zoom44

fred is absolutely correct- there is not one source capable of getting us of petroleum. we need to use the combination of sources that best fit where you live. for the south west that means more reliance on sun produced energy (not solar panels but solar furnace steam generated perhaps) wave energy for the coastal places, ng, geothermal,hydro,wind , bio mass, nuclear etc. only by using a combination of the alternatives can we replace coal and petroleum

rotarygod

What industry does the natural gas come from?

rotarygod

I do agree that we can be more efficient with what we've got and that each part of the country/world should focus on their strengths with the resources they've got at hand.

mdw1000

In one of Tom Clancy's books, there is a group of environmental types that are trying to reduce the human population by using a biological weapon. They figure then nature can "make a comeback". They of course decide that they are the humans that should survive . When they are inevitably taken down by John Clark, Ding Chavez, and the rest of the RB6 team, rather than kill them, take them in, etc, Clark strands them out in the middle of the jungle. He leaves them naked with no supplies and no technology. Basically tells them if they think the human race is so bad, then they can live without the things it has developed.

Just thought of this because of the comment someone made about the only solution being for us to just die. I do believe that some environmentalists would like to thin the herd of humans, so to speak. I guess I consider myself a rational environmentalist. I believe we have to do the best we can to preserve our environment, live in harmony with it, etc. Otherwise we will eventually not be able to survive. But I also believe that to some extend WE are part of the environment.

For example, some people talk about how we should force ourselves to wean off oil, etc by putting high taxes on it. What they don't want to talk about is the effect that will have on especially those of low income. You will have increased hunger, homelessness, etc. They will have less resources than they already do for things like health care, which will lead to the spread of more contagious diseases, etc. Of course I guess that will help thin the herd.

Anyway, back on topic. I think it is great that Mazda is doing research on alternative fuels with the rotary. If nothing else, they can use it for PR when people give them crap for the poor fuel economy. Plus in the process they are putting more R&D into rotary engines in general. That said, RG is right in that there is a lot less energy in an equivalent amount of hydrogen.

mdw1000

We could use the fusion reactor to power our flux capacitor... or our rotary warp engine.

rotarygod

I love the avatar!

zoom44

note i said "foreign" petroleum. domestic regionally distributed power alternatives to reduce( i would love to say eliminate) our use of foreign petroleum



exactly

chetrickerman

im sorry, but nuclear fusion does not give you hydrogen. you have to give hydrogen for fusion, because the outcome is helium. They take cubes of tritium, which is the third isotope of hydrogen, and place them into the reactor and then create a plasma field. the hydrogen fuses into helium and energy is produced. this is the same reaction that is happening on the sun. and many people think that the sun is perpetual, which its not, it will die in 4.6 billion years. right now, it is through about half its life. we are trying to replicate this reaction on earth, but so far not so good. we still havent hit the moment of perpetual. I designed and inertial confinemet fusion reactor but i was never able to build it or test it due to lack of funds (i was a sophmore in highschool). But thats my little ramble. RG, how much power is lost when you switch to propane?

eviltwinkie

Someone has been starting at the wikipedia too long...

Fusion DOES give you easy access to hydrogen...

You use the energy output to power hydrogen harvesting...

Since the electricity being used is "clean"...

When the generation of power is cheap...it opens up all sorts of possibilities...

chetrickerman

yes, that does give you cheap energy, but im saying you dont get hydrogen from a fusion reaction, you get heat(form of energy) and helium(waste), i have done a lot of development and know quite a bit about it considering my age.

eviltwinkie

Yet you assume that others do not know how a basic and primitive fusion reaction works...

That's like what? 4th grade physics...

Come back and tout your knowledge when you can tell me the the mass of a gravitophoton...

heh...

chetrickerman

****, i well i remember saying that photons do not have mass, and gravity is a force, and force isnt made of anything, and force has no mass. so im going to say zero

btw, im not assuming that none of you know about this stuff, i was just adding to the conversation. you guys are all very smart, much more than i am, but i do consider myself pretty smart on this subject based on my age

eviltwinkie

Seek ye Heim...

chetrickerman

what? i dont speak spanish!!

zoom44

english?

http://forums.hypography.com/physics...im-theory.html

http://www.heim-theory.com/downloads/A_Abstract.pdf
or french?

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9orie_de_Heim

chetrickerman

fine, we will just use anti-matter to power our cars. jk, but i will definitely have to read those when i get home.

Floyd

I've seen the light very cool stuff!

Also check out http://www.blacklightpower.com/ for a really cool energy generation process.

Basicly the guy has found/developed a catalyst that excites a H atom to have its electorn jump in 1 shell. This releases an amount smaller than fussion or fission but much greater than combustion. It also alows a plasma state to be reached at much less extreem tempratures.

