The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: BradGuth on 14 Sep 2007 22:59 On Sep 13, 10:18 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The GMC VOLT is on the right set of Earth and human friendly tracks, > of becoming a hydrogen peroxide hybrid that'll easily obtain a clean/ > (zero NOx) 200 empg from whatever little bit of fossil or whatever > biofuel. > > The h2o2/Aluminum battery energy density aspect alone is doable as is, > and the hybrid dual-fuel injected little engine is certainly every bit > as doable, except smaller and a whole lot more powerful for its size > than any atmospheric breathing and subsequently NOx polluting engine. > - Brad Guth - And of course we have the all-knowing naysayer Eeyore to always thank for all the progress that's going in reverse, as well as for the reason we're at war with Muslims that just so happen to all of that oil which apparently belonged to us. It's a good thing we took out Saddam as based upon those phony WMD, before Eeyore and his kind more than tripled that per barrel value. - Brad Guth -
From: Spehro Pefhany on 15 Sep 2007 11:54 On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 02:59:31 -0000, the renowned BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Sep 13, 10:18 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> The GMC VOLT is on the right set of Earth and human friendly tracks, >> of becoming a hydrogen peroxide hybrid that'll easily obtain a clean/ >> (zero NOx) 200 empg from whatever little bit of fossil or whatever >> biofuel. >> >> The h2o2/Aluminum battery energy density aspect alone is doable as is, >> and the hybrid dual-fuel injected little engine is certainly every bit >> as doable, except smaller and a whole lot more powerful for its size >> than any atmospheric breathing and subsequently NOx polluting engine. >> - Brad Guth - > >And of course we have the all-knowing naysayer Eeyore to always thank >for all the progress that's going in reverse, as well as for the >reason we're at war with Muslims that just so happen to all of that >oil which apparently belonged to us. > >It's a good thing we took out Saddam as based upon those phony WMD, >before Eeyore and his kind more than tripled that per barrel value. >- Brad Guth - More like quadrupled. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany -- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff(a)interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
From: BradGuth on 19 Sep 2007 16:02 On Jul 28, 1:44 pm, gyansor...(a)gmail.com wrote: > Is it not about time that we saw more hi spec electric cars on our > roads. I saw the Tesla Roadster and it outperforms a Ferarri on > acceleration but what of teh charging time. Can we now re-charge in > say 10 mins? The overnight charge is impractable unless the car is to > be used for short distances from home. > > http://youtube.com/watch?v=kRd7ER7u-KU If cruising range is an issue, in that case you'll need one of my zero NOx Hummers or GM Volt hybrids that are good for 100 empg or 200 empg, whereas even that spiffy performance Tesla Roadster at 100 empg shouldn't be all that hard to accept. Apparently any such resource of h2o2 and aluminum these days is not a welcome thing in usenet naysay land, even if it's created by a wealth of surplus energy that's clean and fully renewable doesn't cut it. If the likes of Warren Buffet, Millie Moo and myself can manage to crank our a few spare teraWatts of clean energy, some of which going into making the likes of h2o2 and aluminum, then lo and behold we're saved from our highly bigoted selves, that is unless you folks have no honest intentions of ever allowing yourself or others to being saved. BTW, what would Albert Einstein have done in the very same energy fiasco situation that we find ourselves stuck with? (perhaps He3 fusion ?) The zero NOx hybrid Hummer at 100 empg, or the zippy hybrid GM Volt at 200 empg is entirely within technical spec as is. Unfortunately, this naysay infested Usenet that's sequestered so deeply in their very own naysay hell on Earth is currently in a no-win situation, whereas the key to that forbidden city of such a wealth of surplus clean renewable energy is apparently forever banished, as though somehow representing the Antichrist. Go figure. What's so often wrong or at least misunderstood about my deductive analogy of our utilizing the vast terrestrial abundance of clean renewable energy for the likes of creating mass quantities of h2o2 and other energy storage products such a