environment
And if we raised the CAFE standards for fuel efficiency on cars by 3mpg, we could cut our consumption of oil by over 30%. It's crazy what conservation will do.
And natural gas is more of a utopian pipe dream that does nothing but put off the inevitable for a few years....as you stated, its' very expensive to build these CNG factories for NG as it is, not to mention the security nightmares for such large facilities.
Unfortunately the NG is a finite resourse and the extraction meathods are horrible for the environment. In the past the roads used to work the gas rigs are then used for deforestation, followed by other forms of land abuse. The bio-diesel and ethanol are made from renewable sources and can sometimes be made form waste products. We're in the process of converting our farm equiptment over to bio diesel and will get all the fuel we need from the local restaurants' fry grease. The converson for our trucks nad tractors is economical and fairly easy for anyone used to twisting wrench on an engine.
Wait, I don't know why I didn't pick up on that yesterday... whats the conversion kit for? I was of the understanding that only straight oil required conversions and that biodiesel was could be used in an engine as is.... unless you changed rubber hoses to synthetic for safetys sake. You'd know more than I cause you're doing it. Enlighten me please, I haven't quite gotten that far. =)
I'm not much of a mechanic, but basically as i understand it, we are replaceing fuel lines and there is a kit that needs to be installed on the fuel injection system to off set any loss of horsepower. On most vehicles a slight loss of HP is no big deal, but with tractors and large trucks pulling tens of thousands of pounds a slight loss of power can keep you from doing the job right.
Ahh, that makes sense. I hadn't considered the differences for ag-machines. There is a slight loss of HP so I suppose on heavy machinery that makes a bit of a difference. Thanks man, I'll have to add that tid-bit to the stack.
I have a second question...What have you decided to do with the glycerine? I know there are several alternatives but I'm still a bit undecided.
I would like to make nitroglycerine, which has as many uses. But we will probably use it to make soap and the rest will be composted.
*laughs*
Yea, that was pretty much what I was looking at. You'll have to tell me how the process goes and how much trouble it is purifying the glycerine into a useful form. Soaps and lotions are tempting, especially when you're already growing native plants and herbs. At least if all else fails you can compost it and i'm sure you have a heavy need for compost.
We use the chaff and trash from our seed cleaning facility and goat manure from the local livestock auction house to make our compost. The pile is usually somewhere in the range of 75 to 150 cubic yards so a little waste glycerine should be able to go into it with out any problem.
Fantastic!
If you keep around I'll be asking you questions all day. =P
Congratulations!!! YOU HAVE BEEN BITTEN BY THE COMMENT BUG! you must infect atleast 3 people and must comment 3 more people good luck!
COMMENT COMMENT COMMENT COMMENT COMMENT COMMENT !!!!
brought to you by: commentbug.com
COMMETN BUG catch it!!!
Trains, trains, trains, trains... electromagnetic trains.
Yes YES!
I Love those. Japans the only one thats really used them to any real extent that I know of. I think they might have built one in Europe but it was several years ago that I can even remember anyone even talking about them. The only problem I have with them is the vast amount of electricity it takes to run them... electricity thats produced by nuclear, coal, or ng plants. =(
But there will be a day!!
You are forgetting China's maglev in Shanghai. It is now the worlds fastest train.
That might have been the one I was thinking of. I know they hyped the "bullet train" idea moreso than the technology.
Put wind turbines in Siberia and voila! Energy enough for Europe! Wind turbines in North Dakota, and voila! Energy enough for everyone!
They actually have wind turbines not far from here and I must say they're a terrible eyesore. I've seen pictures of windfarms out west where its remeniscent of 20' tall rows of corn and even thats not as bad as the ones they put out here. Picture beautiful rolling fields randomly dotted with 60' megaliths apinning 20' blades peaking over every scenic hill. I drove through for the first time and it was terrible. I used to think radio towers where bad... these things.... I don't even know.
I must admit that the old Holland style windmills are pretty cool though.
Which looks safer and has less impact on the surrounding environment?
Sorry, had a bit of user error there. Heres the second pic
I'm so with you. PaleAle's plan is to repopulate North Dakota completely with bison and wolves and just put wind turbines there.
Elect PaleAle!
I don't think anyone was debating that point. . . .
Well, then put the wind turbines off the coast - but then people think they're an eyesore as well. Something has to give, either we sacrifice a few thousands square km for the good of the planet or we keep building coal fired power plants...and sacrifice it all.
There is an interesting test project going on in New York that uses turbines submerged in the Hudson River. The blades turn relatively slowly that don't propose any threat to fish. I am not sure if any fish live in there but there ya go.
