What's you're really doing is using photosynthesis, a form of solar energy, to produce your fuel. Fun fact : most crops are between 1-2% efficient at converting sunlight to chemical energy. Then, you're going to lose at least half of that energy converting the crops to ethanol, then you'll lose 2/3 of the energy in the ethanol when you burn it for motive power.
Also, those crops need water and fertilizer, generally, costing you energy. If you use the good fertilizer, you won't even gain energy doing this.
Or you could use cheap Chinese made solar cells (less than $1 a watt) and use it to charge batteries. Commercial solar cells are 7-14% efficient, and the battery charging is around 80% efficient or better. When you drive the car on those batteries, another 80% or more of that power actually propels the car.
Do the math. The problem today are the high technology items needed to make all this work have high manufacturing costs (that are falling rapidly). However, in the long run, it seems pretty obvious where this is heading.
While you are probably fairly accurate on the efficiency (too lazy to bother checking right now), one cannot just grow "cheap Chinese made solar cells" in one's back field.
We do though need to be careful about the feedstock of choice for the fuel production, as not everyone has the land and time to make their own.
Indeed - good thing ethanol can be produced from virtually any plant cellulose.
What do they do with cornstalks/non-edible parts of foodstock now? Leave it to biodegrade? Tsk tsk, so wasteful...
Companies operating in free markets will pick the lowest costs of production and or highest value end markets above ethical considerations. This *could* lead to people in neighbouring states paying more for basic foodstuffs as it becomes more efficient to plant fuel than food crops. Or because crops are bought to use as feedstock for alcohol rather than food for people.
That's more of a capitalism related issue, though, isn't it?
Let us not fall prey to the lowest-common-denominator habit of blaming the inanimate for the actions of people.
Personally I'm hoping for better bio-gas fuels. petrol/gasoline engines can run quite easily on gas as long as they have good enough injectors and hardened valve seats.
Fairly certain you meant 'alcohol' there, in which case it's less a matter of the quality of injectors and more about the size of the jets/time the injectors are left open, which can easily be adjusted on current vehicles via reprogramming the ECM.
The Italians would like to give you the plot and backdrop for your next movie. Add a giant creature (maybe it's den was in a cavern above the caldera.. or even better it lives in the magma) and there you go, instant movie.
Mixing? Oh, no, my friend, you have it all wrong! I intend to replace gasoline with alcohol. See, the major issue with alcohol as a main fuel source is that its burn profile is more akin to diesel than gasoline - that is to say, to achieve the maximum efficiency of the burn, you have to significantly up the compression ratio.
That is what excites me about this new engine tech; with diesel like compression in a gasoline-oriented system, it's a trivial matter to convert the gas engine to run on alcohol and remove, or at least severely diminish, our dependence on petroleum-based fuels altogether!
Here's my vision for the future of automobiles: alcohol-electric hybrids, in which propulsion is provided solely by the electric motors, and the engine merely kicks on when needed to charge the batteries; we would be free from the shackles of the energy cartels... well, until they lobby (read: bribe) the government to criminalize the possession of distillation equipment for anyone but themselves...
It's not going to happen with adults. A good educational system (I did NOT say "school system"!) would try to develop the skills to analyze an argument. It may not succeed, not with human beings.
Well, I for one would welcome our new non-human overlords. 'Cause really, there's not much any entity could do to fuck things up more than what we humans are capable of.
If you are unemployed, you can pay your taxes through WORKING!
Where did you get the impression that 50% of Americans don't work? Obviously nowhere even closely related to reality. FYI, just because a person doesn't have to pay income tax doesn't mean they have no income - it means their income is so slight that taxation would financially cripple them. Or is that what you're gunning for - having half the country forced onto welfare by taxation?
Also to be noted, I guarantee that most of the people in that 50% category do indeed work, likely far more than your self-entitled ass. When my wife was in college, I worked 80 hours a week doing minimum wage shit work for 3-4 different companies, and still barely made enough to feed and shelter my family; had Uncle Sam demanded a cut, there is no way I would have been able to provide for them without government assistance. Of course, judging from your statements it's clear you've never been forced to endure such hardship.
I hope you are someday, so you can see first-hand how much of a selfish, ignorant asshole you're coming off as right now.
Everyone should pay tax. Pay in cash, or pay with labour. But you should not be getting something for nothing.