aluminum, is that I actually care about the future and of our best efforts applied for salvaging our badly failing environment for the greater good of all life, of which there can not be such a warm and fuzzy future if it's controlled and/ or moderated by the sorted faith-based past that simply doesn't allow the truth to exist. Whereas others of this anti-think-tank Usenet of naysayism from hell are pretty much intent upon their focus as to deploy as much of their Usenet spermware/fuckware as they can muster, such as their having recently shut down one of the GOOGLE Usenet "Sort by reply / Sort by date" features (seems as though rather Einstein or other Yid like GOOGLE insider, doesn't it, as why otherwise would all of their topic replies as "Sort by date" fail to function, and it's clearly of what Yids do best next to their remote PC/MAC terminating via whatever internet browser back or side doors). Even if merely 0.1% of Earth's surface were converted into hosting those environment and people friendly composite wind, solar PV and stirling towers that'll deliver a continuous 40 kw per tower footprint square meter, whereas that alone is worth 20,450 teraWatts od squeaky clean energy, So lo and behold, it doesn't actually take all that much of any rocket science wizard in order to figure out that the sun itself as impacting upon our badly polluted surface is the primary clean force of energy to take advantage of, instead of having to continually fight over fossil and yellowcake fuel and subsequently having to deal with all of our secondary soot and toxic issues, as well as we must keep stepping over all of those dead bodies is what seems rather unnecessary. Willie Moo's SBLs are clearly a spendy alternative of obtaining clean energy, but at least technically doable as is. His terrestrial alternatives are actually a whole lot more doable, as is. The total worth of raw solar energy influx potential that's continually impacting Earth and that of our sooty/polluted atmosphere is worth 7.2e17 w.h or 720,000 TW.h, and by most any standard it's rather clean energy, other than populated with loads of nasty UV b/c, X-rays and even for having a few of its own halo CME gamma rays that are not exactly human DNA friendly. Down to Earth energy that doesn't suck or blow; here's my none- WorldFactBook revised terrestrial energy budget; 64,000 TW / direct global solar photon influx that gets through to the surface 16,000 TW / currents, winds, tides, rivers and moon (this conservative amount could just as easily become worth 32,000 TW) 8,000 TW / photosynthesis potential (total PV @12.5% eff, not including Stirling options, which without much effort could become worthy of 16,000 TW) 4,000 TW / potential of sustained geothermal energy draw w/o foreseeable planet harm could easily be pushed to extracting 8,000 TW. - the all-inclusive human demand that adding AGW insult to injury - 24+ TW / humans + our industry (extracted from fossil, renewable and nuclear) 100 TW / human+industry 2100AD (extracted from fossil, renewable and nuclear) On behalf of off-world resources of clean and renewable energy, there's a great deal of nearby space-based energy that's clearly in addition to those Willie Moo SBLs that are solar pumped for all they're worth: In addition there's a warm and fuzzy dosage of IR moonshine, as well as an ongoing force of orbit gravity that's always existing as our Earth/moon orbital related process, whereas if such a force were converted into available surface joules of energy, and then into watt hour energy = 7.2e23 w.h (7.2e11 TW) If merely 0.0001% of that orbital gravity/tidal energy were getting converted into those matters of having been contributing into our atmospheric, surface and of those toasty internal fluids as friction induced heating = 7,200 TW or roughly speaking 1% of the solar energy influx. In other words, if it were not for the energy contributed by our physically dark and somewhat salty old moon, Earth would become extensively iced over because, our sun alone is simply not as bright and toasty enough for sharing sufficient energy all by itself, especially if mother Earth were any more reflective, as it had to have been in those multiple ice-age past times that were simply of much worse off cycles before Earth obtained that moon. According to others in their planetology field of expertise, Earth is continually losing roughly 40 TW.h away from our geothermal core, and otherwise humans have been converting fossil, bio/renewable and yellowcake