Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 16:35:12 +0100, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 06:55:34 -0700
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
On 15 Apr 2023 02:27:25 GMT, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Someday. Maybe. Gaseous hydrogen storage presents many problems.
Carbon fiber vessels have helped somewhat. BMW played around with
liquid hydrogen although it was for an ICE dual fuel engine. Besides
the problem of it boiling off, what could go wrong with Joe Sixpack
filling his pickup with a -423 F liquid?
My neighborhood Shell station has a hydrogen fill-up thing. I\'ve never
seen it used.
Some years ago, TFL experimented with a few hydrogen-powered buses.
Obviously nothing useful came of it. But they thought that the use of
hydrogen was so safe that they sited the filling station twenty miles
from the centre of London.
I guess a AAA rescue truck will have to carry gaseous hydrogen and
liquid hydrogen and what all.
On 16/04/2023 04:04, T wrote:
And ice core samples definitive show that the
planets heated up BEFORE CO2 levels rose.
If the climate alarmists are now predicting that a few degrees rise in
temperature is going to destroy all the ice at the poles and the world\'s
land masses are going to flood where do all these ice core samples come
from? If the world was a lot hotter with elevated levels of CO2 wouldn\'t
all the ice have melted?
On 15/04/2023 09:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 15/04/2023 03:27, rbowman wrote:
with declining costs for renewable electricity,
in particular from solar PV and wind,
ROFLMAO!
More sunlit uplands full of fairy farts and unicorn shit
Yep, as long as you don\'t factor in the cost of maintenance and repair.
Each wind turbine is likely to have a fault at least 3x per year and
possibly 10x per year. A whole army of repair technicians travelling to
far flung sites on the top of mountains has to be paid for in our
utility bills.
And some of the recent astronomy articles on ars,
hint at where heavy elements come from. Supernovas
are a good source.
https://lco.global/spacebook/stars/supernova/
\"The explosion sends a shock wave of the star\'s former surface zooming
out at a speed of 10,000 km/s, and heating it so it shines brilliantly
for about a week. This shock wave compresses the material it passes
through and is the only place where many elements such as zinc, silver,
tin, gold, mercury, lead and uranium are produced.\"
But we don\'t normally sit just outside a supernova,
with a catchers mitt, because we\'d be fried instantly
by the infrared. A safe distance from a supernova, is
a long long way.
\"Earth would have to be at least 50 light-years away
from the exploding star.\"
And we can\'t even manage to go the 4 light-years to the \"neighbours\".
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 20:40:52 -0400, Ed P wrote:
The current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421
ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of the
Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years prior to
the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV6r0njkjxk
It doesn\'t mean shit to a tree.
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 15:01:37 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Until they start taxing it through the roof like alcohol and tobacco and
petrol.
23% in this county for recreational marijuana. 20% state excise tax and a 3% local tax. A medical card cuts that down to 4%. The local initiative approved the 3% on recreational, rejected 3% on medical.
There were other factors but the state is trying to decide what to do with a 2.6 billion dollar budget surplus.
https://apnews.com/article/politics-greg-gianforte-montana-taxes-d0c2aed6fd0591ee4be345f368cb0540
The one thing the laws of chemistry have to say, is that nothing existsLithium will become passe in a few years as other materials do a better
job.
The problem with that statement is that it is only true at low currentOn 4/15/2023 11:59 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On 2023-04-15, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> writes:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:14:20 -0700, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/14/23 10:11, Frank wrote:
On 4/14/2023 12:04 PM, Ed P wrote:
On 4/14/2023 10:49 AM, Frank wrote:
On 4/13/2023 11:57 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Are you greenies nuts?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385430139122
Nearly 3 grand for a battery with the same capacity of two deep
cycle lead acid batteries costing £150?
As it is EV\'s with lithium batteries weigh about about a half ton
more than ICE vehicles. Would be interesting to see what they
would
weigh with a lead battery.
One problem with price is demand. Currently lead is a commodity
and
most of it is available as recycle from depleted batteries.
Even if
price were equivalent there is probably more cost in manufacture of
lithium batteries needing additional materials and more
complexity of
manufacture.
lithium batteries are just a passing phase of technology.
The future will be either graphene, aluminum or silicone anode.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/01/04/1066141/whats-next-for-batteries/
This year could be a breakout year for one alternative: lithium iron
phosphate (LFP), a low-cost cathode material sometimes used for
lithium-ion batteries.
Yes, there are a lot of technologies being looked into. Something
like
sodium would be much cheaper and not have the flammability
concerns even
though only slightly heavier.
Natural gas fuel cells come to mind.
Fuel cells have been the thing of the future since 1838. Car makers
keep promising hydrogen fuel cell cars but don\'t deliver.
Seems to me that an NG fuel cell car would make more sense than
hydrogen. I suspect that fuel cells aren\'t very practical.
Natural gas is CH4. What happens to the C? It\'s turned into
CO2, of course - which just makes the problem worse.
CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O
2C8H18 + 25O2 -> 16CO2 + 18H2O
The trick is:Â how much energy do we get out of CH4 compared to C8H18?
https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter4/transportation-and-energy/combustibles-energy-content/
And, of course, storage and efficiency of combustion are factors.
Google sez:
\"Fuel cell vehicles, which use electric motors, are much more energy
efficient. The fuel cell system can use 60% of the fuel\'s
energyâcorrespond- ing to more than a 50% reduction in fuel consumption
compared to a conventional vehicle with a gasoline internal combustion
engine.\"
Problem with pure hydrogen is that you cannot carry a lot of it around
and need high pressure storage tanks. Nobel prize winning chemist,
George Olah, thought methanol would be the best renewable fuel to use.