*grimaces*
I'm hesitant on that idea. I can see alot of people jumping on that wagon but more so as a result of "out of sight out of mind" than believing it a satisfactory alternative. I'd have a hard time believing a giant chunk of metal would pose no ill effect on the rivers ecosystem. Would you want it in your house? ;-)
Relatively speaking, the system would be considerably better than building a hydroelectric dam. I think it is an interesting solution since water always flows and is considerably denser than air thus enabling a much slower rotation of the blades. I can understand how migrating birds can be affected by the spinning blades of a wind turbine but apparently the much smaller water turbine turns considerably slower and yields some considerable electric power.
Hold on now... "Considerably better" wasn't good enough when comparing alt-fuels to oil, why should I let you get away with it? ;-)
Besides, this is a non-terrestrial ecosystem. Its directly limited in size by the banks of the river. While I’m not suggesting this turbine is the size of the river, percentage wise it poses a much bigger obstacle to fish than a wind turbine does to birds.
LOL. Apples and oranges are good but the juice from an orange can sting my eye.
The turbines are quite small. I tried to find the exact dimensions but can only tell you that the were just a few feet across. The idea was fairly simple. Make them small and put them on the river bottom and spread them out. The blades spin quite slowly and fish can waltz right through them without being hit.
The turbines are quite small. I tried to find the exact dimensions but can only tell you that the were just a few feet across. The idea was fairly simple. Make them small and put them on the river bottom and spread them out. The blades spin quite slowly and fish can waltz right through them without being hit.
I figured the size wouldn't be immense. I'm just wondering what cleaning and maintenance would involve as that is a definite disturbance not only to the immediate area but everything downstream aswell.
Good question. I think cleaning routines would be similar to cleaning the bottom of a boat although I doubt much organic life would reside on the turbines. Rivers are quite dynamic and would easily adapt to cleaning. The upside is this is just about the only disturbance to the ecosystem compared to what we are presently using.
I don't agree with that at all. I don't think you have any idea of the dynamics within an aqueous environment. That’s like suggesting its all right net tuna because dolphins are smart and they'll figure it out. Give me a break man. And since when is it okay to expect the environment to adjust to us?? You had some debatable but interesting ideas before but now I think you're just out of your element. Stick with tech speak cause your still a few lessons short of an eco-nut.
Careful now. I am a certified open water diver with considerable experience in the water. The presentation of the underwater turbines that I saw appeared to be conducive to an aqueous environment. If I were to have my druthers, they are considerably better than the coal burning or nuclear plant up the river. Being kind to the environment in this day and age requires finding the smallest foot print. Most of our environmental problems are driven by consumerism and lack of environmental laws. Criticizing my take on the environment is a wasted effort when there are much bigger fish to fry out there.
I'm sorry, I fail to see how that certification makes you a stream and water ecologist. In fact I can't see any connection whatsoever between the two beyond that they both happen to take place in the water.
I am not claiming to be an authority on the matter but your tone suggests that you are. There is nothing wrong with throwing ideas into the mix but jumping on them disrespectfully isn't conducive to finding solutions.
I'm sorry, I get very impatient with people that preach technological change based on environmental concern and then suggest ideas devoid of ecological merit. I know that may not have been your intention but alot of people do it. It really gets under my skin.
We had a good thing going, lets keep it that way. I'll retract the claws a bit. =P
Appreciated.
I have a guilty admission.
The scenic hills I refered to where in all actuality nothing more than farmland. =P
Truth be told I can't look at cornfields anymore without thinking they're atrocities either.
This is all well and good but how far should we take the internal combustion engine? I hope the damn things go by the way of the dodo and I feel that talk of alternative fuels to power them is a waste of time. No matter what fuel you put in an engine, it will still be inefficient.
Toyota is on the right track with hybrid power except that they were wrong by putting the electric engine in the power train instead of at the wheels. The 25hp wheel motor solves the mechanical loss issue (one moving part). Mechanical loss is the reason why cars are so inefficient. A better hybrid system would be a microturbine generator with wheel motors for propulsion. The heat loss could be captured by a stirling engine attached to a smaller generator. With the advent of flexible solar panels, car roofs could be used to generate electric power (albeit small) to be stored while the car is parked.
I have already replaced most of the incandescent bulbs in my house with CFL's.
Toyota is on the right track with hybrid power except that they were wrong by putting the electric engine in the power train instead of at the wheels. The 25hp wheel motor solves the mechanical loss issue (one moving part). Mechanical loss is the reason why cars are so inefficient. A better hybrid system would be a microturbine generator with wheel motors for propulsion. The heat loss could be captured by a stirling engine attached to a smaller generator. With the advent of flexible solar panels, car roofs could be used to generate electric power (albeit small) to be stored while the car is parked.
I have already replaced most of the incandescent bulbs in my house with CFL's.
Ooooops, I forgot my manners. Welcome to Mindsay Nate. With Champy's recommendation, I am sure that you will be a fine addition to Mindsay.