derived nuclear energy into contributing roughly 24 TW.h, that's obviously directly contributing to our AGW before such energy eventually leaves Earth, for a grand energy exit budget tally of 64 TW.h and growing. Of course along with more atmospheric suspended h2o and subsequently nighttime cloud coverage is exactly why less of that energy is leaving Earth. Life in a sealed biosphere such as Earth, whereas only the bad stuff remains within our environment for us frail humans and all other more important life to deal with, whereas the squeaky clean energy that wouldn't hurt a fly just keeps radiating away. Therefore, we humans are in fact heating up our surface environment, but having more so been contributing our energy byproducts of soot along with those pesky toxic elements of CO2 and NOx like there's no tomorrow. Of what we badly need is lots more energy that's squeaky clean and the most end- user efficient usage without the all-inclusive end result that's currently generating soot plus those invisible but toxic byproducts of CO2 and NOx, of which this has been doable if extracting the bulk of that new and improved energy from the sun and our moon, as much as possible avoiding those various other fossil or biofuel alternatives that depend upon their having to consume such horrific volumes of our mostly N2 and sooty water saturated atmosphere. To argue against this logic is to show your true colors, as for being in favor of greed, arrogance and insurmountable bigotry that's of more faith-based ideology than not. Whereas to contribute on behalf of constructively resolving such issues in the most affordable manner is being humanly intelligent, along with having good awareness and remorse for those unfortunate mistakes made in the past, and otherwise for keeping an honest focus towards taking that new and improved grip upon the best of our talents and resources as driven in the proper direction, instead of our being continually faith-based sequestered back into them dark ages where only the rich get richer and the poor that can't possibly get any poorer simply get dead (and apparently especially dead if you're a Muslim sitting on an oily rock). Excluding all of those extremely interesting but unavoidably spendy off-world energy alternatives that are never as good for the all- inclusive bottom line as hyped by their promoters, we have upon or within Earth more than what's necessary in order to safely manage our clean energy future well past the 2100AD mark, that is if we can manage to avoid WWIII, WWIV and WWV in order to end all such silly wars because we've used up every last drop, m3 and/or tonne of fossil and yellowcake reserves in the faith-based process of exterminating one another. If we are to effectively go off-world for supplementing our future energy, as such it'll have to be accomplished in a very big way, and eventually it'll most likely have to include the highly beneficial aspects of obtaining a little badly needed solar shade and moderating the gravity tidal energy influx via relocation of our moon's orbit, as for being sent all the way out to the halo station-keeping realm of Earth's L1, and that's in addition to whatever nifty Willie Moo GSO SBLs, as there will also have to be the fully tethered LSE-CM/ISS along with it's tethered dipole element that'll reach such monster SBLs if need be to within 2r of Earth, and also offering the one and only proper access to/from our moon that'll become the only humanly safe and affordably doable alternative, and that's not even to mention the absolutely terrific space based CM/ISS habitat of that depot/ gateway potential, that's afforded by having such a nearby worthy do- everything best via zero gravity outpost, as so affordably and accessibly at our disposal. Too bad this sorry and/or pathetic Usenet and most every other internet forum of physics and science is so badly skewed into the nearest status quo toilet, of their being in such profound naysayism denial of their denial, and without so much as a speck of remorse at that. Apparently it doesn't get any better, no matters what the physics or best available science has to offer. - Brad Guth -
