Leftist solution to power crisis: Sit in the dark
Aaron R. Kulkis
Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
why is that?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com
ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@msn.com ab...@sprint.com
ab...@earthlink.com
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
Mark Sobolewski
> Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>
> why is that?
I just read a hilarious article in the LAWeekly about a protest
when George W. Bush was in town.
Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed
and less fossil fuels. (Yet, they were unhappy that
their lights were going out.) They put up a big
banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!" Yeah, and
while they are at it, how about a nice
big 10 acre lot for every spotted owl on earth?
Wooo wooo! :-)
Mark Sobolewski
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >
> > why is that?
>
> I just read a hilarious article in the LAWeekly about a protest
> when George W. Bush was in town.
>
> Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed
> and less fossil fuels. (Yet, they were unhappy that
> their lights were going out.)
It's pretty funny how Leftists demonstrate that they really
DON'T like conservation once someone makes them put their
lifestyle where their mouths are...
> They put up a big
> banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!" Yeah, and
> while they are at it, how about a nice
> big 10 acre lot for every spotted owl on earth?
> Wooo wooo! :-)
>
> Mark Sobolewski
Shel Scott
>Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
>
It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
"conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
sundown.
>(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
>
There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
>They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
>
That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
power.
--
tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com
ab...@hotmail.com ab...@msn.com ab...@sprint.com
ab...@earthlink.com
--
): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :(
(: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :)
Mark Sobolewski
> Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
> >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
> >
> About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
> It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
> entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
> "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
> sundown.
Actually, it has turned out that way. Public opposition to
nuclear power here has been halved. Now 60% of people
(twice before) favor nuclear power.
> >(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
> >
> There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
>
> >They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
> >
> That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
> I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> power.
HAHAHA! The sierra club objects to wind power as well
because the California condors (vultures) would be harmed by them.
In other words, there are some leftist wackos who are like
5 year old children who cry for "daddy" government to provide
them with everything.
Mark Sobolewski
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
standing still!
Deb.
BiteMe
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>
> why is that?
>
Because they are only Hybrids... Half electric Half Gas...
Ike
BiteMe
Shel Scott wrote:
> Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
> >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
> >
> About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
> It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
> entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
> "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
> sundown.
>
> >(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
> >
> There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
>
> >They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
> >
> That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
> I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> power.
Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
and a large enough wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
keep the lights on. Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
generators on every home with wind generators could end the
dependence on OPEC. Rumor has it there is another alternative
power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
big oil & coal interests
Ike
tom parker
wrote:
Can you provide proof of your assertions about wind power? I am
interested - last time I did the math was years ago, things may have
changed.
tparker
"If the government doesn't trust the people, why doesn't it dissolve them and elect a new people?" Robert Anton Wilson, "The Illuminati Papers"
Ray Fischer
>Shel Scott wrote:
>> Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
>> >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
>> >
>> About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
>> It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
>> entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
>> "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
>> sundown.
California is 49th out of 50 in per capita energy usage.
>> That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
>> I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
>> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
>> power.
>
>Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
Santa Ana
>and a large enough wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
>keep the lights on.
The only problem is that Santa Ana winds occur only a few days every
year.
> Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
>Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
>generators on every home with wind generators could end the
>dependence on OPEC.
Shrug. It'd go a long way towards that.
> Rumor has it there is another alternative
>power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
>big oil & coal interests
Ah yes, the usual black helicopters and conspiracies.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Rich Soyack
news:9f9l1l$r...@bolt.sonic.net...
There are energy cells which will probably start to be available for
home use in about 3 years.
Rich Soyack
Rick Bowen
<aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>
>why is that?
Probably just realized what 100 million lead acid batteries going
tits up at roughly the same time would do the the environment.
Rick Bowen
TSRA Life Member
NRA Member
"Molon Labe"
Member of PETA
(People Eating Tasty Animals)
B.A.S.T.A.R.D.
(Bad American Standing
Tall Among Radically
Dependant Sheeple)
Rick Bowen
<kegp...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
>
>
>Shel Scott wrote:
>
>> Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
>> >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
>> >
>> About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
>> It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
>> entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
>> "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
>> sundown.
>>
>> >(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
>> >
>> There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
>>
>> >They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
>> >
>> That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
>> I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
>> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
>> power.
>
>Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
>and a large enough wind farm
No can do. Kali condor is so fucking stupid they fly into the
damn things. Check out the Sierra Club.
one could produce enough electricity to
>keep the lights on. Plus no waste is produced
Lead acid batteries. Clean up. lead smeltering, reclamation, acid
recovery.
that is unsafe like
>Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
>generators on every home with wind generators could end the
>dependence on OPEC. Rumor has it there is another alternative
>power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
Yeah, cold fusion.
>big oil & coal interests
>
>Ike
Rick Bowen
BiteMe
tom parker wrote:
Do a search at www.dogpile.com for Wind Generators. From what
I hear some who have invested in a Wind Generator sell off the extra
power to the electric Company.
Ike
BiteMe
Ray Fischer wrote:
> BiteMe <kegp...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
> >Shel Scott wrote:
> >> Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
> >> >
> >> About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
> >> It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
> >> entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
> >> "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
> >> sundown.
>
> California is 49th out of 50 in per capita energy usage.
>
> >> That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
> >> I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
> >> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> >> power.
> >
> >Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
>
> Santa Ana
>
Spelling Troll =8^D (thanks anyway)
>
> >and a large enough wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
> >keep the lights on.
>
> The only problem is that Santa Ana winds occur only a few days every
> year.
>
> > Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
> >Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
> >generators on every home with wind generators could end the
> >dependence on OPEC.
>
> Shrug. It'd go a long way towards that.
Yeppers
> > Rumor has it there is another alternative
> >power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
> >big oil & coal interests
>
> Ah yes, the usual black helicopters and conspiracies.
>
Maybe, Maybe not if not the utility companies should do the switch over
and bankrupt OPEC. But that's just a Greedy Liberal's opinion..
Ike
BiteMe
Rick Bowen wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 21:52:40 -0500, BiteMe
> <kegp...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Shel Scott wrote:
> >
> >> Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
> >> >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
> >> >
> >> About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
> >> It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
> >> entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
> >> "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
> >> sundown.
> >>
> >> >(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
> >> >
> >> There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
> >>
> >> >They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
> >> >
> >> That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
> >> I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
> >> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> >> power.
> >
> >Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
> >and a large enough wind farm
>
> No can do. Kali condor is so fucking stupid they fly into the
> damn things. Check out the Sierra Club.
Oh well guess they will have to move the condors...
>
> one could produce enough electricity to
> >keep the lights on. Plus no waste is produced
>
> Lead acid batteries. Clean up. lead smeltering, reclamation, acid
> recovery.
>
okie...
>
> that is unsafe like
> >Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
> >generators on every home with wind generators could end the
> >dependence on OPEC. Rumor has it there is another alternative
> >power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
>
> Yeah, cold fusion.
>
Not keeping track of everything so I'll take your word for it...
Ike
tom parker
wrote:
I have found a good deal of advertising, so far, but no actual
numbers. Are there any numbers out there that you know of? I've
helped design and build a few private power systems, and there are a
_lot_ of things to take into consideration before you can claim a net
profit on private power. The problems multiply enormously when you
are talking alternative public power, AFAIK. Hence, I would like to
see some actual math by actual engineering types - know of any?
thanks in advance
Aaron R. Kulkis
Maybe the Sierra Club should take a squat and start shitting out
whatever electricity they need out of their collective asses.
> Mark Sobolewski
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com
K: Truth in advertising:
Aaron R. Kulkis
How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
DOH!
>
> Deb.
Shel Scott
>> power.
>
>Can you prove that? Though not...
>
Anyone asking for proof that wind and solar can't meet requirements
just does not understand two key issues:
- the sheer volume of electricity that is consumed every day in the
US alone. Thousands of megawatts.
- how useless is a source that becomes unavailable often and by
circumstances beyond our control.
Wind can't provide enough power, especially when it's not blowing.
Solar can't provide enough power at a reasonable cost, especially when
the sun isn't shining. These are great as supplemental sources (for
those wealthy enough to afford them), but, since there will be a great
deal of time when neither is providing any power at all, the grid
needs to have the capacity it would have if there were no solar or
wind generation at all.
Lone Haranguer
Shel Scott wrote:
>
> BiteMe <kegp...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
> >Shel Scott wrote:
> >> wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> >> power.
> >
> >Can you prove that? Though not...
> >
> I'll assume you meant "thought" not.
> Anyone asking for proof that wind and solar can't meet requirements
> just does not understand two key issues:
> - the sheer volume of electricity that is consumed every day in the
> US alone. Thousands of megawatts.
> - how useless is a source that becomes unavailable often and by
> circumstances beyond our control.
>
> Wind can't provide enough power, especially when it's not blowing.
> Solar can't provide enough power at a reasonable cost, especially when
> the sun isn't shining. These are great as supplemental sources (for
> those wealthy enough to afford them), but, since there will be a great
> deal of time when neither is providing any power at all, the grid
> needs to have the capacity it would have if there were no solar or
> wind generation at all.