Tell ya what, chief - you think the 50% of Americans who have so little income as to not owe income taxes have it easy? Well, put your money where your mouth is - why don't you figure out how little you have to make to not pay income taxes, then live on that amount for, say, the next year.
That is, if you have the balls to do it, which I seriously doubt you do.
Easy to blame the poor for the nation's economic woes when you yourself have never counted among their ranks, eh Mz. Antoinette?
there is a lot of excess capacity in the power grid at night. Most people would recharge their electric cars overnight, and not have to worry about it during the day. Its only on long trips that you would need to worry about daytime charging.
The problem, of course, occurs when electric cars become more ubiquitous - yea, there's a lot of excess capacity in the grid at night now, but when we get to the point of most-if-not-all of the 210,000,000+ drivers all charging their cars overnight? Not so much.
Oh, it was a poem? I think you need to preface it by saying something like, "Yes, Fat Mike is literate - this is just a poem, which is why it has only the most tenuous connection with English grammar." Otherwise it just looks like any other idiot on the internet who can't put more than two words together coherently. It would be especially helpful for those of us who have no idea who Fat Mike is, what NOFX is, or what The Idiots Are Taking Over is (nearly everyone).
I take it your Google is broken? Mine seems to be working fine...
There's no point for democracy when ignorance is celebrated
Political scientists think the same one vote that some monkeys are inbred
Majority rule, don't work in mental institutions
Sometimes the smallest softest voice carries the grand biggest solutions
What are we left with?
A nation of god-fearing pregnant nationalists
Who feel it's their duty to populate the homeland
Pass on traditions
How to get ahead religions
And prosperity be a symbol to culture
Yea; it's almost as if certain, powerful groups want it to be that way...
The slave was precious to his master because of the money he had cost him They were worth at least as much as they could be sold for in the market It is the impossibility of living by any other means that compels our farm labourers to till the soil whose fruits they will not eat and our masons to construct buildings in which they will not live It is want that compels them to go down on their knees to the rich man in order to get from him permission to enrich him what effective gain [has] the suppression of slavery brought [him ?] He is free, you say. Ah! That is his misfortune These men [have] the most terrible, the most imperious of masters, that is, need. They must therefore find someone to hire them, or die of hunger. Is that to be free?
You foolish and senseless people, with eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear; there is no man so blind, as he who refuses to see.
Lemme guess, you plan on retorting something about how there are so many other countries with far more oppressive regimes than the US Facists, right? Got one for that too:
How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
Guess it kind of depends; say someone bitches about how there's too many people on Facebook, but also bitches about how there's too few people on G+, or complaining about Facebook invading their privacy while simultaneously bemoaning G+'s lack of "personalization."
Really, though, I was probably being hyperbolic. Mea Culpa, and all that jazz.
Oh, and, for the record, Churchill was a jerk who happened to get one right every once and a while.
We should be targeting the unemployed, for not paying the employment and income taxes they would be paying if they had jobs.
Sure - take nothing from nothing, and what do you get?
Seriously, though, what are you suggesting?
For that matter, we should target the nearly 50% of the American public that does not pay income taxes at all (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/28/46-percent-of-americans-e_n_886293.html).
You ever stop to ask yourself why so many people "don't pay income taxes?" Hint: It's not because they're sheltering their income in off-shore accounts.
Agreed, seconded, motion carried; If G+ turns into Facebook, I'm out like yesterday's fashions.
The hilarious irony is how much people bitch about Facebook on/., while simultaneously bitching about how other social networks "aren't as good" as Facebook.
They shouldn't care about why you want the data. They care about how much you cost them to service.
*Sigh*... I don't know which is worse - companies treating customers as if they were burdens, or people like this who seem to honestly believe that's how it should be.
Slashdot Mirror
What's you're really doing is using photosynthesis, a form of solar energy, to produce your fuel. Fun fact : most crops are between 1-2% efficient at converting sunlight to chemical energy. Then, you're going to lose at least half of that energy converting the crops to ethanol, then you'll lose 2/3 of the energy in the ethanol when you burn it for motive power.
Also, those crops need water and fertilizer, generally, costing you energy. If you use the good fertilizer, you won't even gain energy doing this.
Or you could use cheap Chinese made solar cells (less than $1 a watt) and use it to charge batteries. Commercial solar cells are 7-14% efficient, and the battery charging is around 80% efficient or better. When you drive the car on those batteries, another 80% or more of that power actually propels the car.