From: John Larkin on 19 Sep 2007 17:10 On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:02:42 -0000, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Jul 28, 1:44 pm, gyansor...(a)gmail.com wrote: >> Is it not about time that we saw more hi spec electric cars on our >> roads. I saw the Tesla Roadster and it outperforms a Ferarri on >> acceleration but what of teh charging time. Can we now re-charge in >> say 10 mins? The overnight charge is impractable unless the car is to >> be used for short distances from home. >> >> http://youtube.com/watch?v=kRd7ER7u-KU > >If cruising range is an issue, in that case you'll need one of my zero >NOx Hummers or GM Volt hybrids that are good for 100 empg or 200 empg, >whereas even that spiffy performance Tesla Roadster at 100 empg >shouldn't be all that hard to accept. > >Apparently any such resource of h2o2 and aluminum these days is not a >welcome thing in usenet naysay land, even if it's created by a wealth >of surplus energy that's clean and fully renewable doesn't cut it. > >If the likes of Warren Buffet, Millie Moo and myself can manage to >crank our a few spare teraWatts of clean energy, some of which going >into making the likes of h2o2 and aluminum, then lo and behold we're >saved from our highly bigoted selves, that is unless you folks have no >honest intentions of ever allowing yourself or others to being saved. >BTW, what would Albert Einstein have done in the very same energy >fiasco situation that we find ourselves stuck with? (perhaps He3 >fusion ?) > >The zero NOx hybrid Hummer at 100 empg, or the zippy hybrid GM Volt at >200 empg is entirely within technical spec as is. Unfortunately, this >naysay infested Usenet that's sequestered so deeply in their very own >naysay hell on Earth is currently in a no-win situation, whereas the >key to that forbidden city of such a wealth of surplus clean renewable >energy is apparently forever banished, as though somehow representing >the Antichrist. Go figure. > >What's so often wrong or at least misunderstood about my deductive >analogy of our utilizing the vast terrestrial abundance of clean >renewable energy for the likes of creating mass quantities of h2o2 and >other energy storage products such a aluminum, is that I actually care >about the future and of our best efforts applied for salvaging our >badly failing environment for the greater good of all life, of which >there can not be such a warm and fuzzy future if it's controlled and/ >or moderated by the sorted faith-based past that simply doesn't allow >the truth to exist. Whereas others of this anti-think-tank Usenet of >naysayism from hell are pretty much intent upon their focus as to >deploy as much of their Usenet spermware/fuckware as they can muster, >such as their having recently shut down one of the GOOGLE Usenet "Sort >by reply / Sort by date" features (seems as though rather Einstein or >other Yid like GOOGLE insider, doesn't it, as why otherwise would all >of their topic replies as "Sort by date" fail to function, and it's >clearly of what Yids do best next to their remote PC/MAC terminating >via whatever internet browser back or side doors). > >Even if merely 0.1% of Earth's surface were converted into hosting >those environment and people friendly composite wind, solar PV and >stirling towers that'll deliver a continuous 40 kw per tower footprint >square meter, whereas that alone is worth 20,450 teraWatts od squeaky >clean energy, So lo and behold, it doesn't actually take all that >much of any rocket science wizard in order to figure out that the sun >itself as impacting upon our badly polluted surface is the primary >clean force of energy to take advantage of, instead of having to >continually fight over fossil and yellowcake fuel and subsequently >having to deal with all of our secondary soot and toxic issues, as >well as we must keep stepping over all of those dead bodies is what >seems rather unnecessary. > >Willie Moo's SBLs are clearly a spendy alternative of obtaining clean >energy, but at least technically doable as is. His terrestrial >alternatives are actually a whole lot more doable, as is. > >The total worth of raw solar energy influx potential that's >continually impacting Earth and that of our sooty/polluted atmosphere >is worth 7.2e17 w.h or 720,000 TW.h, and by most any standard it's >rather clean energy, other than populated with loads of nasty UV b/c, >X-rays and even for having a few of its own halo CME gamma rays that >are not exactly human DNA friendly. > >Down to Earth energy that doesn't suck or blow; here's my none- >WorldFactBook revised terrestrial energy budget; > >64,000 TW / direct global solar photon influx that gets through to the >surface > >16,000 TW / currents, winds, tides, rivers and moon (this conservative >amount could just as easily become worth 32,000 TW) > >8,000 TW / photosynthesis potential (total