This is readily observable in a small private system. For my motorhome
I have 6 solar panels, regulator, inverter, wind generator and gas
generator. So if the sun is not shining nor the wind blowing I will
have to crank up the gas generator. Of course this gobbles gas and is
only efficient if I am running a high wattage appliance. So to provide
storage capacity and avoid the gas generator for small loads I have to
have 5 large batteries. Watching the battery meter sink slowly down
toward the red area shows the price paid for every use of electricity.
Another display shows the amps consumed by every 110V appliance as it is
turned on. If every consumer had this display in their homes they might
become more conscious of conserving.
LZ
Mark Balcom
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com...
>
>
> Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>
> why is that?
>
>
Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
Mark
Mark Balcom
"BiteMe" <kegp...@whitehouse.com> wrote in message
news:3B1854F8...@whitehouse.com...
I could power my house for more than 75 years for the cost of enough solar
cells to supply my needs. Besides that, it would require covering my entire
yard with them.
I use solar power as part of my electricity supple on my boat. The output at
noon is about 120 watts per square meter. There is only 6-8 hours of usable
daylight (in the summer, less in the winter). That is 10 Amps or less (at 12
volts) PEAK output, at noon. Figure something more like 6 for an average
Amps times 6 hours equals 36 Amp hours of battery charge. If the charging
system was 100% efficient that would produce 1/3 of my daily need while
cruising. Now, figure how little would be produced by the entire area of the
roof of the house, compared to the household needs. 416 square meters of
roof times 120 Watts per meter = a mere 5000 Watts PEAK. What do I do after
the sun goes down?
Mark
Mark Balcom
"Rich Soyack" <richs...@home.com> wrote in message
news:aOYR6.6494$r62.2...@typhoon1.ba-dsg.net...
Do you mean fuel cells?
Where do you get the hydrogen?
Mark
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Shel Scott wrote:
>
> > Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
> > >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
> > >
> > About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
> > It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
> > entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
> > "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
> > sundown.
> >
> > >(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
> > >
> > There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
> >
> > >They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
> > >
> > That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
> > I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
> > wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> > power.
>
> Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
> and a large enough wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
> keep the lights on. Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
> Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
> generators on every home with wind generators could end the
Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
is ever recouped) ????
> dependence on OPEC. Rumor has it there is another alternative
> power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
> big oil & coal interests
>
> Ike
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com
K: Truth in advertising:
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com...
> >
> >
> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >
> > why is that?
> >
> >
>
> Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
> from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>
I take it they never studied thermodynamics.
Rich Soyack
news:V%bS6.56002$FS3.6...@sjc-read.news.verio.net...
The first commercially available fuel cells (thanks for the correction) will
probably be
"direct fuel cells" which produce hydrogen and oxygen internally using
natural gas. Yes
they will still use fossile fuels but the efficiencies will be higher than
today's natural gas
nonfuel cell units.
Rich Soyack
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <3B1871D5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Deborah Terreson wrote:
>>
>> ----------
>> In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>>
>> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
>> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
>> standing still!
>
> How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> ----------
> In article <3B1871D5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> >>
> >> ----------
> >> In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >> <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >>
> >> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> >> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> >> standing still!
> >
> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
>
> Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
Nah..you still haven't restored a single ampere-second worth of charge
during the blackout...
doc
Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3B17E7A5...@yahoo.com...
> Mark Sobolewski wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > >
> >
> > I just read a hilarious article in the LAWeekly about a protest
> > when George W. Bush was in town.
> >
> > Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed
> > their lights were going out.)
>
>
> DON'T like conservation once someone makes them put their
> lifestyle where their mouths are...
Interesting that you bring that up....seems that California also passed a
law a while back mandating that the auto manufacturers build a certain
percentage of their sales volume in electric cars......I think that GM was
the first to get one on dealer's lots, and guess what.....*no one bought
them*.......I think that they all ended up being recalled......one of those
"liberal" things......every else should drive one, to "save the
planet".....except us......
doc
>
>
>
> > They put up a big
> > banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!" Yeah, and
> > while they are at it, how about a nice
> > big 10 acre lot for every spotted owl on earth?
> > Wooo wooo! :-)
> >
> > Mark Sobolewski
doc
tom parker <park...@w-link.net> wrote in message
news:3b2561bc....@NEWS.W-LINK.NET...
A friend of mine (retired physician, and amateur engineer) did a lot of
research, and owns a winter home near Yuma, AZ, that is totally powered by
solar panels and a windmill, storing power in banks of large lead/acid
cells, and using high efficiency inverters to produce mains AC (sine wave)
voltage (also uses a solar hot water heater). He uses no shore power
whatever.......however, his setup required an investment of over $30,000
initially, and about $800 per year in maintenance (replacement batteries,
diodes and transistors in inverters, solar cells). His comment when I
questioned him about the math was......."based on a leverage rate of 7%, I
will see a complete payout on my investment in 37.3 YEARS, including what
power is sold back to the utility company"......this is a minimum system
requirement for a 2000 sq. ft. one-story house.
Based on his experience, costs will have to go down a lot before these forms
of power generation are economically feasible, even considering economies of
scale in large systems........what the leftist whacos forget, you have to
find a way to convert the DC output of the solar arrays and windmills to AC
mains voltages (transport it to the load), and store the output for periods
of no wind and no sun......the batteries and electronics to accomplish this
and control the system increase costs by at least an order of
magnitude.......
doc
doc
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com...
> >
> >
> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >
> > why is that?
> >
> >
>
> Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric
current
> from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would
work.
>
> Mark
Is this sort of like........ummm.......a perpetual motion machine?
doc
tom parker
That's the part I was familiar with. I had hoped that some issues had
been resolved since I last looked into it. Power conversion and
storage are a couple of big problems, especially when dealing with
erratic primary energy sources. Lead acid batteries aren't really
practical for entire cities, IMHO, not to mention being horrendously
polluting. Hydrogen has this habit of going BANG!, in the presence of
oxygen and heat, etc. Problems, problems.....
Aaron R. Kulkis
AND conversion losses
AND the exceedingly high energy cost of manufacturing solar cells
in the first place.
>
> doc
>
> >
> > thanks in advance
> >
> > tparker
> > "If the government doesn't trust the people, why doesn't it dissolve them
> and elect a new people?" Robert Anton Wilson, "The Illuminati Papers"
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote in message
> news:iNbS6.55999$FS3.6...@sjc-read.news.verio.net...
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > >
> > > why is that?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> > fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric
> current
> > from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> > put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would
> work.
> >
> > Mark
>
> Is this sort of like........ummm.......a perpetual motion machine?
Precisely.
Society
news:3B1854F8...@whitehouse.com...
>
> Shel Scott wrote:
>
> > near producing enough power.
>
> Can you prove that? [...]
Yes.
#1: The Sacramento Metropolitan Utility District
converted its 500MW Rancho Seco nuclear power plant
to a solar farm. It now generates 2MW. An expansion
to 4MW is underway. Do the math: 500 >> 4.
#2: The hottest days and nights during which the
demand for electricity is highest occur during temperature
inversions. There is very little wind during an inversion.
My turn: Can you comprehend the term "energy density"?
> Fact is with the Santa Anna winds and a large enough
> wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
> keep the lights on.
Can you prove that? <laugh> Do the math. Your imaginary
"large enough wind farm" is not a "fact". It would be
impossibly large. Plus, the Santa Ana winds don't always
blow. (If they did, they wouldn't have a special name.)
> Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
> Nuclear waste is.
False. Wind farms are built out of metal machines. Metal
mining results in mine tailings that are loaded with poisonous
heavy metal contaminants deadlier than nuclear waste
from power plants. And those heavy metals don't decay
at all the way nuclear waste does. They last *forever*.
> We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
> generators on every home with wind generators
> could end the dependence on OPEC.
<laugh>
"Every home with wind generators"? Do you really
want a big wind turbine swinging over you and your
family's head all the time? The darn things are also
prone to mechanical breakdown and need lots of
maintenance. Ever wonder why so many windmills
on Northern California's Altamont pass are out of
operation on windy days when they could sell all the
juice they can make?
> Rumor has it there is another alternative power
> generator but it poses to much of a financial threat
> to big oil & coal interests
Hey, I heard about that on the Art Bell Show too.
The 200 mile per gallon carburetor rumor lives again!
<chuckle>
--
Even if the universe is bounded and finite,
stupidity is infinite and has no bounds.
doc
I belong to an organization called IEEE that publishes a monthly Journal,
and a couple of months ago they did a great analytical piece on this subject
(specifically focused on pure electric, as well as gasoline/electric, power
plants in automobiles), including some stats on the energy requirements and
pollution contributions involved operation as well as in the manufacture of
the devices, etc.
One interesting study in the article cited the fact that emissions
(pollutants) generated by today's gasoline powered automobiles were
considerably lower on a gram/mile basis than a pure electric vehicle of the
same size and passenger capacity, due to the emissions from the power
plants required to charge the batteries, even after the emission
contribution of the refineries and petroleum distribution process are
considered.
Their conclusion agrees with most of our discussion.......that the true
amortized cost and environmental factors unfortunately do not support these
as viable economic alternatives at this time.
doc
Aaron R. Kulkis
IEEE Spectrum, I take it?