I've been very impressed with Toyota for quite some time now. They took an interest in new technologies long before it was even a concern and they to this day are at the forefront of development. The wheel motor is interesting but I'd be curious as to the amount of space they'd have to make that work especially when working around the suspension system. It would seem to me at least that it would be difficult to power the wheels on a direct shaft. I'd think at least some mechanical conversion would be needed and even then you'd further complicate the efforts to recapture forward velocity. On the up side traction control would be greatly improved.
I guess I don't understand your model completely. The stirling engine/generator is interesting. My understanding though is that size/weight is a problem. What I don't get is the microturbine with the wheel motors. If the wheel motors are electric then you wouldn't want to be running the generators off them... the energy they produce only goes back to running the wheel motors (fallacy of the perpetual motion theory). If it ran off of a fly wheel then that makes perfect sense and you've accounted for kinetic conversion.
Oh and solar... *smiles*
As much as I think harnessing solar energy is the key to all our energy needs I’m afraid panels are just to expensive and fragile to put on cars. That and their effectiveness varies so greatly depending on conditions and location that they wouldn't be dependable enough to be a major part of the system.
Thank you so much though. I've really enjoyed the conversation.
Thanks for the warm welcome aswell. =)
The wheel motor is surprisingly compact and I am glad you picked up on the traction control. I think the concept is exceptionally brilliant. The stirling engine was an afterthought with respect to picking up thermal energy from the exhaust of a microturbine generator. Damn that Dean Kamen for not working on the stirling engine hard enough.
The reason I suggested this route is that I wanted to remove as many parts as possible from the drivetrain. Microturbines tend to use fuel much more efficiently than piston engines and produce less pollution. Microturbine generators would be used to charge the storage system with the wheel motors drawing from the storage system. I suggested Microturbines as an alternative power source until more efficient methods of energy storage are produced.
Solar panels have come a long way in the last couple of years. They are now producing flexible solar panels that will easily shape to the roof of a car. I think the price of panels will reduce considerably of the demand outstrips the supply.
The reason I suggested this route is that I wanted to remove as many parts as possible from the drivetrain. Microturbines tend to use fuel much more efficiently than piston engines and produce less pollution. Microturbine generators would be used to charge the storage system with the wheel motors drawing from the storage system. I suggested Microturbines as an alternative power source until more efficient methods of energy storage are produced.
Solar panels have come a long way in the last couple of years. They are now producing flexible solar panels that will easily shape to the roof of a car. I think the price of panels will reduce considerably of the demand outstrips the supply.
You still have a major reliability issue with panels. You can't quantify the power input because the value will vary for too many conditions.
I see, I didn't realize the microturbine was fuel powered. You're right, if you must use fuel you're much better off ditching the engine for something else and use it to supply power to the electric motors rather than assist the drivetrain.
I thought of the panels being a supplimental power supply that would reduce the demand on a generator for short trips. This is a daily commuter concept that I was thinking of. During the months with the sun high in the sky while the commuter is at work, the car should be sufficiently charged for a short drive with a kilowatt panel on the roof of a car. Most people don't really drive their cars that far.
Eh, I still think cost/benifit makes it debateable. I usually see solar as someting better suited for other functions.
I'd actually put my energy into the sterling concept some more. Although... shoot. It may not have as much to offer on an electric engine with lower running temperatures and all.
Electric motors while under demand produce a fair amount of heat. It is the resistance in the copper winding that produces the heat. Stirling engines have been used in submarines for ages so the technology has been proven. I really thought the segway was using a stirling engine for a power source and was sorely disappointed when I found out it wasn't. The last I heard, Dean Kamen is still working on a solution for that.
While I agree with you completely you're overlooking one very important part to this problem that I think allot of people miss. Mass conversion straight to another technology, even if far superior, is just not possible. Not only would you be talking about a financial investment well beyond our means, you'd also be wiping out one of the most profitable industries in this country. One way or another there has to be an intermediary. The sad fact is that we're in this predicament not for lack of technology or lack of interest, but for lack of funds to oversee an immediate switch from one very developed and ingrained technology to a new and never before utilized alternative. Gas stations, transportation networks, refineries, holding cells, rigging operations... all instantly obsolete. Mechanics in every garage and dealership across the country no longer qualified to change even a headlight. Its already gotten to the point where full fledged mechanic hopefuls are looking at 4 years of post-secondary education to fix new cars. Veteran mechanics are shutting down because they can't work on anything other than older vehicles anymore but at least they can service something. Forcing a new technology will require everyone to go back to college... but then we have the problem of who's going to teach them?? But lets move on to manufacturing. Thousands of factories using specialized equipment and methods painstakingly developed by engineers for decades...DONE. New parts requiring new plans and new machinery that no one knows how to use and there won't be any third party parts until years down the road because the Majors hold all of the patents and there is no standards set between Auto corporations so EVERY part is a specialty part.... need I continue? (speaking to everyone here...)
The importance of fuels like biodiesel and ethanol is that they can act as a stepping stone. There is little to no conversion needed to realize immediate gain and they can still utilize old infrastructure while we build up the a new industry. The cost of change is always painful. Now consider the cost of change for something that’s been a pillar of our country for over a century now. One way or another time is going to be a part of the equation. At least with these alternatives we can make some immediate progress in the interim.
The switch is not as hard as you think. I don't think the auto manufacturers will retool with electric motors and forget combustion engines overnight nor would I recommend it. Gas vehicles will be around for quite some time to come hence the need for existing infrastructure. Alternative fuels will also require the building of alternative fuel infrastructures.
The truth is I have no sympathy for an industry that put all of its eggs in one basket. Particularly since our environment has suffered because of it. The technology that I proposed exists already and there is plenty of infrastructure to support it. Electric motors are far simpler to repair than piston engines. Will the auto industry collapse? I seriously doubt that since our love affair with the automobile is still as strong as ever and we will still be building them. If you take a look at the economy over the last 30 years, it has diversified considerably and will continue to do so ad infinitum. If you think about it, the automobile industry will be going electric. So why not focus on retooling for that now?
Alternative fuels like the ones you suggested will still belch out pollution, greenhouse gases and require land to produce fuel for cars rather than food for people. The solution does not sit well with me for those reasons.
The truth is I have no sympathy for an industry that put all of its eggs in one basket. Particularly since our environment has suffered because of it. The technology that I proposed exists already and there is plenty of infrastructure to support it. Electric motors are far simpler to repair than piston engines. Will the auto industry collapse? I seriously doubt that since our love affair with the automobile is still as strong as ever and we will still be building them. If you take a look at the economy over the last 30 years, it has diversified considerably and will continue to do so ad infinitum. If you think about it, the automobile industry will be going electric. So why not focus on retooling for that now?
Alternative fuels like the ones you suggested will still belch out pollution, greenhouse gases and require land to produce fuel for cars rather than food for people. The solution does not sit well with me for those reasons.
Let me correct you on one thing. The process for producing ethanol is no different than brewing beer... its alcohol, straight put. We have the capacity to produce enough food to supply the entire world. Why we do not is an entirely different matter but the US government has been paying farms for decades NOT to farm their land in order to keep the market from bottoming out. Biodiesel creates an extremely easy way to convert waste cooking oil into useful fuel...oil that is used by the thousands of fast food restaurants daily and is otherwise sent to costly reclamation centers. Both methods have been used since the early eighties in all sorts of backyard rigs to much success. So if we have to be stuck with combustion engines for some time then why on earth would we nix two options that cost a fraction of the price of gas, produce half the amount of pollution, and can be quickly concocted in your garage?
Hmm, have you ever been through a northern winter? Its not so much the snow as it is the salt they dump on the roads. It does a hefty number on cars, especially electrical systems. I can only imagine what that does when theres an engine on each wheel. =P
LOL I am Canadian!! I know all about the northern winters. GM's hywire concept has all the electricals systems enclosed. There are fairly straightforward ways to protect electrical systems from weather and moisture.
*smiles*
I always liked canadians. LoL
I am very familiar with biodiesel as I am a Volkswagon Golf owner. My buddy will be converting his car to VO with a simple bolt on kit that is available. The process is not cheap and simply not accessible for someone with limited mechanical skills. There is the problem right there. People just want it done rather than going out to have their cars retrofitted. How many people have had their vehicles setup to use propane or natural gas? The infrastructure is there yet not utilized. I fear that would be the end result for alternative fuels. The market wants a ready made solution that doesn't require them getting off their collective fat asses.
We would be stuck with combustion engines until a viable storage solution come along. Storage of electrons is the bottleneck issue here. Give the consumer a car that they can plug in, requires little maintenance and is nearly pollution free and you will have a hot market.
We would be stuck with combustion engines until a viable storage solution come along. Storage of electrons is the bottleneck issue here. Give the consumer a car that they can plug in, requires little maintenance and is nearly pollution free and you will have a hot market.
VO and Biodiesel are not the same thing. VO requires the kit and has its problems...mainly with temperatures. Biodiesel is safe to pour straight in your tank. The *only* concern I've come across is pre '90's engines as they came with rubber hoses and biodiesel is slightly more corrosive so it breaks them down sooner. Other than that the only thing stopping a gas station from producing biodiesel itself and selling it are customers asking for it. Most people that use it just make it themselves.
Quick Links
Latest Comment
Re: She's a lady.... - Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaa... Many congrats; in Jewspeak, MAZEL TOV!
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