PV @12.5% eff, not >including Stirling options, which without much effort could become >worthy of 16,000 TW) > >4,000 TW / potential of sustained geothermal energy draw w/o >foreseeable planet harm could easily be pushed to extracting 8,000 TW. > >- the all-inclusive human demand that adding AGW insult to injury - > > 24+ TW / humans + our industry (extracted from fossil, renewable >and nuclear) > > 100 TW / human+industry 2100AD (extracted from fossil, renewable >and nuclear) > >On behalf of off-world resources of clean and renewable energy, >there's a great deal of nearby space-based energy that's clearly in >addition to those Willie Moo SBLs that are solar pumped for all >they're worth: > >In addition there's a warm and fuzzy dosage of IR moonshine, as >well as an ongoing force of orbit gravity that's always existing >as our Earth/moon orbital related process, whereas if such a force >were converted into available surface joules of energy, and then >into watt hour energy = 7.2e23 w.h (7.2e11 TW) > >If merely 0.0001% of that orbital gravity/tidal energy were getting >converted into those matters of having been contributing into our >atmospheric, surface and of those toasty internal fluids as friction >induced heating = 7,200 TW or roughly speaking 1% of the solar energy >influx. > >In other words, if it were not for the energy contributed by our >physically dark and somewhat salty old moon, Earth would become >extensively iced over because, our sun alone is simply not as bright >and toasty enough for sharing sufficient energy all by itself, >especially if mother Earth were any more reflective, as it had to have >been in those multiple ice-age past times that were simply of much >worse off cycles before Earth obtained that moon. > >According to others in their planetology field of expertise, Earth is >continually losing roughly 40 TW.h away from our geothermal core, and >otherwise humans have been converting fossil, bio/renewable and >yellowcake derived nuclear energy into contributing roughly 24 TW.h, >that's obviously directly contributing to our AGW before such energy >eventually leaves Earth, for a grand energy exit budget tally of 64 >TW.h and growing. Of course along with more atmospheric suspended h2o >and subsequently nighttime cloud coverage is exactly why less of that >energy is leaving Earth. > >Life in a sealed biosphere such as Earth, whereas only the bad stuff >remains within our environment for us frail humans and all other more >important life to deal with, whereas the squeaky clean energy that >wouldn't hurt a fly just keeps radiating away. Therefore, we humans >are in fact heating up our surface environment, but having more so >been contributing our energy byproducts of soot along with those pesky >toxic elements of CO2 and NOx like there's no tomorrow. Of what we >badly need is lots more energy that's squeaky clean and the most end- >user efficient usage without the all-inclusive end result that's >currently generating soot plus those invisible but toxic byproducts of >CO2 and NOx, of which this has been doable if extracting the bulk of >that new and improved energy from the sun and our moon, as much as >possible avoiding those various other fossil or biofuel alternatives >that depend upon their having to consume such horrific volumes of our >mostly N2 and sooty water saturated atmosphere. > >To argue against this logic is to show your true colors, as for being >in favor of greed, arrogance and insurmountable bigotry that's of more >faith-based ideology than not. Whereas to contribute on behalf of >constructively resolving such issues in the most affordable manner is >being humanly intelligent, along with having good awareness and >remorse for those unfortunate mistakes made in the past, and otherwise >for keeping an honest focus towards taking that new and improved grip >upon the best of our talents and resources as driven in the proper >direction, instead of our being continually faith-based sequestered >back into them dark ages where only the rich get richer and the poor >that can't possibly get any poorer simply get dead (and apparently >especially dead if you're a Muslim sitting on an oily rock). > >Excluding all of those extremely interesting but unavoidably spendy >off-world energy alternatives that are never as good for the all- >inclusive bottom line as hyped by their promoters, we have upon or >within Earth more than what's necessary in order to safely manage our >clean energy future well past the 2100AD mark, that is if