Something else to consider, since gasoline is used by 99.9999% of the people in the US, it's pricing itself has a lot to do with the yearly inflation rate. Rising gasoline is a big contributor to the inflation rate.
GAS WAR??
a GAS WAR idea that WILL work---->
This whole Gas War thing is just a stupid rumor! There is no retired Coke executive, and there is no plan! What good do you think it would do to boycott one or two gasoline companies? All that would do is force you to buy gas from someone else! Boy! That solves the whole problem! (Sarcasm intended). Anyone that believes the whole "gas war" thing is a bigger idiot than I thought possible!
Not so. There was a gas war and I WON. Yes, the beer and hard boiled eggs won out over baked beans. Cleared out the entire office for twenty minutes.
"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in news:IOt4i.21592$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net:
Just don't light a match...
svr29.news.prodigy.net:
Or do, and see a real clearance.
No "procrastination". The only way for such a change to occur at this time would be for the government to subsidize the alternative technology. When the price of gas goes high enough that something else is significantly cheaper then we'll see an alternative technology brought to market. Right now that is not the case.
I don't see how "procrastinating" while more efficient technologies are developed will make the change "more difficult". If we "procrastinate" long enough then somebody will find an economically viable way to obtain carbon from atmospheric CO2 and the long term production of synthetic gasoline will become possible, at which time a "transition" will no longer be necessary, we'll just keep on doing what we're doing only using gasoline synthezied from hydrogen and carbon derived from water and air, with the energy input coming from nuclear energy, instead of using gasoline derived from something pumped out of holes in the ground. And if we procrastinate long enough then that nuclear energy will come from fusion, which we can with the available stocks of hydrogen continue using at far higher rates than today for a large multiple of the anticipated life of the universe.
Or any other term. Your vision of a world powered by "free" solar energy ain't gonna happen.
Which can and in the long term will be synthesized. There's nothing magic about the chemistry of dead dinosaurs. The best quality lubricants are synthesized already.
The last I heard it was a half cent a gallon below the 1981 peak in constant dollars. However it's my understanding that wages haven't kept pace with inflation since 1981 so I'd like to see a source for your contention that it is currently a lower percentage of disposable income.
| If we | "procrastinate" long enough then somebody will find an economically | viable way to obtain carbon from atmospheric CO2 and the long term | production of synthetic gasoline will become possible,
And so will perpetual motion. I'm eagerly awaiting an explanation of how a fuel might be synthesized from its constituant elements in a reaction that consumes less energy than will be released in its subsequent oxidation.
Not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, though. :-)
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA
|| Even if we were to achieve global "no-fuel" energy production || (unlikely in the short and intermediate term) | | Or any other term. Your vision of a world powered by "free" solar | energy ain't gonna happen.
That's not /my/ vision - if that's what you've inferred from my enthusiasm for using solar energy where it offers economic advantage, then you're over-simplifying and over-generalizing.
|| we would still likely || need significant amounts of petroleum for non-fuel uses. | | Which can and in the long term will be synthesized. There's nothing | magic about the chemistry of dead dinosaurs. The best quality | lubricants are synthesized already.
Without disagreeing with your statement, I'd suggest that at some point we may find dead dinos in short supply - and that the synthesis of which you speak requires a net energy input.
I also hope for a fundamental breakthrough in energy production. The problem with such breakthrough events is their unpredictability. It could happen later today - or it could happen thousand years from now. I'm of the opinion that a decision to gamble on a "timely" breakthrough carries unacceptable risk. YMMV.
There's another fly in the ointment: consider the consequences of a breakthrough that provided a handy low-temperature fusion power source using some commonly available fuel (water would be nice, yes?) that could be made small enough and inexpensively enough to provide essentially unlimited no-cost energy for everyone on the planet.
Sounds attractive until one realizes that this unlimited no-cost energy is going to be released as thermal energy regardless of the form in which it is generated or used.
You might find it interesting to estimate how much energy you might use if you weren't constrained by cost (just imagine, you could have a
500hp bass boat to speed you to your favorite fishing spot!) - then multiply by the population of the planet and convert to Btu (500 hp = 372.849936kW, 1kWh = 3412.14163Btu).All things considered, I kinda like the idea of making good (and better) use of what we already have.
BTW, I'm still interested in learning why the folks in your area got rid of their solar panels. If you don't want to publicly post the info, I'd welcome an e-mail...
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA
"Morris Dovey" wrote in news:465d6104$0$502$815e3792 @news.qwest.net:
That type of reaction would violate the principles of thermodynamics (see, my Dutch side is shining through ). However, it would be nice to use sunlight to split water molecules, release the oxygen, but trap the hydrogen for use as a fuel. Something analogous to photosynthesis, which is slowly releasing some of its secrets, the latest being some ultrafast intra- or intermolecular twisting to make the essential reaction happen. Don't pin me on the details, just see Science magazine. You can start here:
It has been many years since I toiled in the vineyards of thermodynamics; however, I am certain that The General Energy Equation still rules.
It is rather brutal when it comes to separating the horse crap from the alfalfa.
Lew
| It has been many years since I toiled in the vineyards of | thermodynamics; however, I am certain that The General Energy | Equation still rules. | | It is rather brutal when it comes to separating the horse crap from | the alfalfa.
True, but Han has just pointed in a direction that may prove interesting. IIRC, there was some possibly promising work being done in Israel with solar/bacterial bioconversion. I didn't hear much and haven't heard anything for some time - so don't know if the research dead-ended or was put under wraps.
-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA
Here in California, we not only have oil to be sucked out of the ground and refined, but also geo-thermal, solar and wind.
Also some interesting work being done in reverse osmosis, especially since SoCal is basically a desert and control of the water supply is a political art form.
Some interesting work being done with solar to generate steam to run turbines to turn generators to generate power.
Interesting way to generate high voltage AC as opposed to using solar to generate low voltage DC.
Lew
Sometimes the price of converting one type of energy to another is worth it. A nuclear power station is not very portable, the hydrogen extracted from water through electrolysis is pretty predictable and is portable. This is just an example.
We are making some headway with battery technology. Solar to charge batteries is another path, but batteries are quite dirty, from a land- fill perspective. Some argue that the impact on the environment of a Prius is worse than a Hummer, if one includes the entire life-cycle of the products.
Oh, and that 500 HP bass boat?? Try 2 x 250 HP... leave one for trolling...
However, there was recent article about a researcher who alloyed a low grade of gallium with aluminum (aluminium for the right ponders) and found it makes an execellent catalyst for the separation of H from O2 in water; the H2 can be subsequently burned or used in a fuel cell. The gallium prevents the Al from forming an oxide layer which inhibits the catalytic reaction.
This has some promise; fill your tank with the Al alloy and another smaller tank with water. The catalyst does require a substantial amount of energy to regenerate, but the regen plants can be co-located with Hydro or Nuclear plants. The current projections were in the equiv to $4.00 or so a gal gas.
scott
Yup. Interestingly, the Wilmington fields have more than quadrupled production (from 200 bbl/day to almost 4000 bbl/day) in the last couple of years, due to advanced extraction/injection techniques.
And don't forget the big solar reflector plant up in the high desert.
scott
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.