And you know this because? That period also coincides with the end ofThe current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421
ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of the
Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years prior to
the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 20:40:52 -0400, Ed P <esp@snet.xxx> wrote:
On 4/15/2023 8:13 PM, T wrote:
On 4/15/23 06:51, Commander Kinsey wrote:
Every time one of those morons says greenhouse gases, say plant air
supply.
These \"alarmists\" act like the CO2 that goes into the atmosphere stays
there. Plants create sugars from it.
Our entire food supply is dependent on CO2. And
if for some strange reason CO2 drops too far in our
atmosphere, plants start dying and every living
thing on this planet is in a heap of trouble.
So ya, \"plant air supply\", \"plant food supply\",
\"Everything else\'s food supply\". CO2 is part of
cycle of life.
So? There is a limit to how much they can process. Balance. You need
balance. Do you have actual numbers of how much is produced and how
much is absorbed?
You body needs water. Too much though, will kill you.
It just occurred to me that most of there
\"Alarmists\" as \"vegetarians\" and do not realize
the above. This is what you get when you don\'t
think for yourself and rely on political offices
for your narratives.
It occurred to me some time back you try to apply a simple theory but
have no supporting evidence. The balance of CO2 has changed.
The current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421
ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of the
Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years prior to
the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
CO2 was about 1600 PPM 50 million years ago, and around 5000 PPM 500
million years ago. The great explosions of plant and animal life
happened at high CO2 levels; no coincidence.
During the cambrian explosion it was around 4000.
Last few million years, so much CO2 was sequestered that plants were
about to starve to death. Good thing we\'re fixing that. 1000 PPM would
be nice.
+1
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 09:32:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 15/04/2023 03:27, rbowman wrote:
with declining costs for renewable electricity,
in particular from solar PV and wind,
ROFLMAO!
More sunlit uplands full of fairy farts and unicorn shit
Wrong attribution... I never wrote bullshit like that.
The Chinese are pushing Lithium Iron Phosphate.
And Tesla is onboard with it. It\'s quite possible that
every Model 3 now, ships with Lithium Iron Phosphate packs.
\"It is reported that the total amount of lithium reserves
   in the oceans is approximately 2.6 à 10^11 tons.\"
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 14:00:03 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Since coal can be made into gasoline, can
natural gas be made into gasoline as well?
You can make any hydrocarbon into any
other hydrocarbon, but whether it makes
sense to do that is a separate issue.
On 4/16/2023 12:57 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 14:00:03 +1000, T <T@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Since coal can be made into gasoline, can
natural gas be made into gasoline as well?
You can make any hydrocarbon into any
other hydrocarbon, but whether it makes
sense to do that is a separate issue.
That would also be my answer.
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 09:31:29 +0100, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On 15/04/2023 09:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 15/04/2023 03:27, rbowman wrote:
with declining costs for renewable electricity,
in particular from solar PV and wind,
ROFLMAO!
More sunlit uplands full of fairy farts and unicorn shit
Yep, as long as you don\'t factor in the cost of maintenance and repair.
Each wind turbine is likely to have a fault at least 3x per year and
possibly 10x per year. A whole army of repair technicians travelling to
far flung sites on the top of mountains has to be paid for in our
utility bills.
Do normal power stations not need maintainance? In fact don\'t they have
full time staff?
On 16/04/2023 11:31, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023 09:31:29 +0100, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On 15/04/2023 09:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 15/04/2023 03:27, rbowman wrote:
with declining costs for renewable electricity,
in particular from solar PV and wind,
ROFLMAO!
More sunlit uplands full of fairy farts and unicorn shit
Yep, as long as you don\'t factor in the cost of maintenance and repair.
Each wind turbine is likely to have a fault at least 3x per year and
possibly 10x per year. A whole army of repair technicians travelling to
far flung sites on the top of mountains has to be paid for in our
utility bills.
Do normal power stations not need maintainance? In fact don\'t they have
full time staff?
There is a massive difference in running a few centralised facilities
with a small maintenance crews and having to employ an army of staff and
vehicles to service perhaps 100,000+ wind turbines in far flung outbacks
of the UK maybe as often as once a month. Add the extra hassle of
offshore installations and the fleet of ships needed and the cost rise
higher.
On 16/04/2023 06:29, Paul wrote:
\"It is reported that the total amount of lithium reserves
in the oceans is approximately 2.6 × 10^11 tons.\"
How much energy would it take to extract it? You would need tha 4x10^9
tonnes of uranium first, to get it out ...
On 16/04/2023 06:08, rbowman wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023 09:32:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 15/04/2023 03:27, rbowman wrote:
with declining costs for renewable electricity,
in particular from solar PV and wind,
ROFLMAO!
More sunlit uplands full of fairy farts and unicorn shit
Wrong attribution... I never wrote bullshit like that.
Sorry. Its hard to spot who wrote what
On 16/04/2023 01:40, Ed P wrote:
The current global average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is 421
ppm as of May 2022. This is an increase of 50% since the start of the
Industrial Revolution, up from 280 ppm during the 10,000 years prior to
the mid-18th century. The increase is due to human activity.
And you know this because? That period also coincides with the end of
the little ice age, and we know that mildly warming oceans outgass lots
of CO2 until the organic life catches up with it