we can >manage to avoid WWIII, WWIV and WWV in order to end all such silly >wars because we've used up every last drop, m3 and/or tonne of fossil >and yellowcake reserves in the faith-based process of exterminating >one another. > >If we are to effectively go off-world for supplementing our future >energy, as such it'll have to be accomplished in a very big way, and >eventually it'll most likely have to include the highly beneficial >aspects of obtaining a little badly needed solar shade and moderating >the gravity tidal energy influx via relocation of our moon's orbit, as >for being sent all the way out to the halo station-keeping realm of >Earth's L1, and that's in addition to whatever nifty Willie Moo GSO >SBLs, as there will also have to be the fully tethered LSE-CM/ISS >along with it's tethered dipole element that'll reach such monster >SBLs if need be to within 2r of Earth, and also offering the one and >only proper access to/from our moon that'll become the only humanly >safe and affordably doable alternative, and that's not even to mention >the absolutely terrific space based CM/ISS habitat of that depot/ >gateway potential, that's afforded by having such a nearby worthy do- >everything best via zero gravity outpost, as so affordably and >accessibly at our disposal. > >Too bad this sorry and/or pathetic Usenet and most every other >internet forum of physics and science is so badly skewed into the >nearest status quo toilet, of their being in such profound naysayism >denial of their denial, and without so much as a speck of remorse at >that. Apparently it doesn't get any better, no matters what the >physics or best available science has to offer. >- Brad Guth - Please forgive us. We are engineers, and we build things that actually work, and that sometimes gives us an irrational prejudice against raving lunatics. John
From: Jim Thompson on 19 Sep 2007 17:38
On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:10:45 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:02:42 -0000, BradGuth <bradguth(a)gmail.com> >wrote: > >>On Jul 28, 1:44 pm, gyansor...(a)gmail.com wrote: >>> Is it not about time that we saw more hi spec electric cars on our >>> roads. I saw the Tesla Roadster and it outperforms a Ferarri on >>> acceleration but what of teh charging time. Can we now re-charge in >>> say 10 mins? The overnight charge is impractable unless the car is to >>> be used for short distances from home. >>> >>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=kRd7ER7u-KU >> >>If cruising range is an issue, in that case you'll need one of my zero >>NOx Hummers or GM Volt hybrids that are good for 100 empg or 200 empg, >>whereas even that spiffy performance Tesla Roadster at 100 empg >>shouldn't be all that hard to accept. >> >>Apparently any such resource of h2o2 and aluminum these days is not a >>welcome thing in usenet naysay land, even if it's created by a wealth >>of surplus energy that's clean and fully renewable doesn't cut it. >> >>If the likes of Warren Buffet, Millie Moo and myself can manage to >>crank our a few spare teraWatts of clean energy, some of which going >>into making the likes of h2o2 and aluminum, then lo and behold we're >>saved from our highly bigoted selves, that is unless you folks have no >>honest intentions of ever allowing yourself or others to being saved. >>BTW, what would Albert Einstein have done in the very same energy >>fiasco situation that we find ourselves stuck with? (perhaps He3 >>fusion ?) >> >>The zero NOx hybrid Hummer at 100 empg, or the zippy hybrid GM Volt at >>200 empg is entirely within technical spec as is. Unfortunately, this >>naysay infested Usenet that's sequestered so deeply in their very own >>naysay hell on Earth is currently in a no-win situation, whereas the >>key to that forbidden city of such a wealth of surplus clean renewable >>energy is apparently forever banished, as though somehow representing >>the Antichrist. Go figure. >> >>What's so often wrong or at least misunderstood about my deductive >>analogy of our utilizing the vast terrestrial abundance of clean >>renewable energy for the likes of creating mass quantities of h2o2 and >>other energy storage products such a aluminum, is that I actually care >>about the future and of our best efforts applied for salvaging our >>badly failing environment for the greater good of all life, of which >>there can not be such a warm and fuzzy future if it's controlled and/ >>or moderated by the sorted faith-based past that simply doesn't allow >>the