Chevy Volt goes down in flames!!!

[River]

Originally Posted by Malikon

(gotta admit, watching some of these house wives trying to park a Ford Excursion is sometimes worth sitting down for.)

Make sure you're wearing International Orange and stay in full view of the backup camera.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by Scooter2112

I get that. Totally agreed.

Now what about other vegetables used for food consumption? Unless we're willing to open up some public areas to farming, I have to assume we're currently at a finite amount of farmland having to make the choice whether crops are grown for either food or fuel...

There's a lot of interesting farming techniques out there that are unfortunately very underutilized. Lots of flat-top buildings out there that you could pop rooftop gardens on. While it wouldn't be the single solution, it would certainly help offset the issue a bit. And that's just one possibility.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by Malikon

Feel free to invent social conscience. I personally would love to see it.

People have the right to drive what they want, even if it's borderline retarded.

(gotta admit, watching some of these house wives trying to park a Ford Excursion is sometimes worth sitting down for.)

Social conscience is beyond even my powers.

And if you want to see something as funny as a house wife parking a ford excursion, watch a city kid trying to back a fifth wheel. But do so from a safe distance.

[Malikon]

Originally Posted by River

Make sure you're wearing International Orange and stay in full view of the backup camera.

my lady and I came out of a corner store (at an intersection last summer) and watched 5-6 SUV's pile into each other. Everyone was talking on a phone, it was like dominos. No one was hurt, it was low speed. But it was funny watching the first truck hit their brakes, get hit and first trucks phone goes flying, then truck number 2 gets hit, phone goes flying,...repeat 3-4 more times.

Then everyone got out and started yelling at each other.

My GF and I had to sit down on the bus stop bench we were laughing so hard.

I applauded.

SUVs in the city and people talking on their phones and not paying attention.

Comedy gold.

[PraXis]

Use a cell phone and cause an accident + huge fine + huge insurance hike = problem solved

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by rjshare

yes it does - it really IS that simple.

you ever tried running a diesel engine on vegetable oil? i have and i am far from being alone. google it if you dont believe me...

You start off talking about superior carbon and inferior carbon (ridiculous), now about biofuels.... do they work sure. How much acreage do we need to grow enough to replace the worlds oil production used today?

Fossil fuels have the most energy bang for the buck.... I don't endorse them, but running the world on biofuels isn't going to cut it. And the carbon coming out of a biofuel tailpipe is the same ecologically.

[PraXis]

Carbonist!

[SoWhat?]

Originally Posted by bertzie

There's a lot of interesting farming techniques out there that are unfortunately very underutilized. Lots of flat-top buildings out there that you could pop rooftop gardens on. While it wouldn't be the single solution, it would certainly help offset the issue a bit. And that's just one possibility.

I see your point. But dirt, and water are heavy. Not many roof tops are built to hold a crop.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

You start off talking about superior carbon and inferior carbon (ridiculous), now about biofuels.... do they work sure. How much acreage do we need to grow enough to replace the worlds oil production used today?

Fossil fuels have the most energy bang for the buck.... I don't endorse them, but running the world on biofuels isn't going to cut it. And the carbon coming out of a biofuel tailpipe is the same ecologically.

But biofuels take carbon to make. CO2 goes into plant, plant grows, plant is turned into biofuel, CO2 comes out, gets turned back into plant, the circle continues. That carbon recycling doesn't happen in fossil fuels.

[Daniel]

I'm always puzzled by the whole electric or hybrid tech in cars...

Because in the end nothing is saved and with current technology more energy is spent than with straight IC and the environmental impact is higher.

But I suppose you need a broader view and longer attention span than a commercial break to figure that out.

[SKATTERBRANE]

Originally Posted by Thumpalumpacus

Sure thing. You go first.

I have gone first, I had only one child. Did you see the part where I said it would take 80 years? Did you see anywhere where I suggested anyone had to die prematurely? Natural attrition would take care of the problem if we did not reproduce like there is no tomorrow. Technology allowed for humans to over populate the world. There WILL be an abrupt reduction in human population sooner or later, I suggest we do it on our own terms. But that is not human nature, we procrastinate, we are always in denial, we refuse to believe anything bad could ever happen to us. We react, rather than proact.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by SoWhat?

I see your point. But dirt, and water are heavy. Not many roof tops are built to hold a crop.

Roofs can hold a person, which is usually well over 100lbs per square foot. A planter holding vegetables isn't going to get over 50lbs per square foot. A cubic foot of water holds 7.5 gallons, and weighs about 70lbs, and that's more than enough for several yards of garden.

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by bertzie

But biofuels take carbon to make. CO2 goes into plant, plant grows, plant is turned into biofuel, CO2 comes out, gets turned back into plant, the circle continues. That carbon recycling doesn't happen in fossil fuels.

CO2 is CO2 whether it comes out of gasoline engine or a biofuel diesel. We are in an excess CO2 situation today, and have been for quite a while.

If plants were sucking up the CO2 as you say, there would be no ocean acidification, there would be no increased heating of the earth.

[rjshare]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

You start off talking about superior carbon and inferior carbon

sorry - i left out the word 'levels', was it really that hard to understand what i was getting at???

at least bertzie managed to explain the whole principle for you.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

CO2 is CO2 whether it comes out of gasoline engine or a biofuel diesel. We are in an excess CO2 situation today, and have been for quite a while.

If plants were sucking up the CO2 as you say, there would be no ocean acidification, there would be no increased heating of the earth.

That's because we're pumping out CO2 faster than plants can take it away. We're pumping tens of millions of years of carbon into the atmosphere over the span of just a couple hundred years. That's fossil fuels fault.

With biofuels, the carbon cycle is much shorter. Grow plants, use plants as fuel, grow more plants. It's a matter of months, vs the epochs for fossil fuels.

[Daniel]

OMG...

Yes and then there is the whole bio fuel thing.

Bottom line:

Grossly inefficient and not any cleaner on the front side or the back side.

[CenCalPlayer]

Originally Posted by bertzie

How the **** do you spill a lithium battery? Aint no liquid in there.

Don't know what's inside those things, but it is a HAZMAT spill if they rupture....

[Malikon]

Originally Posted by SKATTERBRANE

We react, rather than proact.

[River side]

Originally Posted by SKATTERBRANE

Most farming requires petroleum for fertilizer, let alone for running the machinery and transport etc. The REAL solution to our problems (as it pertains to the environment) is allow the world's population to decrease by 80% or so, it would only take 80 years to accomplish this.

And who doesn't think that it will happen, regardless of anyone's leanings?

Good luck to us all, but the fact is that there's not enough arable land to sustain things the way they are.

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by bertzie

That's because we're pumping out CO2 faster than plants can take it away. We're pumping tens of millions of years of carbon into the atmosphere over the span of just a couple hundred years. That's fossil fuels fault.

With biofuels, the carbon cycle is much shorter. Grow plants, use plants as fuel, grow more plants. It's a matter of months, vs the epochs for fossil fuels.

You are missing a huge factor here. Think in terms of energy units. A barrel of oil has x amount of BTU's. To replace that amount of BTU's in the barrel of oil with biofuels, you will have to use the same number of BTU's which generates the same amount of CO2, not less.

The burning of carbon (carbon + oxygen) equals x BTU's.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by CenCalPlayer

Don't know what's inside those things, but it is a HAZMAT spill if they rupture....

How it's made Lithium Ion batteries - YouTube

How it's made Lithium Ion batteries - YouTube

[Sinmastah]

Originally Posted by Daniel

I'm always puzzled by the whole electric or hybrid tech in cars...

Because in the end nothing is saved and with current technology more energy is spent than with straight IC and the environmental impact is higher.

But I suppose you need a broader view and longer attention span than a commercial break to figure that out.

Depends on the tech. Hybrids work out to save money, however the battery cost is the problem when you need to replace it.

Needs super-capacitors.

[CenCalPlayer]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

Same with an ICE car. Rupture your gas tank, break a fuel line, lose crank case oil or transmission fluid in an accident and its considered a hazmat spill.

You may be right but they don't call out a hazmat unit in those cases....not sure what the deal with the batties is but guess they contain some pretty nasty stuff.

[SKATTERBRANE]

Yeah, I always wonder why people drive F250s or 2500s with dually axels, extended cabs, 4wd as their daily driver. To me a truck is a tool, not something you drive around in as a commuter or grocery getter. With the gas you save driving a Ford Fusion (for example) you could afford payments on it while keeping your F250 at home, ready for its specialized use. If you have to haul something, well then they have their purpose, but to many it is some sort of macho status symbol.

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by CenCalPlayer

You may be right but they don't call out a hazmat unit in those cases....not sure what the deal with the batties is but guess they contain some pretty nasty stuff.

It may depend on what state you are in. In NY I worked for an environmental consulting firm that did traffic accident hazmat responses.

[CenCalPlayer]

Originally Posted by rjshare

if the world wasnt run by oil companies, we would all use biological fuels such as alcohol or vegetable oil. the carbon produced during combustion is inferior to the carbon absorbed by the plant in its life and we could continue to use internal combustion engines without the need to radically redesign the whole automotive industry.

add to that the fact that lots of farmers who currently struggle to make a living would have a livelyhood back and its win/win..

Uh, sorry but not valid. Most "oil" companies are very diverse "energy" companies and would love to have another avenue to move towards that was sustainable and economically feasible. They are actually dropping huge amounts into research and development towards that end. There is something called "green gas" that is made from bio mass and is a drop in replacement for petroleum based fuels, can even make aviation and jet fuels from this processes....enviromental groups are restricting this as they after the demise of the internal combustion engine. So there are alternatives developed or being developed, but then politics gets involved......not make a judgement one way or the other on that, just stating that tired line you put out there is faulty.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by geochem1st

You are missing a huge factor here. Think in terms of energy units. A barrel of oil has x amount of BTU's. To replace that amount of BTU's in the barrel of oil with biofuels, you will have to use the same number of BTU's which generates the same amount of CO2, not less.

The burning of carbon (carbon + oxygen) equals x BTU's.

That's why we need more efficient biofuel technologies, which is something they're working on. All fuels, both biofuel and fossil fuel, got there energy from the same place. The sun. Making biofuels doesn't take energy in the sense that you have to consume the same amount of energy to make it. The only energy used in the production of biofuels is to process it from the raw plant matter into a fuel form that can be used in a combustion engine. The difference in energy comes from the fact that the fossil fuels had tens of millions of years to be processed naturally into crude oil, which is just refined. If we tried to make crude oil from plant matter grown today it would undoubtedly take as much or more energy than the energy needed to produce modern biofuels like ethanol or vegetable oil. What our technology development is doing is speeding up the process from millions of years down to months. That process just isn't efficient enough yet.

[SKATTERBRANE]

The law of conservation of matter/energy. Are two laws pretty hard to break. (though with atomic fusion, not impossible)

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by SKATTERBRANE

The law of conservation of matter/energy. Are two laws pretty hard to break. (though with atomic fusion, not impossible)

It's not being broken. Fuel is a chemical energy storage device. The energy comes from the fusion of the sun. The problem with biofuels currently is that the total energy storage in any given biofuel is less than the total energy distributed between the processing of the fuel from its raw plant form in addition to the energy used from the fuel in its refined form. What we need to do is increase the efficiency of the refinement process so that the total energy consumed by refinement plus end usage of the fuel is less than that of the energy stored in the raw plant matter from the sun.

[geochem1st]

Originally Posted by bertzie

That's why we need more efficient biofuel technologies, which is something they're working on. All fuels, both biofuel and fossil fuel, got there energy from the same place. The sun. Making biofuels doesn't take energy in the sense that you have to consume the same amount of energy to make it. The only energy used in the production of biofuels is to process it from the raw plant matter into a fuel form that can be used in a combustion engine. The difference in energy comes from the fact that the fossil fuels had tens of millions of years to be processed naturally into crude oil, which is just refined. If we tried to make crude oil from plant matter grown today it would undoubtedly take as much or more energy than the energy needed to produce modern biofuels like ethanol or vegetable oil. What our technology development is doing is speeding up the process from millions of years down to months. That process just isn't efficient enough yet.

Again, Fossil Fuel is the most energy efficient fuel around, the most bang for the buck. All those millions of years concentrating carbon is going to be impossible to match with biofuels.

And the kicker...... if by some miracle a technique comes into play that actually puts all that carbon into biofuels that fossil fuels have, you haven't gained a damn thing ecologically. You will spitting out as much carbon as fossil fuels by burning it.... not less.