THE TRUCK STOP General Chat area. Religion and politics topics will undoubtedly be deleted. Anything over PG-13 is not allowed. WORK SAFE!

our future

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 12, 2008 | 06:27 PM
  #21  
TG02Z71's Avatar
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,134
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
Default

I'm going to D.C. and invent my BS harvester, it will power the world and the source will never dry up as long as people are alive!!!
Reply
Old Jun 12, 2008 | 08:32 PM
  #22  
03sierraslt's Avatar
Admin
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 19,007
Likes: 221
From: Western PA
Default

Allot of the oil price fluctuation has to do with the value of the US dollar. As the value of the dollar sinks investers turn to commodities (Oil) to offset the sinking dollar. Oil goes up when the dollar goes down. As the US dollar increases its value other countries are forced to pay more for oil. The way the market is right now who the hell knows what will happen, too many investers are WAYYYYYY to jumpy and at the slightest hint of anything ( even someone farting) they sell of everything or buy up. As rocky as the market is right now everyone is just looking for any reason to do anything, so every little event plays a huge role in the daily market fluctuation..


Thats my .02 anyway haha
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 04:19 AM
  #23  
viciousknid's Avatar
Where's the Beef?
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 9,382
Likes: 1
From: Dover, Oklahoma
Default

Originally Posted by NoChrome
this is correct but through the use of solar/wind the electricity can be derived cleanly but why use "free" energy when you can sell retards oil at 130ish a barrel.
It's easier to produce energy out of fossil fuels than it is to extract it from hydrogen.
The energy result from hydrogen isn't a whole lot more than the energy required to get it. While oil produces a lot more energy than you put into it.
Dollar for dollar it's cheaper to use oil. Even with solar panels and wind power, that's only a fraction of what it would take to power the U.S.
Originally Posted by NoChrome
I wouldnt really worry about the water issues, cause most the hydrogen will be derived from water, and the water that is exiting the pipe will be from unburnt hydrogen in the cylinder combining with unburnt oxygen combining back into water.
This statement simply confirms my concern. any unburnt hydrogen exits the tail pipe and converts back into water. This also produces alot of water vapor which (if your formiliar with weather) evaporates into the air. The more water that's evaporating the more storms you will see.
Google is your friend. "Hydrologic Cycle"
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 07:02 AM
  #24  
NoChrome's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
From: Edwards AFB CA
Default

Originally Posted by viciousknid
It's easier to produce energy out of fossil fuels than it is to extract it from hydrogen.
The energy result from hydrogen isn't a whole lot more than the energy required to get it. While oil produces a lot more energy than you put into it.
Dollar for dollar it's cheaper to use oil. Even with solar panels and wind power, that's only a fraction of what it would take to power the U.S.

This statement simply confirms my concern. any unburnt hydrogen exits the tail pipe and converts back into water. This also produces alot of water vapor which (if your formiliar with weather) evaporates into the air. The more water that's evaporating the more storms you will see.
Google is your friend. "Hydrologic Cycle"
You are correct in that most hydrogen comes from fossil fuels,of that the hydrogen is derived mostly from natural gas, and for the most part you are correct in that it is cheaper to get the gas from sources other than water. But the goal with hydrogen though is to get our dependence off of oil. Are you aware a 10sq mi area of solar panels in the middle of nowhere in the desert in nevada or california will net enough electricity for the entire united states, now obviously that wont fix the night time needs, but that does not include any hydroelectric power, wind, geothermal, surf or any thing else. And I went through 3rd grade science, I know how the weather works. I do not know if you have noticed but the truck you drive every day does the exact same thing the hydrogen car does. Emits water as exhaust. If they get hydrogen from fossil fuels, that means theres some hydrogen in your gas. That unburnt hydrogen in your gas combines with oxygen and makes water. And finally if we get all of our hydrogen from water we wont have any problems with water as exhaust because its jut reconverting to its prior state.

Last edited by NoChrome; Jun 13, 2008 at 11:03 AM. Reason: my grammer is crap
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 02:47 PM
  #25  
viciousknid's Avatar
Where's the Beef?
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 9,382
Likes: 1
From: Dover, Oklahoma
Default

Let's agree to disagree. I like the idea, but economically it's just as bad as oil.
As far as already producing hydrogen fumes, it's not nearly the same as running pure hydrogen.
I realize all the different sources out there but look up how much energy they take to run compared to how much energy they produce and how much energy we use. It's gonna take a whole lot of changing to make it work.

here's a read on a few of the problems with hydrogen.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/...vironment.html

Nuclear Energy seems the way to go so far. As far as cars go, Bio Diesel.
We'll just have to wait and see what the big wigs decide to do.
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 02:50 PM
  #26  
viciousknid's Avatar
Where's the Beef?
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 9,382
Likes: 1
From: Dover, Oklahoma
Default

regardless. there's gonna be a lot of changing.
You know how the price of ammo is going up? Well. buy it anyway, you just might need it.
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 03:08 PM
  #27  
NoChrome's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
From: Edwards AFB CA
Default

Originally Posted by viciousknid
Let's agree to disagree. I like the idea, but economically it's just as bad as oil.
agreed. Hydrogen is not the answer. It is a band aid. Clean renewable resources and conservation will be the only fix.
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 04:04 PM
  #28  
Launching!
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
From: New Bern, NC
Default

Nuclear Energy seems the way to go so far.
Way wrong! What the hell are we going to do with the waste from nuclear energy that takes 500 years to start breaking down???

How come they can't make gobs of solar power to power the Hydrogen plants vs fossil fuels??
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 05:09 PM
  #29  
MikeZQ8SS's Avatar
TECH Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
From: Groton, Ct
Default

Originally Posted by Wallywall
Way wrong! What the hell are we going to do with the waste from nuclear energy that takes 500 years to start breaking down???

I have the solution to that problem but no one listens to me.

Put it in those nearly indestructible casks they transport the waste in to the yucca mountain site, but instead of putting it on a truck or train, put it in a ******* rocket and launch it directly at the sun or another star really really far away. It'd be just like a mid day snack for a star.

Problem solved. Screw the environmentalists that say it sounds unsafe.
Reply
Old Jun 13, 2008 | 05:17 PM
  #30  
Launching!
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
From: New Bern, NC
Default

^I like that. Price wise it's probably not feasible.
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 PM.