> and a couple of months ago they did a great analytical piece on this subject
> (specifically focused on pure electric, as well as gasoline/electric, power
> plants in automobiles), including some stats on the energy requirements and
> pollution contributions involved operation as well as in the manufacture of
> the devices, etc.
>
> One interesting study in the article cited the fact that emissions
> (pollutants) generated by today's gasoline powered automobiles were
> considerably lower on a gram/mile basis than a pure electric vehicle of the
> same size and passenger capacity, due to the emissions from the power
> plants required to charge the batteries, even after the emission
> contribution of the refineries and petroleum distribution process are
> considered.
Living in Detroit, and working on several occasions with the Big 3 auto
companies,, I can assure you, I have talked with the scientists
and engineers who did some of the basic research in this regard :-)))
tracy
everything. Before I dropped out of college I took a course from an uptight anal
engineer like you. The fascist was cramming his laws of Thermodynamics down all
the other genuflecting dweeb students throats. You just wait, Governor Gray Davis
is going to repeal the third law of Thermodynamics and do away with that fascist
entropy stuff. Then we'll have plenty of power with no pollution.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
--
tracy
Robert Sturgeon
wrote:
>Hey man, I'm a pot smoking San Francisco lefty and that makes me an expert on
>everything. Before I dropped out of college I took a course from an uptight anal
>engineer like you. The fascist was cramming his laws of Thermodynamics down all
>the other genuflecting dweeb students throats. You just wait, Governor Gray Davis
>is going to repeal the third law of Thermodynamics and do away with that fascist
>entropy stuff. Then we'll have plenty of power with no pollution.
The "liberal" Democrats do seem to believe they can repeal laws of
economics that don't suit them. A poor confused letter writer in
today's San Francisco Chronicle said that price caps would prevent
electrical blackouts and that President Bush is showing his
callousness by refusing to impose price caps. Wow. It's not much
of a stretch to try to repeal physical laws too.
(rest snipped)
--
Robert Sturgeon
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
"The Constitution admittedly has a few defects and blemishes, but it still
seems a hell of a lot better than the system we have now."
Robert Anton
Aaron R. Kulkis
And that's with the government subsidy which hides the TRUE cost of solar cells.
(which is even higher)
>
> I use solar power as part of my electricity supple on my boat. The output at
> noon is about 120 watts per square meter. There is only 6-8 hours of usable
> daylight (in the summer, less in the winter). That is 10 Amps or less (at 12
> volts) PEAK output, at noon. Figure something more like 6 for an average
> Amps times 6 hours equals 36 Amp hours of battery charge. If the charging
> system was 100% efficient that would produce 1/3 of my daily need while
> cruising. Now, figure how little would be produced by the entire area of the
> roof of the house, compared to the household needs. 416 square meters of
> roof times 120 Watts per meter = a mere 5000 Watts PEAK. What do I do after
> the sun goes down?
>
> Mark
Lone Haranguer
And if you look at a map that shows which part of the country gets the
most days of sunshine, Yuma is the peak area. Efficiency will decrease
as you get more cloudy days. I haven't done any wind studies but
personal experience shows plenty of windy/sunny days at Imperial Dam,
just north of Yuma.
LZ
Mike Hartigan
One must consider the carnage that inevitably results when those
big blades start turning. Indeed, I think that it's reasonable to
conclude that far more innocent living things (birds) are killed per
megawatt of wind-power than of nuclear.
Then again, if enough birds are killed, perhaps we won't have to worry so
much about destroying their habitats and we can get back on track with
that progress thing. Maybe the liberals are on to something!
Matt Kennel
:"Ike" pleaded "BiteMe" <kegp...@whitehouse.com> then scrawled in message
:news:3B1854F8...@whitehouse.com...
:>
:> Shel Scott wrote:
:>
:> > [W]ind and solar power can not come anywhere
:> > near producing enough power.
:>
:> Can you prove that? [...]
:
:Yes.
:
:#1: The Sacramento Metropolitan Utility District
:converted its 500MW Rancho Seco nuclear power plant
:to a solar farm. It now generates 2MW. An expansion
:to 4MW is underway. Do the math: 500 >> 4.
That's pretty sad.
Fortunately we just got the second unit from our local nuke back
online. A few months ago there was a fire and a power failure on the
generating plant; the nice circuit breakers tripped of course. One of
those powered an oil pump that lubricates the main bearing for a Big
Ass Turbine that was spinning at 2000+ RPM or so.
They had to ship the turbine by barge back to its manufacturing plant
to get an overhaul.
Anyway, at full operation the two reactors (2200 MW) are
18% of southern California's total electricity use.
:> Fact is with the Santa Anna winds and a large enough
:> wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
:> keep the lights on.
:
:Can you prove that? <laugh> Do the math. Your imaginary
:"large enough wind farm" is not a "fact". It would be
:impossibly large. Plus, the Santa Ana winds don't always
:blow. (If they did, they wouldn't have a special name.)
Wind does work compared to photovoltaic but site limitations
are very significant, like hydropower.
:> Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
:> Nuclear waste is.
:
:False. Wind farms are built out of metal machines. Metal
:mining results in mine tailings that are loaded with poisonous
:heavy metal contaminants deadlier than nuclear waste
:from power plants. And those heavy metals don't decay
:at all the way nuclear waste does. They last *forever*.
:
:> We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
:> generators on every home with wind generators
:> could end the dependence on OPEC.
:
:<laugh>
:
:"Every home with wind generators"? Do you really
:want a big wind turbine swinging over you and your
:family's head all the time? The darn things are also
:prone to mechanical breakdown and need lots of
:maintenance. Ever wonder why so many windmills
:on Northern California's Altamont pass are out of
:operation on windy days when they could sell all the
:juice they can make?
The technology really is getting better but you
can't do squat about the weather.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
Don Kulha
doc wrote:
> He uses no shore power
> whatever.......however, his setup required an investment of over $30,000
> initially, and about $800 per year in maintenance (replacement batteries,
> diodes and transistors in inverters, solar cells). His comment when I
> questioned him about the math was......."based on a leverage rate of 7%, I
> will see a complete payout on my investment in 37.3 YEARS, including what
> power is sold back to the utility company"......this is a minimum system
> requirement for a 2000 sq. ft. one-story house.
Hey Doc...If your buddy is paying out $800 per year on average for maintanence
he got seriously screwed by whoever designed his system. They must have used
the worse junk in the world. PV panels routinely have a 20-25 year warranty and
will last much longer than that. If the system was set up poorly I guess you
could kill batteries quickley. Tell him not to buy the trash inverters they
sell at Walley World next time. I know lots of off-grid folk and haven't heard
of anyone spending that kind of money for maintaining a home type system
The "minimum system requirement for a 2000 sq. ft. one-story house" depends a
lot on just how efficient that house is energy wise, $30K would be at the
"deluxe" end of the scale for a fairly wasteful home.
If anyone's interested in the real dope on independent energy systems as
opposed to uninformed (and somewhat biggoted) speculation check out our website
and magazine (you can download the current issue on the newstands for free
there) at:
P.S. - I've met and spoken with Ed a couple times and I can tell you he thinks
nuclear power is really stupid idea.
Don Kulha
Home Power Magazine, "The Hands-On Journal of Home-Made Power"
Ray Fischer
>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
>cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
>is ever recouped) ????
Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a power
plant?
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Ray Fischer
>> >> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>> >>
>> >> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
>> >> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
>> >> standing still!
>> >
>> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
>>
>> Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
>
>Nah..you still haven't restored a single ampere-second worth of charge
>during the blackout...
You can't fill up your car with gas during a blackout either.
Gas pumps run on electricity.
FYI
Ray Fischer
>Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
>fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
>from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
>put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid. Sometimes the same
ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
Gunner
wrote:
>Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>>Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
>>fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
>>from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
>>put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>
>No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid. Sometimes the same
>ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
On the same level of Lieberals who think that a missile shield is
impossible. Sorta like those who said heavyer than air flight was
impossible.
Gunner
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look
upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
Mahatma Ghandi
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Deborah Terreson wrote:
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>
> >> >> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >> >>
> >> >> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> >> >> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> >> >> standing still!
> >> >
> >> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> >>
> >> Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
> >
> >Nah..you still haven't restored a single ampere-second worth of charge
> >during the blackout...
>
> You can't fill up your car with gas during a blackout either.
>
> Gas pumps run on electricity.
That's not the ONLY way to pump gas.
you *CAN* stick a hose from a hand-powered pump down the filler pipe
and pump the old way.
Also, you can (as the military does), use gravity-feed tanks.
No electricity necessary, EVER.
>
> FYI
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>
> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
Bzzzzzzzzt! who believes that electric cars and fuel cells are a panacea
a) conservatives
b) radical liberals.
hope that helps
> Sometimes the same
> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
Hope that helps.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Shit, let's abandon any attempts to save fuel at all. After all,
> Honda's got a hybrid now that gets 68 MPG.. (61 city..)
>
> All they need to do now is put the drivetrain into a Ford Expedition
> chassis, so the fat assed Noble Republicans might buy one.
Ford dealerships in Democratic bastions, such as California and
Massachussets, where Republicans are reporting that Expeditions and
other SUVs continue to post extremely strong sales.
Liberaly hypocrisy?
Naaaaaaaaaaaah, couldn't be.
>
> Right, little right wing macho turd?
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Ray Fischer wrote:
> > >
> > > Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
> > > >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> > > >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
> > > >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> > > >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
> > >
> > > No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
> >
> > Bzzzzzzzzt! who believes that electric cars and fuel cells are a panacea
> > a) conservatives
> > b) radical liberals.
> >
> > hope that helps
> >
> > > Sometimes the same
> > > ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
> >
> > Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> > > rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > DNRC Minister of all I survey, fuckhead, right wing dufus, virgin, gynophobe, homophobe
> > ICQ # 3056642
Don Kulha
> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
> >cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
> >is ever recouped) ????
>
> Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a power
> plant?
Good point Ray but this isn't a discussion based on the facts...that's
readily apparent.
We published an article based somewhat on Siemens research that basically
says in a decent solar access area a PV panel will amortize all the energy
incorporated in it's production within 2 years. This is kW for kW including
things like administration energy use, shipping raw materials, the glass and
aluminum in the frame etc.. This is also available on the Siemens solar
website. There was some whining about how solar is subsidized here
too.....lessee since 1957 nuclear has gotten 90.5% of energy subsidy dollars
and all solar combined has gotten .05% and the renewables research budget
(miniscule even next to the "oil depletion allowance" tax break) for the
coming year was halved. Then there was the bird thing when they were talking
about windplants...it was made to sound as if they had to rake away all the
carcasses so the blades could keep turning; the real figure is that on
average at the windfarms they find one bird per year dead in the vicinity of
a windplant. Those evil windplants! Apparently there must be some invisible
windplants around here as I occasionally find dead birds on the ground or
road....it couldn't be that birds ever die of natural causes.
Then too Ray, it doesn't seem like these mental giants were straining their
grey matter too much either. The bit about the hybrid vehicles making and
storing hydrogen.....You know, if you take the excess power generated on the
grid during low use times (wee hours of the morning) store it and put it back
on the grid during high use times (peak hours) it's quite beneficial. PG&E
pumps water uphill at night when they have excess power and run it downhill
thru turbines during the day when they need the power. Just imagine how
foolish PG&E must have been all these years to think their silly idea must
work....
Nope Ray....most of the misinformation in this thread has zero, zip to do
with the facts. Besides. What do we care what the folks over at
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.rush-limbaugh, soc.singles, think? Last I looked
this was msc.survivalism and we were concerned with sustainability and
intelligent independant power production. I don't care about some what bored
retirees stock in Enron, Standard Oil or PG&E is worth. I do care about high
quality, reliable power that isn't interruptible by TPTB, corporate greed,
regulator incompetence, or the occasional storm.
Ciao....Don
http://www.homepower.com
Shel Scott
>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
>>cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
>>is ever recouped) ????
>
>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a power
>plant?
>
the life of each compared to the energy costs of producing each.
--
tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com
ab...@hotmail.com ab...@msn.com ab...@sprint.com
ab...@earthlink.com
): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :(
(: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :)
Ray Fischer
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >Deborah Terreson wrote:
>> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>>
>> >> >> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
>> >> >> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
>> >> >> standing still!
>> >> >
>> >> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
>> >>
>> >> Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
>> >
>> >Nah..you still haven't restored a single ampere-second worth of charge
>> >during the blackout...
>>
>> You can't fill up your car with gas during a blackout either.
>>
>> Gas pumps run on electricity.
>
>That's not the ONLY way to pump gas.
Yes, moron, it is.
>you *CAN* stick a hose from a hand-powered pump
There aren't any.
Ray Fischer
>> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
>> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
>> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
>> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>>
>> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
>> Sometimes the same
>> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
>
>Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles. And
there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
Ray Fischer
>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
>>>cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
>>>is ever recouped) ????
>>
>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a power
>>plant?
>>
>Fair enough; now let's consider the amount of energy generated over
>the life of each compared to the energy costs of producing each.
Haven't a clue. Don't even have a good idea how to assess such a
thing. In general people don't keep track of how much energy is
required to produce anything.
Gunner
wrote:
>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> >Deborah Terreson wrote:
>>> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>>>
>>> >> >> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
>>> >> >> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
>>> >> >> standing still!
>>> >> >
>>> >> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
>>> >>
>>> >> Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
>>> >
>>> >Nah..you still haven't restored a single ampere-second worth of charge
>>> >during the blackout...
>>>
>>> You can't fill up your car with gas during a blackout either.
>>>
>>> Gas pumps run on electricity.
>>
>>That's not the ONLY way to pump gas.
>
>Yes, moron, it is.
>
>>you *CAN* stick a hose from a hand-powered pump
>
>There aren't any.
Ray.. take a look in the back of any farmers pickup... you will note a
fuel tank with a hand powered pump in many of them. Most easy to hose
clamp a longer hose to the pickup tube, drop it into a gas stations
tank..and pump.
As far as NO hand pumped Filling stations pumps..yes there are. Not many
any more.. few in fact..but yes..they still do exhist and in commercial
use.
Gunner
wrote:
>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>
>>> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
>>> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
>>> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
>>> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>>>
>>> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
>>> Sometimes the same
>>> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
>>
>>Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
>
>Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
>
>The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
>if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles. And
>there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
>Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
But. Ray..we are talking about Missile defense. Not rabies defense yada
yada yada. A SDI system will not protect you against a car wreck. Hummm
seat belts will not protect you from a mugger..so that means we should
not bother with seat belts?
You might want to reframe your comment...LOL <G>
Matt Kennel
:Shel Scott <ssc...@unispam.com> wrote:
:>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
:>>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:
:>>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
:>>>cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
:>>>is ever recouped) ????
:>>
:>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a power
:>>plant?
:>>
:>Fair enough; now let's consider the amount of energy generated over
:>the life of each compared to the energy costs of producing each.
:
:Haven't a clue. Don't even have a good idea how to assess such a
:thing. In general people don't keep track of how much energy is
:required to produce anything.
To a very approximate degree the cost of the stuff to make something
includes the energy inputs. If it is highly cost-effective it probably
puts out more energy than it took to make it.
It is difficult to decide where to "draw the line"---do you count the
energy to make the factory that made the tools that made the bulldozer
that broke the ground for the powerplant?
Nevertheless serious people do try (e.g. national DOE laboratories); I
think nukes and wind plants can put out significantly more energy than
their inputs however they defined it.
:--
:Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
:rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
--
Ray Fischer
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)
>>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>>>> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
>>>> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
>>>> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
>>>> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>>>>
>>>> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
>>>> Sometimes the same
>>>> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
>>>
>>>Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
>>
>>Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
>>
>>The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
>>if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles. And
>>there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
>>Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
>
>But. Ray..we are talking about Missile defense. Not rabies defense yada
>yada yada. A SDI system will not protect you against a car wreck.
It will not keep you from being killed by an enemy.
Which rather makes it pretty pointless.
Unless, that is, the point is to funnel a shitload of money to your
corporate buddies.
BJ
"Ray Fischer" <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:9fm7hj$j...@bolt.sonic.net...
Of course if missiles were launched toward the city you live in, you might
change you mind.
The Danimal
> On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 21:35:23 GMT, Ray Fischer <rfis...@sonic.net> wrote:
> :Shel Scott <ssc...@unispam.com> wrote:
> :>rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> :>>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :>>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
> :>>>cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
> :>>>is ever recouped) ????
> :>>
> :>>Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a power
> :>>plant?
> :>>
> :>Fair enough; now let's consider the amount of energy generated over
> :>the life of each compared to the energy costs of producing each.
> :
> :Haven't a clue. Don't even have a good idea how to assess such a
> :thing. In general people don't keep track of how much energy is
> :required to produce anything.
>
> To a very approximate degree the cost of the stuff to make something
> includes the energy inputs. If it is highly cost-effective it probably
> puts out more energy than it took to make it.
Quite a bit more, in fact. For most manufactured goods, the
cost of the energy to make them is about 5% to 10% of the final
selling cost.
That is why the CPI rises only a little even when energy costs
double or triple. If energy costs were larger compared to the
costs of labor, capital, and ownership, the economy would not
be able to absorb the huge swings in energy costs that it has.
> It is difficult to decide where to "draw the line"---do you count the
> energy to make the factory that made the tools that made the bulldozer
> that broke the ground for the powerplant?
You would need to apportion that cost among all the goods that
come from the factory. This would ultimately show up as part
of the cost you pay to rent the bulldozer that breaks ground
for your plant.
Do you count all the gasoline your employees burned up commuting
to school to get the education they needed to work for you?
Ultimately you pay for this in labor costs. However, people
spend a lot of money on things other than energy, so there is
a limit to the fraction of the economy that goes to that.
It's like taxes. All the money you make comes from people who
paid taxes, and you pay taxes too, so it might seem that you
have a sort of reverse Zeno's Paradox wherein taxes recursively
absorb everything. But clearly they don't. Energy costs work
similarly. Something like 5% to 10% of GDP goes to pay for
energy. That's a big cost, but it factors in pretty evenly in
most things you buy. If, for example, you buy a highly engineered
item such as a computer, the direct energy cost is lower than if
you spend the same $2000 on portland cement. However, a lot of
energy goes into the engineering (engineers tend to drive cars
and SUVs, and only a few of them keep their heat at 52 degress F
in winter).
> Nevertheless serious people do try (e.g. national DOE laboratories); I
> think nukes and wind plants can put out significantly more energy than
> their inputs however they defined it.
Wind plants have the considerable advantage of getting fuel
absolutely for free. They have economics similar to that of
hydroelectric plants. Once you have built a hydroelectric plant,
it is pretty much like having a machine that cranks out money.
I saw a calculation that showed the lifetime energy output of a
solar cell under favorable siting conditions was so high that
it was almost as good as having a chunk of uranium.
Consider the enormous cost of putting stuff into orbit. Shipping
costs are so high that when it comes to putting an energy source
into orbit, you want the device that will yield the most energy
per unit mass that you have to lift. Solar cells are more popular
on satellites than nuclear reactors or radioisotope-powered thermionic
generators not just because they are safer, cheaper, and more reliable, but
(probably) because they yield more lifetime energy output per unit
mass, and because they are easier to add in small capacity increments
than nuclear reactors. Nuclear reactors in space also have the
problem of eliminating waste heat solely by radiation. Solar cells in
Earth orbit have the considerable advantage of 1350 W/m^2 of
insolation whenever they are not in the Earth's shadow.
-- the Danimal
Gunner ©
wrote:
>Gunner <gun...@cyberg8t.com> wrote:
>> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)
>>>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
>>>>> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
>>>>> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
>>>>> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
>>>>> Sometimes the same
>>>>> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
>>>>
>>>>Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
>>>
>>>Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
>>>
>>>The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
>>>if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles. And
>>>there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
>>>Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
>>
>>But. Ray..we are talking about Missile defense. Not rabies defense yada
>>yada yada. A SDI system will not protect you against a car wreck.
>
>It will not keep you from being killed by an enemy.
Nothing will keep you from being killed by an enemy. He may well run a
bulldozer over your bedroom as you sleep. But.. its far more likely that
a determined enemy nation may well shoot a missile(s) at your country,
than try to kill each and everyone of you with a D8 Cat, one house at a
time.
A flight of Russian ICBM with 10 MIRVs (each) is far more devastating
(and effective) than setting off a couple container ship nukes in a few
harbors. So.. in the grand scheme of things..such a launch..is more
likely to destroy the target nations abliltiy to respond..than your
container ship bombs.
>
>Which rather makes it pretty pointless.
You really dont think things through very well do you? Are you simply a
born fatalist, or that ignorant that you run only on emotion?
Gunner
>
>Unless, that is, the point is to funnel a shitload of money to your
>corporate buddies.
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>
> >> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> >> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
> >> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> >> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
> >>
> >> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
> >> Sometimes the same
> >> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
> >
> >Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
>
> Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
>
> The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
> if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles.
So what?
Anti-personnel mines only work against people.
> And
> there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
> Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >Deborah Terreson wrote:
> >> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >>
> >> >> >> > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> >> >> >> I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> >> >> >> standing still!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> >> >>
> >> >> Probably about as long as it takes to get the computer back online... <g>
> >> >
> >> >Nah..you still haven't restored a single ampere-second worth of charge
> >> >during the blackout...
> >>
> >> You can't fill up your car with gas during a blackout either.
> >>
> >> Gas pumps run on electricity.
> >
> >That's not the ONLY way to pump gas.
>
> Yes, moron, it is.
only an idiot believes such a thing.
>
> >you *CAN* stick a hose from a hand-powered pump
>
> There aren't any.
Funny. I can go to Kmart and get a simple flapper-valve pump for less than $10.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Gunner <gun...@cyberg8t.com> wrote:
> > rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)
> >>Aaron R. Kulkis <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>Ray Fischer wrote:
> >>>> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
>
> >>>> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> >>>> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
> >>>> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> >>>> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
> >>>>
> >>>> No, it's only conservatives who are THAT stupid.
> >>>> Sometimes the same
> >>>> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
> >>>
> >>>Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
> >>
> >>Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
> >>
> >>The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
> >>if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles. And
> >>there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
> >>Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
> >
> >But. Ray..we are talking about Missile defense. Not rabies defense yada
> >yada yada. A SDI system will not protect you against a car wreck.
>
> It will not keep you from being killed by an enemy.
Will seat belts protect you in ALL car crashes
a) yes
B) NO.
I guess we should get rid of them, right!??!?!
>
> Which rather makes it pretty pointless.
>
> Unless, that is, the point is to funnel a shitload of money to your
> corporate buddies.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> rfis...@sonic.net into you -- Nietzsche
Aaron R. Kulkis
No...self-defence is WAAAAAAAAAAY tooo scary for most liberals to even contemplate.
http://www.jpfo.org/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unfortunately, the energy yield isn't nearly so good on the surface
of our planet.
>
> -- the Danimal
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com
K: Truth in advertising:
CLK
identify, locate and stop than an ICBM, is it not? And while an ICBM
can affect a great deal of damage, you know who and where it's coming
from. The ship, on the other hand, if detonated in San Fransisco Bay
would be far more disturbing. The lack of notice/prepardness and hit
location coupled with the lack of immediate knowledge of who sent it
can create a new enemy- being attacked by the unknown.
Carl
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 22:20:42 +0000, Gunner © <gun...@cyberg8t.com>
wrote:
Remove the trash before replying....
Mathew
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> BiteMe wrote:
> >
> > Shel Scott wrote:
> >
> > > Mark Sobolewski <msobo...@tems.com> wrote:
> > > >Ed Begly Jr. said that more "conservation" was needed and less fossil fuels.
> > > >
> > > About what we expect to hear from the show-biz community.
> > > It would appear, then, that the problems in California are due
> > > entirely to the state not "conserving" enough. They had best begin
> > > "conserving" a lot more or they aren't going to be able to see after
> > > sundown.
> > >
> > > >(Yet, they were unhappy that their lights were going out.)
> > > >
> > > There is obviously not enough "conserving" going on down there.
> > >
> > > >They put up a big banner "CLEAN POWER NOW!"
> > > >
> > > That would seem to indicate that Begley supports nuclear power.
> > > I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, in assuming he knows that
> > > wind and solar power can not come anywhere near producing enough
> > > power.
> >
> > Can you prove that? Though not... Fact is with the Santa Anna winds
> > and a large enough wind farm one could produce enough electricity to
> > keep the lights on. Plus no waste is produced that is unsafe like
> > Nuclear waste is. We will NEVER run out of wind or Sun so Solar
> > generators on every home with wind generators could end the
>
> Do you have any idea how much energy it takes to produce a solar
> cell (which may VERY well be damaged before that energy investment
> is ever recouped) ????
With R&D the cost would surely go down dramatically,but Solar has not had
the clout and priority that oil has.
By the way there is a good article on nuclear power in the current issue
of the "Economist" magazine.
>
>
> > dependence on OPEC. Rumor has it there is another alternative
> > power generator but it poses to much of a financial threat to
> > big oil & coal interests
> >
> > Ike
Mathew
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Deborah Terreson wrote:
> >
> > ----------
> > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> >
> > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > standing still!
>
> How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
Using a little generator?
>
> DOH!
>
>
> >
> > Deb.
Mathew
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> doc wrote:
> >
> > Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote in message
> > news:iNbS6.55999$FS3.6...@sjc-read.news.verio.net...
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > >
> > > > why is that?
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> > > fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric
> > current
> > > from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> > > put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would
> > work.
> > >
> > > Mark
> >
> > Is this sort of like........ummm.......a perpetual motion machine?
>
> Precisely.
>
Funny that Germans have been working on Hydrogen powered cars.
>
> >
> > doc
sunbird
> Funny that Germans have been working on Hydrogen powered cars.
haven't they learned about playing with hydrogen?
sunbird
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > >
> > > ----------
> > > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > >
> > > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > > standing still!
> >
> > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
>
> Using a little generator?
According to Enviro-whacko ideas, please explain the advantage of running a
gasoline posered generator and a gasoline powered automobile.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > doc wrote:
> > >
> > > Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote in message
> > > news:iNbS6.55999$FS3.6...@sjc-read.news.verio.net...
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > > >
> > > > > why is that?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> > > > fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric
> > > current
> > > > from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> > > > put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would
> > > work.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > >
> > > Is this sort of like........ummm.......a perpetual motion machine?
> >
> > Precisely.
> >
>
> Funny that Germans have been working on Hydrogen powered cars.
I seem to recall that the Germans played with Hydrogen-filled airships.
In retrospect, it was an utterly stupid idea. One could even say that
the Hindenburg disaster was...a 30 second event which characterized the
entire Nazi regime:
* A lot of otherwise smart people went along with a stupid idea.
* The Nazi craft sailed along, looking very grand to observers all around.
* Something sparked a fire...and volatile forces were released.
* More quickly than anybody could believe, those in control, those along
for the ride, and numerous people nearby found themselves in the midst
of a nightmare of unimaginable proportions.
* The few survivors, dazed and terrified, said "never again"
Bud Frawley
> Mathew wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >
> > > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ----------
> > > > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > >
> > > > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > > > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > > > standing still!
> > >
> > > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> >
> > Using a little generator?
>
> According to Enviro-whacko ideas, please explain the advantage of running a
> gasoline posered generator and a gasoline powered automobile.
another moron republiCON which flunked 1st grade science! thank's for
proving you do'nt know what a generator does. it makes electricity. if
you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
blackout's. then they do'nt have to build more power plant's. I guess in
your little world your generator stop's in a blackout! what a moron!
The Danimal
> The Danimal wrote:
> > Solar cells in
> > Earth orbit have the considerable advantage of 1350 W/m^2 of
> > insolation whenever they are not in the Earth's shadow.
>
> Unfortunately, the energy yield isn't nearly so good on the surface
> of our planet.
See any solar engineering textbook for the standard formulas for
calculating insolation. There are atmospheric losses, cosine losses
(for fixed collectors that do not track the sun), and of course
nighttime. At low latitudes in dry climates on clear days when the
sun is directly overhead, insolation is on the order of 900 W/m^2,
if I recall correctly (I'm too lazy to dig up my solar textbook).
That's about as good as it gets on Earth. High elevations tend to
be better, of course, as there is less atmosphere above them to
absorb and scatter sunlight.
It's interesting to calculate how much energy from the sun is
uselessly hitting the roof of your house every year. Since you have
to put *something* on the roof of your house, it would be nice
if someone could invent a solar cell with the same mechanical
properties and cost as a roof shingle. Then you'd get electricity
for essentially nothing. Not necessarily at the most convenient
times, but you're going to pay to have your roof shingled anyway.
My house measures approximately 40' x 25' with some roof overhang
but I'll neglect that, along with the partial shading from my
neighbor's trees. I have this much roof area uselessly reflecting,
absorbing, and re-radiating solar heat:
(40 ft * 25 ft) / ((((100 cm/m)/(2.54 cm/in))^2)/(144 in^2/ft^2)) =~ 93 m^2
I'm at 40 degrees north latitude, at a fairly low elevation, in an area
with humid summers. I'm too lazy to look up the exact numbers but I
think insolation might get as high as 800 W/m^2 at the best times.
Let's call it 500 W/m^2 to take in a larger number of hours. During those
hours my roof is squandering at least 46 KW. That is considerably more
power than I ever draw in the form of electricity.
Assuming a 10% solar cell efficiency, my roof could probably kick out
between 2 and 6 KW of electricity during a respectable number of hours
each year. Obviously having a higher cell efficiency would be better.
Of course the currently available solar cells cost far more than
roofing shingles, and they do not have the mechanical properties that
would make them direct replacements for shingles. But a simple calculation
shows that the solar energy bouncing uselessly off rooftops is a potential
energy resource comparable to our current domestic energy consumption.
-- the Danimal
Rich Soyack
news:FDD33EB5E080F662.71238431...@lp.airnews.net...
Interesting that you call someone a moron and then you show that you didn't
understand
the simple question that you were asked.
Rich Soyack
Lone Haranguer
Good thinking Bud! Ask governor Davis to issue an order forcing
EVERYONE in California to purchase (that means buy) a generator. Of
course you will need to rescind all zoning, air pollution and noise
pollution laws and the gas stations will be clogged with folks filling
their gasoline cans. Insurance rates will zoom because of additional
fire hazard and hundreds of nitwits will be fried when they plug their
generators into a house circuit and the grid comes back on.
But who cares, right? California will sound and smell just like an
engine repair shop.
LZ
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:58:46 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > Mathew wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > >
> > > > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > ----------
> > > > > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > > > > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > > > > standing still!
> > > >
> > > > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> > >
> > > Using a little generator?
> >
> > According to Enviro-whacko ideas, please explain the advantage of running a
> > gasoline posered generator and a gasoline powered automobile.
>
> another moron republiCON which flunked 1st grade science! thank's for
Wrong. I'm registered independant.
> proving you do'nt know what a generator does. it makes electricity.
Another moron Demoncrook who thinks that *HIS* preferred power sources
come without any costs.
Clue for the goddamned fucking clueless: how long will your gas-powered
generator run without gas in the tank?
> if
> you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
to a gas-powered automobile.
Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
> they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> blackout's.
If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
need batteries for, ya retard
> then they do'nt have to build more power plant's.
> I guess in your little world your generator stop's in a blackout!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Uh, yes, Bud... the generators stop in a black out.
In fact, losss of connection to a working generator is WHY there's
a black out. Do the math.
> what a moron!
Yes, you most certainly are.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
Aaron R. Kulkis
very true.
About the only thing you can do is heat water with it....unfortunately,
there's no inexpensive way to get it hot enough to boil without the
introduction of heatpumps (refrigeration/air conditioner concepts),
which is...well, you know...you expend more energy MOVING the energy
than what you can recover.
:-(
Offbreed
>
> haven't they learned about playing with hydrogen?
If you are talking about that blimp (Hyndenberg?), the skin of the
blimp was made of (effectively) smokeless gun powder mixed with
aluminum powder for pigment. Bloody miracle the thing did not go up
earlier.
Clue number one is the VISIBLE flames in the pictures. Hydrogen burns
in a near invisible blue flame.
This question has been beat to death over the years. A Deja search
should get you more info than you really want to deal with.
Aaron R. Kulkis
Nevertheless, hydrogen is still very dangerous in the hands
of the typical American moron.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> >>>>> Gunner writes:
>
> Gunner> On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 21:32:56 GMT, rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)
> wrote>
>
> >>>> Mark Balcom <ma...@coho.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> >Have you heard about the guy who wants to build cars that use hydrogen for
> >>>> >fuel? The hydrogen would be separated from water by passing electric current
> >>>> >from the grid through it. When the cars are parked their fuel cells would
> >>>> >put electricity back into the grid. Liberals actually think this would work.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sometimes the same
> >>>> ones that think a missile shield can be made to work.
> >>>
> >>> Steady progress in air defence has been made every decade.
> >>
> >> Steady progress in air and missile weapons has been made every decade.
> >>
> >> The most blindingly obvious problem with missile defense is that even
> >> if it worked perfectly, it would only protect against missiles. And
> >> there are a _lot_ of very deadly weapons that do not involve missiles.
> >> Nuclear, biological, chemical, and explosive.
>
> Gunner> yada yada. A SDI system will not protect you against a car wreck. Hummm
> Gunner> seat belts will not protect you from a mugger..so that means we should
> Gunner> not bother with seat belts?
>
> Gunner> You might want to reframe your comment...LOL <G>
>
> If we had unlimited resources you would have a strong point here. But
> to me the question is where do we spend our _limited_ resources. I would
Considering that spending money in this way PROTECTS all of the other
resources....your argument is disingenous.
Now...if you want to talk about allocation of limited resources...
let's discuss the replacement of cheap, safe, efficient R-12 with
expensive, inefficient, highly toxic and explosive R-134a....which
is INCOMPATIBLE with hoses, oils, and gaskets used in R-12 systems.
> rather spend the funds on higher risk items. Continue some research on
> SDI, but make sure we are spending enough on the more likely risks first.
>
> --
> Andrew Hall
> (Now reading Usenet in alt.rush-limbaugh...)
Bud Frawley
> Bud Frawley wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:58:46 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > Mathew wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > > > > > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > > > > > standing still!
> > > > >
> > > > > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> > > >
> > > > Using a little generator?
> > >
> > > According to Enviro-whacko ideas, please explain the advantage of running a
> > > gasoline posered generator and a gasoline powered automobile.
> >
> > another moron republiCON which flunked 1st grade science! thank's for
>
> Wrong. I'm registered independant.
you couild of fooled me.
>
> > proving you do'nt know what a generator does. it makes electricity.
>
> Another moron Demoncrook who thinks that *HIS* preferred power sources
> come without any costs.
>
> Clue for the goddamned fucking clueless: how long will your gas-powered
> generator run without gas in the tank?
dumass you can use any kind of gas even lawn mower gas.
>
>
> > if
> > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
>
> Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> to a gas-powered automobile.
>
you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you do'nt
jnow that's when you poolute the most!
> Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
> conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
> chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
what a moron! there's no conversion's. you go right fron the generator to
the plug! what kind of generator did you get suckered into buying?
>
>
> > they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> > blackout's.
>
> If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
> need batteries for, ya retard
tha battery's are for the car moron!
>
> > then they do'nt have to build more power plant's.
> > I guess in your little world your generator stop's in a blackout!
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Uh, yes, Bud... the generators stop in a black out.
>
> In fact, losss of connection to a working generator is WHY there's
> a black out. Do the math.
>
you did'nt even make it to 1st grade!
Rich Soyack
Is there a special kind of gas called "lawn mower gas?"
> >
> >
> > >
if
> > > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
> >
> > Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> > to a gas-powered automobile.
> >
> you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you do'nt
> jnow that's when you poolute the most!
Gas power generators polute quite a bit more than automobile engines.
>
> > Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
> > conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
> > chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
>
> what a moron! there's no conversion's. you go right fron the generator to
> the plug! what kind of generator did you get suckered into buying?
Well, a gas powered generator converts the gas to mechanical enerby to drive
the generators engine. Then the generators engine turns the coil in the
magnetic
field and produces electrical energy. Then the electrical energy is stored
in the
storage batteries as chemical energy (a quibble is possible here). Then the
chemical
energy is converted into mechanical energy to drive what ever it is you are
driving.
There are power losses in every step of the process.
> >
> >
> > > they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> > > blackout's.
> >
> > If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
> > need batteries for, ya retard
>
> tha battery's are for the car moron!
Nothing is free, if the generator is free to you who pays for it? Or do you
mean it should
be part of the price of the battery. In that case you would be buying a
generator every time
you buy a battery. Unless you think the government should buy your
generator, in which
case you are asking me to buy you a generator. Why should I do that?
Rich Soyack
Brock Hannibal
Currently in the developed countries we use Alternating Current for
electrical transmission and use transformers to step up the voltage for
transmission and step down the voltage to our residences and places of
business. AC is fine for this and is efficient for running electric
motors and heaters(including stoves and such). Radios, televisions,
stereos, electronic musical instruments, computers and a whole host of
other commonly used items on the other hand use Direct Current or DC.
It's pretty inefficent to convert AC to DC. Rarely better than 80%
efficient, yet most of these devices do just that. They plug into the wall but before
the energy is actually used to perform useful work it is internally
converted to DC by the devices.
Bear with me here.
Solar cells produce DC directly and this charge can
be stored in a combination of batteries and capacitance and used to
power the types of devices I mentioned almost directly. Look at all the
devices we have that use "wall warts". These wall warts are essentially
little power supplies that convert AC to DC. Anyway what I'm thinking is
that many of our commonly used devices that consume power could be
designed to use the DC produced and stored by a solar cell system
directly, thereby increasing efficency and abrogating the need for these wall
warts. It would be simple to add low voltage DC wiring to existing
structures and new construction and if we kept it down to about 24 Volts
also much safer than 120 Volt AC. Many rechargeable devices, including
lighting fixtures could also be designed to accomodate this form of electricity
and designed to recharge while the sun is shining for use when it's not. So I guess
what I'm proposing is sort of a dual system.
Personally, in my house, the only use I have for electricity sold to me
by the power company is for running lighting, fan motors, small
appliances and electronic devices. All the real energy hogs are
currently natural gas, like my dryer, water heater, furnace, oven and
stovetop. It wouldn't be that painful for me to convert to the kind of
solar system I propose if the manufacturers of the types of devices I
mentioned started producing DC versions of them. DC lighting is certaily
available, too. All the lighting in automobiles is already DC.
Just some ideas that are running around in my head. They interfere with
my constant thinking about sex with high smv women, so it's best to
write them down.
--
Brock
"One thing counts in this life: Get them to sign
on the line which is dotted...A. Always. B. Be.
C. Closing. Always Be Closing."
sunbird
> Of course the currently available solar cells cost far more than
> roofing shingles, and they do not have the mechanical properties that
> would make them direct replacements for shingles. But a simple calculation
> shows that the solar energy bouncing uselessly off rooftops is a potential
> energy resource comparable to our current domestic energy consumption.
no argument there, but you can use that solar energy also in ways other than
converting to electrical. heating water is common among uses. I also think
it would be kinda cool to cover a roof in fiber optic bundles and use them to
distribute light into the house.
also, if we really want to save energy we should build homes underground.
sunbird
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 12:04:55 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > Bud Frawley wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:58:46 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > > Mathew wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > > > > > > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > > > > > > standing still!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> > > > >
> > > > > Using a little generator?
> > > >
> > > > According to Enviro-whacko ideas, please explain the advantage of running a
> > > > gasoline posered generator and a gasoline powered automobile.
> > >
> > > another moron republiCON which flunked 1st grade science! thank's for
> >
> > Wrong. I'm registered independant.
>
> you couild of fooled me.
even retarded puppies can fool you, Frawley..
> >
> > > proving you do'nt know what a generator does. it makes electricity.
> >
> > Another moron Demoncrook who thinks that *HIS* preferred power sources
> > come without any costs.
> >
> > Clue for the goddamned fucking clueless: how long will your gas-powered
> > generator run without gas in the tank?
>
> dumass you can use any kind of gas even lawn mower gas.
So, once again, please explain why burning gasoline in a car is
eeeeeeeevil, but burning the same gasoline in a generator to charge
an electric car is good.
Accuracy counts, so be specific.
> >
> >
> > > if
> > > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
> >
> > Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> > to a gas-powered automobile.
> >
> you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you do'nt
> jnow that's when you poolute the most!
Cars pollute less than consumer-grade generators, hope that helps.
Even if you
>
> > Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
> > conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
> > chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
>
> what a moron! there's no conversion's. you go right fron the generator to
> the plug! what kind of generator did you get suckered into buying?
Spoken like a technological illiterate.
Uh, dooooooooooooofus, how does the energy of the generator get stored
in the electric car????
Traditional automobile:
Gasoline engine produces Mechanical energy
Transmission and axles convert the mechanical energy to vehicle motion.
Therefore the ONLY conversions are
1:Chemical energy (gas) ==> 2:heat energy ==> 3:mechanical energy ==> motion
oxygen piston
Now, in your your elusionally infantile nirvana:
1:Chemical energy (gas) ==> 2:heat energy ==> 3:mechanical energy ==>
oxygen piston electromagnetic
induction
==> 4:electric energy (current) ==> 5: chemical energy (battery acid)
charging battery
Then, when you USE the car...the process continues
5: chemical energy (battery acid) ==> 6: electric energy (current) ==>
discharge battery electromagnetic
induction and repulsion
==>7: mechanical energy (motor) ==> vehicle motion.
So, tell us.... how does the replacing the conversion
2:heat energy ==> 3: mechanical energy ==> motion
piston
with
2:heat energy ==> 3:mechanical energy ==>
piston electromagnetic
induction
==> 4:electric energy (current) ==> 5: chemical energy (battery acid)
charging battery
5: chemical energy (battery acid) ==> 6: electric energy (current) ==>
discharge battery electromagnetic
induction and repulsion
==>7: mechanical energy (motor) ==> vehicle motion.
reduce conversion losses and waste.
Considering that any time you have electric current involved, you
suffer TREMENDOUS losses (like 50%).
Since there TWO such losses,... 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25... 25% useable energy
left over ...
that's a 75% loss just due to charging/recharging losses.
And that STILL doesn't account for the losses that are inherent in
ALL heat engines.
T(high) - T(low)
efficiency = ------------------
T(high)
In a typical gasoline engine, T(high) is around 600 Kelvin, and
T low is local ambient temperature...therefore, around 300 kelvin
Thus, the MAXIMUM thermal efficiency is 600-300/600 = 50%
Thus, a gasoline automobile is about 50% efficient.
Conversely, an electric automobile running off of charged batteries
is only 12.5% efficient. MAXIMUM!!!!
Show me ANY current production automobile which runs below 12.5%
efficiency for more than a few __MOMENTS___ during normal use.
> >
> >
> > > they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> > > blackout's.
> >
> > If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
> > need batteries for, ya retard
>
> tha battery's are for the car moron!
> >
> > > then they do'nt have to build more power plant's.
> > > I guess in your little world your generator stop's in a blackout!
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Uh, yes, Bud... the generators stop in a black out.
> >
> > In fact, losss of connection to a working generator is WHY there's
> > a black out. Do the math.
> >
> you did'nt even make it to 1st grade!
Purdue University school of Interdisciplinary Engineering says otherwise.
> >
> > > what a moron!
> >
> > Yes, you most certainly are.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Aaron R. Kulkis
Actually, you missed a few conversions in the electric car scenario.
I count at least 6:
gasoline (chemical) =(1) > heat =(2)> mechanical =(3)> electric current =(4)>
chemical (battery acid) =(5)> electric current =(6)> mechanical
the significant ones are
(2) maximum 50% efficient for gasoline and typical ambient temperatures.
(3+4) maximum 50% due to parasitic load losses in electric systems
(5+6) maximum 50% due to parasitic load losses in electric systems
Therefore, the BEST efficiency of any battery operated vehicle is 12.5%
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> > > > blackout's.
> > >
> > > If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
> > > need batteries for, ya retard
> >
> > tha battery's are for the car moron!
>
> Nothing is free, if the generator is free to you who pays for it? Or do you
> mean it should
> be part of the price of the battery. In that case you would be buying a
> generator every time
> you buy a battery. Unless you think the government should buy your
> generator, in which
> case you are asking me to buy you a generator. Why should I do that?
>
> Rich Soyack
Aaron R. Kulkis
Bud...if you were to load a .45 cal pistol, put it to your head,
and pull the trigger...
you would DEFINITELY increase your IQ.
Rich Soyack
Or we could each live in a closet and go to sleep when the sun goes down and
wake up when it comes up <smirk>.
Rich Soyack
PS: The last time I check solar cell efficency was way below 10%. Does
anyone know
what it is now?
Rich Soyack
sunbird
> > dumass you can use any kind of gas even lawn mower gas.
> Is there a special kind of gas called "lawn mower gas?"
gas that sits around for long periods of time loses octane equivalency.
lawn mowers tolerate pretty low octane.
> Gas power generators polute quite a bit more than automobile engines.
this is a blanket statement that has no meaning. a cheap hardware-store
type gen may be dirtier per gallon of fuel burned than a new car. but
in reality commercial gens run pretty steady allowing a precise tuning
that can give you very clean results. still on a gallon by gallon
basis. there are many more cars than generators i would think.
and there are old cars, and trucks don't have to be as clean as
passenger cars (this includes SUV's and pickups). there are so
many automobile engines that a slight bit of difference on most
of them is important. i think one of the best things we could do
for the environment is to remove the "truck" exemptions from
passenger vehicles unless that vehicle is used on a farm for
income...which is exactly why that (set of) exemption(s) got
created in the 1st place.
sunbird
Bud Frawley
I guess you put oil in your gas tank in your car! I hope you can push
because that's what your gonna be doin when it craps out on you!
>
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> if
> > > > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
> > >
> > > Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> > > to a gas-powered automobile.
> > >
> > you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you do'nt
> > jnow that's when you poolute the most!
>
> Gas power generators polute quite a bit more than automobile engines.
>
LOL!!!!!!!!!!! like you can drive it so fast it makes global
warming!!!!!!! LOLLOLLOL!!!!!
> >
> > > Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
> > > conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
> > > chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
> >
> > what a moron! there's no conversion's. you go right fron the generator to
> > the plug! what kind of generator did you get suckered into buying?
>
> Well, a gas powered generator converts the gas to mechanical enerby to drive
> the generators engine. Then the generators engine turns the coil in the magnetic
> field and produces electrical energy. Then the electrical energy is stored in the
> storage batteries as chemical energy (a quibble is possible here). Then the chemical
> energy is converted into mechanical energy to drive what ever it is you are driving.
> There are power losses in every step of the process.
you put thje gas in the generator and it connect's right to the plug, are
you a moron or what?
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> > > > blackout's.
> > >
> > > If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
> > > need batteries for, ya retard
> >
> > tha battery's are for the car moron!
>
> Nothing is free, if the generator is free to you who pays for it? Or do you mean it should
> be part of the price of the battery. In that case you would be buying a generator every time
> you buy a battery. Unless you think the government should buy your generator, in which
> case you are asking me to buy you a generator. Why should I do that?
>
I guess you just proved you do'nt know battery company's have money
coming out there ass! they should make a law where they give you a F-R-E-
E generator with the battery's! if you think they ca'nt afford it then
you gotta be the biggest dumass I ever saw!
> Rich Soyack
>
>
>
Bud Frawley
> Bud Frawley wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 12:04:55 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > Bud Frawley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:58:46 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis said...
> > > > > Mathew wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Deborah Terreson wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > > In article <3B17CCA5...@yahoo.com>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > > <aku...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Haven't heard any eco-nuts talking about electric cars these days.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hell, Aaron, I see 'em out here all the time. I got smoked by one tearing up
> > > > > > > > I-95 going to Portland last week, the damn thing moved past me like I was
> > > > > > > > standing still!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How long does it take to re-charge during a blackout?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Using a little generator?
> > > > >
> > > > > According to Enviro-whacko ideas, please explain the advantage of running a
> > > > > gasoline posered generator and a gasoline powered automobile.
> > > >
> > > > another moron republiCON which flunked 1st grade science! thank's for
> > >
> > > Wrong. I'm registered independant.
> >
> > you couild of fooled me.
>
> even retarded puppies can fool you, Frawley..
that wa sso funny I forgot to laugh!
>
>
> > >
> > > > proving you do'nt know what a generator does. it makes electricity.
> > >
> > > Another moron Demoncrook who thinks that *HIS* preferred power sources
> > > come without any costs.
> > >
> > > Clue for the goddamned fucking clueless: how long will your gas-powered
> > > generator run without gas in the tank?
> >
> > dumass you can use any kind of gas even lawn mower gas.
>
> So, once again, please explain why burning gasoline in a car is
> eeeeeeeevil, but burning the same gasoline in a generator to charge
> an electric car is good.
>
I guess you think a generator is as big as an suv! you do'nt pollute with
a generator! moron! the car makes zero emmissions!
> Accuracy counts, so be specific.
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > if
> > > > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
> > >
> > > Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> > > to a gas-powered automobile.
> > >
> > you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you do'nt
> > jnow that's when you poolute the most!
>
> Cars pollute less than consumer-grade generators, hope that helps.
what a moron if you believe that!
>
> Even if you
>
> >
> > > Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
> > > conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
> > > chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
> >
> > what a moron! there's no conversion's. you go right fron the generator to
> > the plug! what kind of generator did you get suckered into buying?
>
> Spoken like a technological illiterate.
thank's for provon g you never used a generator!
>
>
> Uh, dooooooooooooofus, how does the energy of the generator get stored
> in the electric car????
>
ever hear of battery's moron?
>
Aaron R. Kulkis
And exactly WHAT processes happen when you do that...
Accuracy counts, so be precise.
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > they should make it so all battery's come with a free generator for
> > > > > blackout's.
> > > >
> > > > If you have a fucking generator in a blackout, what in the FUCK do you
> > > > need batteries for, ya retard
> > >
> > > tha battery's are for the car moron!
> >
> > Nothing is free, if the generator is free to you who pays for it? Or do you mean it should
> > be part of the price of the battery. In that case you would be buying a generator every time
> > you buy a battery. Unless you think the government should buy your generator, in which
> > case you are asking me to buy you a generator. Why should I do that?
> >
> I guess you just proved you do'nt know battery company's have money
> coming out there ass! they should make a law where they give you a F-R-E-
> E generator with the battery's! if you think they ca'nt afford it then
> you gotta be the biggest dumass I ever saw!
That's illegal.
Hope that helps.
>
> > Rich Soyack
Aaron R. Kulkis
Considering that you are easily fooled by retarded puppies, it's
not surprising that you forget to laugh.
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > > proving you do'nt know what a generator does. it makes electricity.
> > > >
> > > > Another moron Demoncrook who thinks that *HIS* preferred power sources
> > > > come without any costs.
> > > >
> > > > Clue for the goddamned fucking clueless: how long will your gas-powered
> > > > generator run without gas in the tank?
> > >
> > > dumass you can use any kind of gas even lawn mower gas.
> >
> > So, once again, please explain why burning gasoline in a car is
> > eeeeeeeevil, but burning the same gasoline in a generator to charge
> > an electric car is good.
> >
> I guess you think a generator is as big as an suv! you do'nt pollute with
> a generator! moron! the car makes zero emmissions!
You think a generator powered by a mere lawnmower engine is going to
recharge an electric car in anything less than a week?
Clue for the fucking clueless: to replace a gas-powered motor
with an battery powered electric system, the electrical generation
system needs to produce FOUR TIMES as much energy that the original
gasoline engine does...for the same
This is because of the 50% loss incurred by charging the battery
and another 50% loss incurred by discharging the battery.
> > Accuracy counts, so be specific.
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > if
> > > > > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a blackout!
> > > >
> > > > Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> > > > to a gas-powered automobile.
> > > >
> > > you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you do'nt
> > > jnow that's when you poolute the most!
> >
> > Cars pollute less than consumer-grade generators, hope that helps.
>
> what a moron if you believe that!
I'm an engineer, educated at Purdue University, one of the 10 best
engineering schools on the ENTIRE PLANET.
And your qualifications are....what, exactly?
> >
> > Even if you
> >
> > >
> > > > Especially when you consider the conversion losses of from the energy
> > > > conversions mechanical => electrical => chemical to store it, and then
> > > > chemical => electrical => mechanical to drive the car.
> > >
> > > what a moron! there's no conversion's. you go right fron the generator to
> > > the plug! what kind of generator did you get suckered into buying?
> >
> > Spoken like a technological illiterate.
>
> thank's for provon g you never used a generator!
See above
> >
> >
> > Uh, dooooooooooooofus, how does the energy of the generator get stored
> > in the electric car????
> >
> ever hear of battery's moron?
There you go.
50% energy loss to charge it
50% energy loss to run the motor.
Rich Soyack
But aren't you the person who wants a free generator with every battery?
Rich Soyack
Rich Soyack
Oh, I never saw gasoline sold with the oil already in it. I have to add the
oil to the gas.
Where do you buy gas that already has oil in it?
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > if
> > > > > you get a big enough one you could recharge the battery in a
blackout!
> > > >
> > > > Again, you fail to tell us how a gas-operated generator is superior
> > > > to a gas-powered automobile.
> > > >
> > > you do'nt pollute from driving yur generator to fast! I guess you
do'nt
> > > jnow that's when you poolute the most!
> >
> > Gas power generators polute quite a bit more than automobile engines.
> >
> LOL!!!!!!!!!!! like you can drive it so fast it makes global
> warming!!!!!!! LOLLOLLOL!!!!!
But you want the number of generators to equal the number of batteries.
Oh, I see. You are in the "I should get it for free" school of economics.
By the way, you don't see me. That's what gives you the courage to type
things like that.
Rich Soyack