truth to exist. Whereas others of this anti-think-tank Usenet of >>naysayism from hell are pretty much intent upon their focus as to >>deploy as much of their Usenet spermware/fuckware as they can muster, >>such as their having recently shut down one of the GOOGLE Usenet "Sort >>by reply / Sort by date" features (seems as though rather Einstein or >>other Yid like GOOGLE insider, doesn't it, as why otherwise would all >>of their topic replies as "Sort by date" fail to function, and it's >>clearly of what Yids do best next to their remote PC/MAC terminating >>via whatever internet browser back or side doors). >> >>Even if merely 0.1% of Earth's surface were converted into hosting >>those environment and people friendly composite wind, solar PV and >>stirling towers that'll deliver a continuous 40 kw per tower footprint >>square meter, whereas that alone is worth 20,450 teraWatts od squeaky >>clean energy, So lo and behold, it doesn't actually take all that >>much of any rocket science wizard in order to figure out that the sun >>itself as impacting upon our badly polluted surface is the primary >>clean force of energy to take advantage of, instead of having to >>continually fight over fossil and yellowcake fuel and subsequently >>having to deal with all of our secondary soot and toxic issues, as >>well as we must keep stepping over all of those dead bodies is what >>seems rather unnecessary. >> >>Willie Moo's SBLs are clearly a spendy alternative of obtaining clean >>energy, but at least technically doable as is. His terrestrial >>alternatives are actually a whole lot more doable, as is. >> >>The total worth of raw solar energy influx potential that's >>continually impacting Earth and that of our sooty/polluted atmosphere >>is worth 7.2e17 w.h or 720,000 TW.h, and by most any standard it's >>rather clean energy, other than populated with loads of nasty UV b/c, >>X-rays and even for having a few of its own halo CME gamma rays that >>are not exactly human DNA friendly. >> >>Down to Earth energy that doesn't suck or blow; here's my none- >>WorldFactBook revised terrestrial energy budget; >> >>64,000 TW / direct global solar photon influx that gets through to the >>surface >> >>16,000 TW / currents, winds, tides, rivers and moon (this conservative >>amount could just as easily become worth 32,000 TW) >> >>8,000 TW / photosynthesis potential (total PV @12.5% eff, not >>including Stirling options, which without much effort could become >>worthy of 16,000 TW) >> >>4,000 TW / potential of sustained geothermal energy draw w/o >>foreseeable planet harm could easily be pushed to extracting 8,000 TW. >> >>- the all-inclusive human demand that adding AGW insult to injury - >> >> 24+ TW / humans + our industry (extracted from fossil, renewable >>and nuclear) >> >> 100 TW / human+industry 2100AD (extracted from fossil, renewable >>and nuclear) >> >>On behalf of off-world resources of clean and renewable energy, >>there's a great deal of nearby space-based energy that's clearly in >>addition to those Willie Moo SBLs that are solar pumped for all >>they're worth: >> >>In addition there's a warm and fuzzy dosage of IR moonshine, as >>well as an ongoing force of orbit gravity that's always existing >>as our Earth/moon orbital related process, whereas if such a force >>were converted into available surface joules of energy, and then >>into watt hour energy = 7.2e23 w.h (7.2e11 TW) >> >>If merely 0.0001% of that orbital gravity/tidal energy were getting >>converted into those matters of having been contributing into our >>atmospheric, surface and of those toasty internal fluids as friction >>induced heating = 7,200 TW or roughly speaking 1% of the solar energy >>influx. >> >>In other words, if it were not for the energy contributed by our >>physically dark and somewhat salty old moon, Earth would become >>extensively iced over because, our sun alone is simply not as bright >>and toasty enough for sharing sufficient energy all by itself, >>especially if mother Earth were any more reflective, as it had to have >>been in those multiple ice-age past times that were simply of much >>worse off cycles before Earth obtained that moon. >> >>According to others in their planetology field of expertise, Earth is >>continually losing roughly 40 TW.h away from our geothermal core, and >>otherwise humans have been converting fossil, bio/renewable and >>yellowcake derived nuclear energy into contributing roughly 24 TW.h, >>that's obviously directly contributing to our AGW before such energy >>eventually leaves Earth, for a grand energy exit budget tally of 64 >>TW.h and growing. Of course along with more atmospheric suspended h2o >>and subsequently nighttime cloud coverage is exactly why less of that >>energy is leaving Earth. >> >>Life in a sealed biosphere such as Earth, whereas only the bad stuff >>remains within our environment for us frail humans and all other more >>important life to deal with, whereas the squeaky clean energy that >>wouldn't hurt a fly just keeps radiating away. Therefore, we humans >>are in fact heating up our surface environment, but having more so >>been contributing our energy byproducts of soot along with those pesky >>toxic elements of CO2 and NOx like there's no tomorrow. Of what we >>badly need is lots more energy that's squeaky clean and the most end- >>user efficient usage without the all-inclusive end result that's >>currently generating soot plus those invisible but toxic byproducts of >>CO2 and NOx, of which this has been doable if extracting the bulk of >>that new and improved energy from the sun and our moon, as much as >>possible avoiding those various other fossil or biofuel alternatives >>that depend upon their having to consume such horrific volumes of our >>mostly N2 and sooty water saturated atmosphere. >> >>To argue against this logic is to show your true colors, as for being >>in favor of greed, arrogance and insurmountable bigotry that's of more >>faith-based ideology than not. Whereas to contribute on behalf of >>constructively resolving such issues in the most affordable manner is >>being humanly intelligent, along with having good awareness and >>remorse for those unfortunate mistakes made in the past, and otherwise >>for keeping an honest focus towards taking that new and improved grip >>upon the best of our talents and resources as driven in the proper >>direction, instead of our being continually faith-based sequestered >>back into them dark ages where only the rich get richer and the poor >>that can't possibly get any poorer simply get dead (and apparently >>especially dead if you're a Muslim sitting on an oily rock). >> >>Excluding all of those extremely interesting but unavoidably spendy >>off-world energy alternatives that are never as good for the all- >>inclusive bottom line as hyped by their promoters, we have upon or >>within Earth more than what's necessary in order to safely manage our >>clean energy future well past the 2100AD mark, that is if we can >>manage to avoid WWIII, WWIV and WWV in order to end all such silly >>wars because we've used up every last drop, m3 and/or tonne of fossil >>and yellowcake reserves in the faith-based process of exterminating >>one another. >> >>If we are to effectively go off-world for supplementing our future >>energy, as such it'll have to be accomplished in a very big way, and >>eventually it'll most likely have to include the highly beneficial >>aspects of obtaining a little badly needed solar shade and moderating >>the gravity tidal energy influx via relocation of our moon's orbit, as >>for being sent all the way out to the halo station-keeping realm of >>Earth's L1, and that's in addition to whatever nifty Willie Moo GSO >>SBLs, as there will also have to be the fully tethered LSE-CM/ISS >>along with it's tethered dipole element that'll reach such monster >>SBLs if need be to within 2r of Earth, and also offering the one and >>only proper access to/from our moon that'll become the only humanly >>safe and affordably doable alternative, and that's not even to mention >>the absolutely terrific space based CM/ISS habitat of that depot/ >>gateway potential, that's afforded by having such a nearby worthy do- >>everything best via zero gravity outpost, as so affordably and >>accessibly at our disposal. >> >>Too bad this sorry and/or pathetic Usenet and most every other >>internet forum of physics and science is so badly skewed into the >>nearest status quo toilet, of their being in such profound naysayism >>denial of their denial, and without so much as a speck of remorse at >>that. Apparently it doesn't get any better, no matters what the >>physics or best available science has to offer. >>- Brad Guth - > > >Please forgive us. We are engineers, and we build things that actually >work, and that sometimes gives us an irrational prejudice against >raving lunatics. > >John Introduce Guth to Slowman. That'll really be a pair ;-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | | http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave |