Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4312618 -

What about the returns on free energy? If they were self sufficient, the start up cost would be great, but over time... the lack of maintenance and production fees... If the technology can be mass produced... What are the implications... what are the applications.

You say start with your legislator, but I thought it was the inventor/desinger, who starts changes?

Ill ask again. How do you handle a situation with a new technology that has significant returns, and does not pollute?

Investors would be stupid to not invest. You think the cost of oil production now may be less... now, what about in 10 years? 20? 30?

Do the returns come back more than they would if old technology was left in place, that could very well, lose outstanding ammounts of money?

Ive heard this argument, that its not cost effective, but i think thats completely ignoring the whole idea of looking at this on a large enough time scale.

Sure, you can give people breks who have "cleaner" facilities... But what is exactly clean?

Do electric cars really not pollute? Where is that energy coming from? It must come from somewhere...

Thats not cleaner, thats shifting the pollution, from one main source, to another.

I think subsidising industries can be tricky... how will you know people will be dedicated to producing top of the line technological innovations?

my problem with most business leaders and politicians is this... if it works, dont fix it. Well i think thats a dillusional statememnt, cause its not really "working" as good as it could. To sit back and let the least ammount of growth to take place is not only depressing, but it encourages companies to be lazy and not keep "greater interests" of the people.

How many people do you think serve as lobbyists for large energy companies? many. Haliburton, dick cheney, george bush...?

They have their hands in it already.

The question is, is this clean and high producing energy worth more than the personal intersts of those in the government or with the means of production?

i say its much more important, and not just for US, but for everyone... :wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4313080 -

What about the returns on free energy?

I don't know what you mean by free energy unless you mean hydroelectric, solar, and other renewable sources.

The US already generates electricity from hydroelectric sources where it's practical. Solar has very high start-up costs and isn't practical to power a car on the go.

How do you handle a situation with a new technology that has significant returns, and does not pollute?

What new non-polluting technologies with high return on investments do you mean? I don't know of any, and if any are developed, they will displace less profitable technologies in the free market.

Do electric cars really not pollute? Where is that energy coming from? It must come from somewhere...

The advantage comes from generating the electricity centrally where rigid emissions controls can be used. Also, nuclear power plants do not produce greenhouse gasses. What's to be done with the spent fuel is another matter that needs to be better addressed.

The real advantage comes long term. It's going to take decades to shift the public mindset to electric vehicles. By that time, practical nuclear fusion (read: radiation clean) will be available to generate nearly unlimited amounts of clean energy. If the electric car mindset is in place by then, many of our current problems will be solved.

Ive heard this argument, that its not cost effective, but i think that's completely ignoring the whole idea of looking at this on a large enough time scale.

Sure, you can give people breaks who have "cleaner" facilities... But what is exactly clean?

This is why legislation is required. Hydrogen cars are non-polluting. Their waste product is water vapor. But until gas stations carry hydrogen, I will not buy a hydrogen-powered car; on the other hand, until their is demand, gas stations will not invest in hydrogen fuel pumps. See the catch-22?

The only way to break the stalemate is legislation, perhaps requiring gas stations to install hydrogen systems and offering tax advantages to people who buy hydrogen cars. This starts the cycle and given enough time, the shift to hydrogen will pick up speed and take off.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4313095 -

Quote:
What about a new source of producing energy? That didnt contribute to smog or pollution at all for that matter?


The Fusion reactor.
Europe is already building one in france to yield 900 second bursts of 900 megawatt.

Even if you go for straight Deuterium fusion (low yield) even the primary reaction is so powerful that every glass of water holds as much thermal power as 150lbs of coal and as such prevents formation of 550lbs of greenhouse-CO2. The radioactive byproducts are not wastes but superior thermonuclear fuels that can be burnt and burnt again until nothing but ordinary helium and thermal energy remains.

An oil barrel holds 55 gallons. If you fill it with ordinary water then the Deuterium naturally present in that water is in the first run equivalent to 150.000 lbs of coal saving the enviroment the release of over half a million pounds of CO2.

1...produce electricity by Deuterium fusion
2...use electricity to make hydrogen from water
3...isolate the deuterium from the hydrogen for (1)
4...Burn hydrogen as an enviromentally friendly fuel, yielding water

I have little doubt that this is the direction we will take if we are going to be enviromentally friendly.

Until that time its my recommendation to use nuclear power. :eek:
One kilo of enriched uranium yields the energy of 15.000.000lbs of coal (preventing formation of 55 million pounds of CO2) and produces about 2lbs of nuclear waste. Encapsulate this into a ballistic capsule that can withstand a misfire and shoot it towards the sun with a rail gun (electromagnetic cannon) at 1/1.000 the rocket price.
Problem solved.


--------------------
Omnicyclion.org
personal empowerment for the world

:nyan: LGBT - Love God Before Tradition :nyan:

Edited by Asante (06/19/05 10:04 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Asante]
    #4313311 -

Impressive. :spliff: :thumbup: :mushroom2:

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Asante]
    #4313321 -

Fusion really is our only hope. It is really very unfortunate that they removed the funding for the super-conducting super-collider but we will probably re-fund it and step up research if and when oil prices rise to uncomfortable levels.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4313682 -

Hydrogen technology isnt perfected, and neither is nuclear fusion.

The main problem stands i think, by people who try to hold off on developing new technologies because they dont want to lose THEIR investment, and not necesarily those of other companies, i.e. major energy/oil companies.

Its not always a "free market", cause where information is witheld, no one knows, and it only exists to those who see it. I would think something like "free energy" belongs to the people. Which IMHO should be the market goal, it would benefit everyone.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4314352 -

Hydrogen technology isnt perfected

Eh? Hydrogen fuel cells were perfected in the 60s. They're used in everything from the space shuttle to cars. Their use isn't widespread in cars only because gas stations don't pump hydrogen; and gas stations don't pump hydrogen because there is no demand.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4314380 -

They are still researching ways of using hydrogen fuel cell technology, and also what i meant by that was, its not cheap to get hydrogen! The process to create hydrogen is most of the time more expensive than what it would save if you used it? So the technology itself, its application isnt perfected, cause if it was, wouldnt you think you would see more gas stations carrying it? You mentioned this yourself earlier...

I dont think there is any demand because of the reason you mentioned earlier, its just not affordable.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4314484 -

I think you have some misunderstanding of how hydrogen fuel cells work.

They are still researching ways of using hydrogen fuel cell technology

Well, this is like saying they're still researching how to use alkaline batteries. Fuel cell technology is perfected. It's even mass produced. The only reason it's not in the average person's daily life is because there are no convenient sources of pressurized hydrogen available outside of industry.

The process to create hydrogen is most of the time more expensive than what it would save if you used it?

This isn't so. Electrolysis of water (splitting it into its component atoms) is a simple process by which you can create virtually unlimited amounts of hydrogen with great efficiency.

Try this at home:

Take a bowl of water and stir in regular table salt to saturation. Then, drop an ordinary AA battery into the water. You'll see bubbles start to rise from both ends of the battery. The stream of bubbles on the negative side of the battery (the cathode) will be pure hydrogen, the other end (the anode) will be pure oxygen.

You'll also notice that the stream of hydrogen is twice as thick as that of oxygen; this is due to water's chemical composition of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom (H2O).

isnt perfected, cause if it was, wouldnt you think you would see more gas stations carrying it? You mentioned this yourself earlier

Yes, but I qualified it as a chicken-and-egg problem. No gas station is going to invest the money in a hydrogen system when they have no customers asking for hydrogen, and no consumers are going to buy hydrogen cars that they can't conveniently fill up.

Only legislation (or maybe the eventual $20/gallon gas prices) will force the shift.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4314505 -

I read on slashdot.org last week that some scientists at the University of California (? I don't remember well, but it seemed like this place) had built a small cold fusion reactor. I have heard nothing since. Anyone else heard this?


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4314545 -

i understand how the process works, and i understand electrolysis. What i dont understand are the costs, and the energy required to produce this energy.

I guess i just have a hard time accepting the fact that if we have a new (relatively), way of producing energy, that is cost effective, and requires less energy than it produces, that this isnt something more mainstream...

It would seem to me, that even with 2 dollars a gallon, that we would start moving in this direction. Im sure there is a lot behind the scenes, but its hard for me to believe that you could have such a well worked out source of producing lots of energy, with very little drawbacks, and yet it is still a stick in the mud.

Where you could use hydroelectric generators to provide a drop current, and without losing too much energy, you could use electrolysis on a damn, to produce TONS of hydrogen and oxygen. And yet this method of production isnt cost effective...?


I think swami mentioned you have a scientific background... can i ask in what?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4314557 -

Fusion is not mainstream because it generates a tremendous amount of waste in the form of irradiated tools and parts. At least this is what I have read.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #4314568 -

Not sure if this is what you mean, but check out this thread::

http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4110332/an//page//vc/1


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #4314584 -

Fusion is not mainstream because it generates a tremendous amount of waste in the form of irradiated tools and parts. At least this is what I have read.

Actually, fusion isn't mainstream because it currently takes more energy to maintain the reaction than you get out of it. We're close to breaking even (Q = 1) but the technology has to reach Q = ~20 before it will be practical for generating energy commercially. It'll happen, just not for a while.

The radiation from fusion is negligible. The reactor components themselves become radioactive, but the half-lives involved are on the order of 10 years compared to fission reactors' waste half lives measured in the tens of thousands of years.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4314887 -

That is the gist of what I read. You are more scientifically inclined than I (better at math). Search www.slashdot.org for the words "breadbox fusion" and let me know what you think.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #4314916 -

Here is a link to the parent article:
http://www.christiansciencemonitor.com/2005/0606/p25s01-stss.html
There is apparently a poor output right now as you stated.


--------------------
"A warrior is a hunter. He calculates everything. That's control. Once his calculations are over, he acts. He lets go. That's abandon. A warrior is not a leaf at the mercy of the wind. No one can push him; no one can make him do things against himself or against his better judgment. A warrior is tuned to survive, and he survives in the best of all possible fashions." ― Carlos Castaneda

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Huehuecoyotl]
    #4314926 -

Yeah, I just found it.

It's the same technology mentioned in the above thread. Since the device operates at a net negative gain (takes more power to operate it than it gives back) it's primary use at the moment is as a convenient source of neutrons for use in portable scanning machines at airports and such.


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4314957 -

I guess i just have a hard time accepting the fact that if we have a new (relatively), way of producing energy, that is cost effective, and requires less energy than it produces, that this isnt something more mainstream...

It doesn't requires less energy. Energy can't be created out of nothing (disregarding weird virtual particles in Quantum Mechanics). So, for every erg your car uses, at least one erg must be spent making hydrogen (usually a littler more due to inefficiencies).

But here's the thing. It's far more efficient and clean to use the economies of scales of a large power plant than it is to generate the same amount of energy from a million small car engines. And a fission or fusion electric power plant emits no greenhouse gasses, unlike oil burning cars.

See the difference?

you could use electrolysis on a damn, to produce TONS of hydrogen and oxygen. And yet this method of production isnt cost effective...?

Of course it's effective. So, you set up a hydrogen production plant at the Hoover dam. Now, tell me who's going to buy all this hydrogen?

It would seem to me, that even with 2 dollars a gallon, that we would start moving in this direction.

Alright, then tell my why you don't currently own a hydrogen-powered car?


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Diploid]
    #4315470 -

Quote:
It doesn't requires less energy. Energy can't be created out of nothing (disregarding weird virtual particles in Quantum Mechanics). So, for every erg your car uses, at least one erg must be spent making hydrogen (usually a littler more due to inefficiencies).


I understand the physics. Im trying to convey to you, that the energy, i.e. human labor, investment, and overall net gains... The overall Turnover, is greater than the current "system". My question is, if such a potential for such returns in a new system is greater, than why hasnt it taken a foot hold..

It would seem logical to me, that if something had the potential to create higher turnovers in both the physical, and social aspects, that it wouldnt drive technology to advance in that direction. If technology is really meant on improving itself, or us as humans improving our technology.

We have these overlapping problems in the world, that create a gridlock for advancement. There are huge gaps of information between different peoples and countries... Its like there is just this huge black hole, and the corresponding information is lost.

Quote:
It's far more efficient and clean to use the economies of scales of a large power plant than it is to generate the same amount of energy from a million small car engines.


Yeah, like using public transportation, mass transportation. But for that you have to have grids, and the infrastructure to accomodate such a system. Or do you think that we should have millions of cars anyway, but if they ran on hydrogen or they were electric, it would be okay, because they are getting energy from one solid source?


Quote:
Of course it's effective. So, you set up a hydrogen production plant at the Hoover dam. Now, tell me who's going to buy all this hydrogen?


What about these hydrogen cars everyones been talking about?


Quote:
Alright, then tell my why you don't currently own a hydrogen-powered car?


They are not mass produced, they are not affordable, their is no market to accomodate their production for lower prices. I cant get hydrogen anywhere. I dont have a company to invest in hydrogen powered cars and hydrogen plants, i cant make effective change other than words that could bring about the existence of a hydrogen car, into my garage.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: S&P, how do you feel about this, it concerns everyone? [Re: Zero7a1]
    #4315558 -

the energy, i.e. human labor, investment, and overall net gains... The overall Turnover, is greater than the current "system".

Alright, I've addressed this several times but you're not getting it.

My question is, if such a potential for such returns in a new system is greater, than why hasnt it taken a foot hold..

For the same reason you don't currently own a hydrogen fuel cell powered car - you have no place to buy the hydrogen.

They are not mass produced, they are not affordable

Mass-produced, affordable fuel cell:

http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1455.html


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Global Warming and the Technological solution
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Rahz 3,692 77 05/28/24 06:07 AM
by Rahz
* A little bit of technology. Droz 792 5 11/07/02 03:51 AM
by GazzBut
* Can technology fix the problems technology created upupup 1,928 19 12/13/02 09:51 PM
by Floydian
* Questions & Answers
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Lord_of_Fungus 11,223 78 03/19/04 06:26 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* Do you feel your knowledge is a burden or a gift?
( 1 2 all )		 Grav 5,850 37 09/08/02 09:55 PM
by Anonymous
* the advance of technology LoverofEarth 1,257 13 03/07/03 05:29 AM
by Strumpling
* Concern Yourselves With What You Want fireworks_godS 1,994 15 09/25/03 02:15 PM
by fireworks_god
* Sports & Spirituality
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 4,701 32 08/21/03 01:44 PM
by Malachi

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
4,043 topic views. 0 members, 218 guests and 35 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.