The only problem with the system is that the reaction requires a near vacume so the volumetric efficency is less then optimal. Still a very cool reaction that also leaves residual substances that me be useful in creating a new generation of batteries.

On a Heim side note Twinkie, I know plasma can be used in the generation magetic fields but is the magnitude tempature based? Could this method of plasma creation be used to create a stronger and more containable magnetic field? Sorry if this is a newb question, I have much curiosity and very little background...

eviltwinkie

Generally the higher in temp, the more energetic...

The higher the energy the more difficult it becomes to contain...

chetrickerman

exactly what twink said, and to continue, the harder it becomes to contain, the more energy is spent on the magnets. that is the problem why we havent been able to hit perpetual with this machine.

eviltwinkie

I'm sorry the answer must be in the form of a convoluted question...

The answer we were looking for...

What is the conservation of energy...

No pie for you...

chetrickerman

FINE, i dont want your pie, I WANT APPLE PIE!! i dont even like twinkies!! jk

BaronVonBigmeat

Why not just burn the natural gas? As opposed to using energy to split it up, and create a gas which has less power?

dillsrotary

physics time, which is physically heavier:

1. a watch completely stop

2. that same watch completely wound up and ticking



On the energy note, why not burn diesel not to power the wheels of a car but to merely charge several large batteries that will move the car electrically?

full charge, no running engine, charge low, run the diesel engine til it's charged again. It will maintain alot more energy from the diesel burn.

nmarz77

There seems to be a lot of people here that are very smart BUT at the same note have been left in the dark on recent Hydrogen power discoveries and advancements.

Hydrogen is VERY HIGH in energy! Nasa wouldn't be using it to propel thier space craft into outer space if it weren't.

There are plenty of people out there already running pure hydrogen as well as hydrogen boosted vehicles and getting incredible gas milage. You don't need a hydrogen tank in order to run hydrogen in your vehicle, you can actually produce your own hydrogen while running your vehicle with a hydrogen generator and a small amount of water.

All I will say now is RESEARCH before you attempt to flame me. Do a few google searches at least. There are some that for whatever reason do not want to believe in hydrogen power(you will see plenty who doubt without proof)......there are others who are not only believers but do'ers(with plenty of proof) already running on it with as much or MORE power than a gasoline engine.

If you still don't believe me I can supply you with link after link after link of people who do and have been using hydroden as an addition to gasoline or sole source or even mixed with other fuels such as propane!

rotarygod

Last time I checked NASA wasn't using an internal combustion otto cycle engine to propel rockets into space! It's a crap fuel in an internal combustion engine such as those that propel cars down the road. When Detroit decides to install rocket engines in cars, then I'll consider hydrogen!

Since you mentioned NASA and mixing hydrogen with gasoline, let's look at some JPL work with Hydrogen and gasoline. Here's a small excerpt on it. Great fuel you've got there!

http://www.lubedev.com/smartgas/hydrogen.htm

Here's a page that supports what you say about hydrogen. They claim it's more fuel efficient that gasoline yet we have never seen a single engine verify that statement. Quite the opposite in fact and impressively at that. Ford has a Supercharged V10 engine that runs on pure hydrogen but makes only 210 hp. The hydrogen rotary makes about 100 hp or so which is less than half what it does on gasoline. Yep. That sure sounds far superior to me!

http://www.ecr.unimelb.edu.au/~cabur...h/exhaust.html

Also think about this. Hydrogen is a very small molecule. It has a tendency to leak out of places that other materials can't. Ever seen a car with a fuel leak? Hydrogen is going to be harder to contain. How many people fail inspection due to a gas cap not sealing properly? You want a hydrogen outlet somewhere? The plus side is that due to hydrogen being lighter than air, it floats rather than falling and spreading. That is at least one benefit of it. Too bad it's offset by storage issues. The tank that it's held in must be made very strong (heavy) since hydrogen needs to be under high pressure.

I know there are things like fuel cells out there and these are promising. Except that a fuel cell is like a hydrogen battery as through a reation with oxygen it can create electricity. It's a nice use because it's not directly going into an internal combustion engine to be burned. That's good. It burns 10 times faster than gasoline. Go look it up. It's fact. This alone is the single most important aspect of a fuel. It's more important than octane and more important than how many joules of energy are released when burned in a static test (to a point of course). These are important but any trait on it's own compared to another fuel using only the same singular trait tells us nothing. Sadly most people have the important issues out of order and don't realize this.

Say what you will. Hydrogen is a crap fuel for an internal combustion otto cycle engine and it will never be as good as other alternatives. It can't be. When you find an alternative car powered by hydrogen, I'll be driving the same car on some other fuel at twice the speed and for twice the distance. It may be with twice the emissions but I'm willing to live with that. I suspect most others would be too.