Hello again, tom:

Quote:

---

so then it wouldn't involve hundreds of thousands windmill blighting the landscape and wacking any flying creature .

---

In the interim, it might. Look. I'm an ecowacko. I don't wanna kill ANYBODY. But, I also like driving my car, so if I had to choose between ME driving, and some animals dying, as long as it was an INTERIM solution, I'd go along with it.

As we've discussed, we're a breakthrough away from fusion being the end-all and be-all of our energy needs. We're close with battery technology, too.. All they need is a nudge.

excon

Fusion ,cold fusion ,or as the few remaining scientists in the field call it ;'Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions', (CANR,) or 'Low Energy Nuclear Reactions,'( LENR) has made very little progress in many years .The few who remain in the field try to convince the rest of the scientific community that their findings are real.
That being said ,I hope you are right about it . A safe reactor in every home sounds cool to me .
Batteries ? Until they take the next step into the world of nano technology ,I think they are at an impass .As they stand now ,they can't come close to replacing carbon based energy ....nor can windmills or solar .....not if we want to come close to fueling a 21st century economy .

We will never find better unless we look for better, and that includes a better grid system. I feel for birds and bats and squirrels and bees, but windmills ain't the only thing killing them. I put power in the rural areas before I worry about bats.

You hate tree huggers and are a bat lover, strange.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Fusion ,cold fusion ,or as the few remaining scientists in the field call it ;'Chemically Assisted Nuclear Reactions', (CANR,) or 'Low Energy Nuclear Reactions,'( LENR) has made very little progress in many years .The few who remain in the field try to convince the rest of the scientific community that their findings are real.
That being said ,I hope you are right about it . A safe reactor in every home sounds cool to me .
Batteries ? Until they take the next step into the world of nano technology ,I think they are at an impass .As they stand now ,they can't come close to replacing carbon based energy ....nor can windmills or solar .....not if we want to come close to fueling a 21st century economy .

---

Until the relm of science fiction is breached and we get cold fusion we have a perfectly good hot fusion solution called nuclear energy. This process removes the pollution of windmills and carbon gas belshing industries. What has to be realised is it doesn't matter which way you go there is a cost and there is pollution whether at the mining stage, the refining stage, the consumption stage or the disposal stage. All the arguments we have are just about what pollution you will tolerate and what you won't and what part of the cost you are willing to bare.THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH

Hello again, science deniers:

I'm NOT talking about cold fusion. I'm talking about HOT fusion, and today's nuclear reactors are NOT fusion. They're FISSION.

excon

Fission, fusion, it is all confusion, ex, everytime we find something that might be an acceptable solution the greenies and tree huggers pounce on it as the greatest evil for some reason or another. We could have hydro power but we arn't allowed to dam rivers and streams, we could have nuclear power but then there is always the possibilities of an accident, we could have wind but the birds and the bats object, we could have solar but the sun don't shine, what I say is stick it where the sun don't shine and get on with it. No fusion will need as much power as it generates to contain it and rare earths for super conductors, so not viable yet even if they did have a viable process. Scale is the problem, getting from the theoretical to the practical. look I have on CD a process for generating electricity, but you can't scale it up, so it hasn't been used. the ideas are there, the processes are there but getting beyond the lab, well that takes initive, finance, risk

So far ITER has not produced more energy than it takes to fire it up. Not sure it ever will .I do not oppose the research .

Research something useful, not pipe dreams. Find a better battery, find a way of making cars even more efficient. I find my new car amazing; 7 litres per 100 KM, and it's not a hybrid. that's real progress, find a way to make microwave power distribution operable. Build refineries at oil fields, not thousands of miles away. Find a way of storing electricity that doesn't involve pumping water up hill We have made great strides with solar power, put more research into that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Research something useful, not pipe dreams. Find a better battery, find a way of making cars even more efficient. I find my new car amazing; 7 litres per 100 KM, and it's not a hybrid. that's real progress, find a way to make microwave power distribution operable. Build refineries at oil fields, not thousands of miles away. Find a way of storing electricity that doesn't involve pumping water up hill We have made great strides with solar power, put more research into that

---

My '95 Mazda got 54 MPG. I'm not impressed.

Duke University researches have made a tiny bit of progress in converting radio waves to electricity, but still a long way to go. Meanwhile, we need to use the efficient energy we have.

Hello again, Steve:

Quote:

---

Meanwhile, we need to use the efficient energy we have.

---

Only in right wing world do they think liberals want to walk.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:
Only in right wing world do they think liberals want to walk.

excon

---

No they want US to walk, ride the bus, ride our bike or take high speed rails nobody wants. You libs will drive your Priuses, Volts and toaster ovens, aka Teslas.

We are using what's available to us and what we can afford. All of us. Conservative or liberal, makes no difference. I can't afford a Tesla any more than you can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

My '95 Mazda got 54 MPG. I'm not impressed.

Duke University researches have made a tiny bit of progress in converting radio waves to electricity, but still a long way to go. Meanwhile, we need to use the efficient energy we have.

---

Yes so did my 59' VW with a 1200 cc engine but that was before the greenies got loose and we got all the pollution control gear on the engines and vehicles became hulking monsters, what really impresses me about this car is it is performing way outside it's rated perimeters with a big engine, if this is possible the standards can be raised

Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack explained why we need to keep going with the handout that keeps jacking up gas and food prices called ethanol subsidies...

Quote:

---

“I don’t know whether I can make the environmental argument, or the economic argument,” Vilsack tells AP. “To me, it’s an opportunity argument.”

---

If there is no environmental or economic argument then what is this "opportunity?"

Hello again, Steve:

Quote:

---

then what is this "opportunity?"

---

I've been telling you about the "opportunity" for YEARS. You never got it. You don't now. Look. You're a worker. You work hard. We need workers... But, workers, being workers, don't see opportunity where entrepreneurs DO. That's NOT to fault you as a worker. It's to correct your viewpoint of the risk taker.

When there were no cars, nobody SAW an opportunity in the car business - except one person. Even AFTER people bought cars, there were some who yelled, "get a horse!". When it was dark, NOBODY saw an opportunity in the light bulb - except one guy.

Lemme tell you a story that my Dad told me. It STUCK with me. There was an old shoe maker who had two sons. He sent ONE son over to China to set up a market.. He came back totally defeated and told his father, "They DON'T wear shoes over there!"

The old shoemaker then sent his other son to China. He came back bursting at the seams with excitement. He couldn't wait to tell his father, "They DON'T wear shoes over there!"

An entrepreneur would immediately GET this story. A worker would be scratching his head. Ordinarily, you don't like my stories. But, THIS is a good'un.

Seeing as how we're gonna run out of oil, I see opportunity, where others simply don't.

excon

You do know how to tell a story. You don't know how to answer a question.

If there is no economic or environmental case to be made for ethanol subsidies, what's the point? Who benefits besides mostly corporate farmers?

Ethanol production is an environmental disaster ,not including all the negative factors in pricing corn as a food commodity .
My Way News - The secret, dirty cost of Obama's green power push

I hate the ethanol subsidy, but the financial transition away from them is a financial disaster. The Chinese energy model is but a warning.

it's also dumber than dirt . It takes more energy to produce than it yields .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

it's also dumber than dirt . It takes more energy to produce than it yields .

---

Kind of like Obamacare.