Rolls Royce Phantom
- Thread starter Buck
- Start date
slo crostic
Learning Storage Performance
I personally think the answer to the world's energy/pollution concerns is offshore hydrogen generating plants. These plants could be run on solar, wind, or wave energy and, using electrolysis, split sea water into hydrogen and oxygen. Both gases can be sent to land via low pressure pipelines, then pressurized/liquefied and distributed by tankers.
I don't know how oxygen for welding/cutting, hospitals, etc... is produced at the moment, but surely this would be a cleaner way.
Cars with IC engines can be run on hydrogen in the same way they are run on LPG now, the only byproduct being heat and water vapour. This would also provide the means of hydrogen production for fuel cell cars of the future.
Low pressure hydrogen could even replace natural gas for home cooking and heating.
This would also, albeit in a very small way, counter the effects of rising sea levels.
As for the GTO, I personally think the Holden Monaro looks better. I also think it should be marketed in America as the "Holden Monaro" not a Pontiac GTO. If I can buy a Chev pickup in Australia that's not rebadged as a Holden, why should our Holden's be rebadged as Pontiacs?
I don't know how oxygen for welding/cutting, hospitals, etc... is produced at the moment, but surely this would be a cleaner way.
Cars with IC engines can be run on hydrogen in the same way they are run on LPG now, the only byproduct being heat and water vapour. This would also provide the means of hydrogen production for fuel cell cars of the future.
Low pressure hydrogen could even replace natural gas for home cooking and heating.
This would also, albeit in a very small way, counter the effects of rising sea levels.
As for the GTO, I personally think the Holden Monaro looks better. I also think it should be marketed in America as the "Holden Monaro" not a Pontiac GTO. If I can buy a Chev pickup in Australia that's not rebadged as a Holden, why should our Holden's be rebadged as Pontiacs?
Tea
Storage? I am Storage!
Errr ... let me see if I've got this straight. You expend energy to separate hydrogen and oxygen from sea water, pump the gases to wherever you want them, and then burn them - i.e., turn them into water, which then evaporates, turns into rain, and falls back into the sea. You are right, Slo. A very small way. In fact the precise net change in the water levels of the ocean can be easily calculated. It is equal to the amount extracted for burning, minus the amount extracted for burning - which is to say zero.
slo crostic
Learning Storage Performance
And the amount of gas held in storage?
Cliptin
Wannabe Storage Freak
slo crostic said:
slo, you're going to suffocate a lot of plants with all that extra oxygen floating around. Then what fun will Tea have left.
Prof.Wizard
Wannabe Storage Freak
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2002
- Messages
- 1,460
You Americans have to pipe down with the displacement of your engines if we really want to do something about the energy problems and become independent of Saddam.
When I was in the US I was thunder-struck when I saw the price of your petrol! Almost one third of the mean EU. And most cars with engines of more than 3 liters!
Hard days are coming though... will it be 10 years, 20, 30?
When I was in the US I was thunder-struck when I saw the price of your petrol! Almost one third of the mean EU. And most cars with engines of more than 3 liters!
Hard days are coming though... will it be 10 years, 20, 30?
Fushigi
Storage Is My Life
I agree that the US likes vehicles with way too much power. Yes, I've a 3L V6 in my car. But the mileage penalty compared to the same car with a 4 banger is a whopping 1MPG. Not enough to get upset about. Also, some features I wanted were only available on the V6 model. My wife's car has a 4 banger; we use it for longer trips as it gets about 6 more MPG highway than my car.
Personally, I believe that CAFE standards should apply to everything except commercial trucks (trucks larger than pickups). And that the standard should be raised by 1MPG/year for the next 20 years. Add to that a sales tax on vehicles that fail to meet CAFE: $1000 per MPG under the average at purchase time should do the trick. Those relatively small changes would probably kill off most of the SUV market (with minivans & cross-over vehicles taking their place), drive down engine size, and drive economy up.
And if that fails to stimulate things, cease the artificially low gas prices. How many folks will buy a 14MPG SUV with gas costing $3.50 - $5 a gallon? Some, sure, but not many. Even cars that get 25MPG would be frowned upon.
The use of gas-electric hybrids, while obviously a short-term solution, is still a great way to get an immediate boost in fuel economy. The only thing I'm disappointed in so far is that the mileage isn't closer to 60MPG vs. the high 40s.
Another step in the right direction would be having speed control built into vehicles. Lets face it: drive at 75-80 in a 55 zone is not only unsafe but for the vast majority of vehicles is going to be less efficient. Most vehicles, or so I assume, are optimized for highway driving somewhere between 55 and 70MPH. Beyond that and fuel consumption is higher. This is already being tested, but it's entirely reasonable for the car to be able to determine the speed limit (if it exists) and ensure it doesn't go any faster. This can be correlated with weather & traffic conditions for a much safer and more efficient (if more boring) journey.
I've no idea what the long term 'fix' is. Perhaps a different hybrid: hydrogen/LP/LNG/fuel cel + electric will ultimately kill off gas burners. Perhaps usable mag-lev mass transit. Perhaps the teleporter from Star Trek or Mr. Fusion from the Back to the Future movies will be invented. Who knows?
So, while I drool over the Maybach's powerplant, I don't think I could justify buying one even if I had the cash.
- Fushigi
Personally, I believe that CAFE standards should apply to everything except commercial trucks (trucks larger than pickups). And that the standard should be raised by 1MPG/year for the next 20 years. Add to that a sales tax on vehicles that fail to meet CAFE: $1000 per MPG under the average at purchase time should do the trick. Those relatively small changes would probably kill off most of the SUV market (with minivans & cross-over vehicles taking their place), drive down engine size, and drive economy up.
And if that fails to stimulate things, cease the artificially low gas prices. How many folks will buy a 14MPG SUV with gas costing $3.50 - $5 a gallon? Some, sure, but not many. Even cars that get 25MPG would be frowned upon.
The use of gas-electric hybrids, while obviously a short-term solution, is still a great way to get an immediate boost in fuel economy. The only thing I'm disappointed in so far is that the mileage isn't closer to 60MPG vs. the high 40s.
Another step in the right direction would be having speed control built into vehicles. Lets face it: drive at 75-80 in a 55 zone is not only unsafe but for the vast majority of vehicles is going to be less efficient. Most vehicles, or so I assume, are optimized for highway driving somewhere between 55 and 70MPH. Beyond that and fuel consumption is higher. This is already being tested, but it's entirely reasonable for the car to be able to determine the speed limit (if it exists) and ensure it doesn't go any faster. This can be correlated with weather & traffic conditions for a much safer and more efficient (if more boring) journey.
I've no idea what the long term 'fix' is. Perhaps a different hybrid: hydrogen/LP/LNG/fuel cel + electric will ultimately kill off gas burners. Perhaps usable mag-lev mass transit. Perhaps the teleporter from Star Trek or Mr. Fusion from the Back to the Future movies will be invented. Who knows?
So, while I drool over the Maybach's powerplant, I don't think I could justify buying one even if I had the cash.
- Fushigi