Do the math. The problem today are the high technology items needed to make all this work have high manufacturing costs (that are falling rapidly). However, in the long run, it seems pretty obvious where this is heading.
While you are probably fairly accurate on the efficiency (too lazy to bother checking right now), one cannot just grow "cheap Chinese made solar cells" in one's back field.
Which was kind of my entire point.
We do though need to be careful about the feedstock of choice for the fuel production, as not everyone has the land and time to make their own.
Indeed - good thing ethanol can be produced from virtually any plant cellulose.
What do they do with cornstalks/non-edible parts of foodstock now? Leave it to biodegrade? Tsk tsk, so wasteful...
Companies operating in free markets will pick the lowest costs of production and or highest value end markets above ethical considerations. This *could* lead to people in neighbouring states paying more for basic foodstuffs as it becomes more efficient to plant fuel than food crops. Or because crops are bought to use as feedstock for alcohol rather than food for people.
That's more of a capitalism related issue, though, isn't it?
Let us not fall prey to the lowest-common-denominator habit of blaming the inanimate for the actions of people.
Personally I'm hoping for better bio-gas fuels. petrol/gasoline engines can run quite easily on gas as long as they have good enough injectors and hardened valve seats.
Fairly certain you meant 'alcohol' there, in which case it's less a matter of the quality of injectors and more about the size of the jets/time the injectors are left open, which can easily be adjusted on current vehicles via reprogramming the ECM.
The government's constant attempts to end-run the Constitution, or the fact that American citizens are helping them.
Getting back on topic, has anyone started a petition to get the other Steve back as head honcho at Apple?
Shit, that happens, let me know.
With Woz at the helm, I may just be forced to reconsider my Apple boycott, walled garden or not...
And you'll probably be able to augment your iPhone via 6 PCI slots or one of 20 ports...
You say that as if it's a bad thing....
The Italians would like to give you the plot and backdrop for your next movie. Add a giant creature (maybe it's den was in a cavern above the caldera.. or even better it lives in the magma) and there you go, instant movie.
...
I see no other possible outcome...
Facciamolo!
Getting back on topic, has anyone started a petition to get the other Steve back as head honcho at Apple?
Shit, that happens, let me know.
With Woz at the helm, I may just be forced to reconsider my Apple boycott, walled garden or not...
Mixing? Oh, no, my friend, you have it all wrong! I intend to replace gasoline with alcohol. See, the major issue with alcohol as a main fuel source is that its burn profile is more akin to diesel than gasoline - that is to say, to achieve the maximum efficiency of the burn, you have to significantly up the compression ratio.
That is what excites me about this new engine tech; with diesel like compression in a gasoline-oriented system, it's a trivial matter to convert the gas engine to run on alcohol and remove, or at least severely diminish, our dependence on petroleum-based fuels altogether!
Here's my vision for the future of automobiles: alcohol-electric hybrids, in which propulsion is provided solely by the electric motors, and the engine merely kicks on when needed to charge the batteries; we would be free from the shackles of the energy cartels... well, until they lobby (read: bribe) the government to criminalize the possession of distillation equipment for anyone but themselves...
To dream the impossible dream...
It's not going to happen with adults. A good educational system (I did NOT say "school system"!) would try to develop the skills to analyze an argument. It may not succeed, not with human beings.
Well, I for one would welcome our new non-human overlords. 'Cause really, there's not much any entity could do to fuck things up more than what we humans are capable of.
If you are unemployed, you can pay your taxes through WORKING!
Where did you get the impression that 50% of Americans don't work? Obviously nowhere even closely related to reality. FYI, just because a person doesn't have to pay income tax doesn't mean they have no income - it means their income is so slight that taxation would financially cripple them. Or is that what you're gunning for - having half the country forced onto welfare by taxation?
Also to be noted, I guarantee that most of the people in that 50% category do indeed work, likely far more than your self-entitled ass. When my wife was in college, I worked 80 hours a week doing minimum wage shit work for 3-4 different companies, and still barely made enough to feed and shelter my family; had Uncle Sam demanded a cut, there is no way I would have been able to provide for them without government assistance. Of course, judging from your statements it's clear you've never been forced to endure such hardship.
I hope you are someday, so you can see first-hand how much of a selfish, ignorant asshole you're coming off as right now.
Everyone should pay tax. Pay in cash, or pay with labour. But you should not be getting something for nothing.
Tell ya what, chief - you think the 50% of Americans who have so little income as to not owe income taxes have it easy? Well, put your money where your mouth is - why don't you figure out how little you have to make to not pay income taxes, then live on that amount for, say, the next year.
That is, if you have the balls to do it, which I seriously doubt you do.
Easy to blame the poor for the nation's economic woes when you yourself have never counted among their ranks, eh Mz. Antoinette?
don't believe me, check out the VW sites where drivers are posting their own experiences and do 46mpg or better on a regular basis.
Indeed - just bought a 2012 Jetta TDI for my wife, as she has a 60-mile-each-way daily commute down the interstate:
Average mileage: 50mpg... and she can often fill up on diesel for less than what I pay for the same amount of gasoline if she goes to Sam's Club.
there is a lot of excess capacity in the power grid at night. Most people would recharge their electric cars overnight, and not have to worry about it during the day. Its only on long trips that you would need to worry about daytime charging.
The problem, of course, occurs when electric cars become more ubiquitous - yea, there's a lot of excess capacity in the grid at night now, but when we get to the point of most-if-not-all of the 210,000,000+ drivers all charging their cars overnight? Not so much.
No, but I can make alcohol from sources that grow on my property...
Oh, it was a poem? I think you need to preface it by saying something like, "Yes, Fat Mike is literate - this is just a poem, which is why it has only the most tenuous connection with English grammar." Otherwise it just looks like any other idiot on the internet who can't put more than two words together coherently. It would be especially helpful for those of us who have no idea who Fat Mike is, what NOFX is, or what The Idiots Are Taking Over is (nearly everyone).
I take it your Google is broken? Mine seems to be working fine...
Political scientists think the same one vote that some monkeys are inbred
should read
Political scientists get the same one vote as some Arkansas inbred
So, if that's the one you are complaining about, mea culpa. That's what I get for trusting a website for song lyrics.
If Fat Mike would like to make statements decrying anti-intellectualism, he should first learn to compose a coherent sentence.
No argument against what the poet said, so you resort to lowest-common-denominator, ad hominem attacks on his sentence structure?
Ever hear of artistic license? Obviously not.
Excellent points, all.
So then, at this point the question becomes, how do we get most people to argue in terms of evidence (and thus, logic)?
Therein lies the real challenge.
There's no point for democracy when ignorance is celebrated
Political scientists think the same one vote that some monkeys are inbred
Majority rule, don't work in mental institutions
Sometimes the smallest softest voice carries the grand biggest solutions
What are we left with?
A nation of god-fearing pregnant nationalists
Who feel it's their duty to populate the homeland
Pass on traditions
How to get ahead religions
And prosperity be a symbol to culture
-- Fat Mike, NOFX The Idiots Are Taking Over
Lemme guess, you plan on retorting something about how there are so many other countries with far more oppressive regimes than the US Facists, right? Got one for that too:
Guess it kind of depends; say someone bitches about how there's too many people on Facebook, but also bitches about how there's too few people on G+, or complaining about Facebook invading their privacy while simultaneously bemoaning G+'s lack of "personalization."
Really, though, I was probably being hyperbolic. Mea Culpa, and all that jazz.
Oh, and, for the record, Churchill was a jerk who happened to get one right every once and a while.
The way things are going around here, I'm not really sure that's much of a 'punishment...'
We should be targeting the unemployed, for not paying the employment and income taxes they would be paying if they had jobs.
Sure - take nothing from nothing, and what do you get?
Seriously, though, what are you suggesting?
For that matter, we should target the nearly 50% of the American public that does not pay income taxes at all (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/28/46-percent-of-americans-e_n_886293.html).
You ever stop to ask yourself why so many people "don't pay income taxes?" Hint: It's not because they're sheltering their income in off-shore accounts.
Wake up America, the Democrats are NOT the Dems of yesteryear.
Sure they are!
Seems to me, the problem is that at some point people got this crazy notion that certain groups of politicians aren't selfish dicks...
Agreed, seconded, motion carried; If G+ turns into Facebook, I'm out like yesterday's fashions.
/., while simultaneously bitching about how other social networks "aren't as good" as Facebook.
The hilarious irony is how much people bitch about Facebook on
They shouldn't care about why you want the data. They care about how much you cost them to service.
*Sigh*... I don't know which is worse - companies treating customers as if they were burdens, or people like this who seem to honestly believe that's how it should be.
Sad, is what it is.