the process of water condensing and falling out of the sky is usually associated with violent weather systems.
Like rain?
The point: Fuel cells are NOT non-polluting. Quit saying they are.
That depends on how you make the fuel. From ancient gas pockets it's the same as crude oil, but from methane created by decomposition of recent organic materials like manure and plants, the total polluting effect is neutral.
Point: Remember there's gray between black and white.
Even if it is satire, I feel I should make some things clear.
The real answer is to build nuclear power plants. You can argue windmills and solar all you want, but there is not enough surface area to have environmentally correct energy,
Proof please.
and, it probably takes more nasty chemicals to make solar panels and windmills anyway.
Keyword: probably.
Which specific nasty chemicals would a windmill need?
And what do you think happens to all the byproducts of a nuclear facility?
Even if you factor in one Chernobyl meltdown per year, you will wind up with far less environmental impact than you would by burning coal.
Source? Does that include cleaned coal by bacteria?
So called clean natural gas is in fact running out
So are places that are safe and willing enough to store radioactive waste.
Fusion is, yet again, 20 years away. That leaves nuclear.
You forgot about biomass and haven't given enough proof to refute windmills and solar cells.
"Any reaction that takes place will either result in the products becoming less ordered, or heat being given off. This means at some time far in the future, when all the possible reactions have taken place, all that will be left is heat (i.e electromagnetic radiation) and fundamental particles."
Sounds a lot like how I learned the early universe was like...
"No reactions will be possible, because the universe will have reached its maximum entropy. The only reactions that can take place will result in a decrease of entropy, which is not possible, so in effect the universe will have died."
So it will be completely stagnant? Not even gravity exists anymore?
A quick search didn't come up with evidence of hydrogen being the direct cause of death. It merely ignites by static electricity and the deflating blimp crashes slowly. A few anti-static, non flammable compartements should be enough to save lives.
As said up this thread, regular fuel is the biggest threat. Quite obvious, really.
From http://www.prairieghosts.com/chi_fires.html (emphasis mine):
THE GOODYEAR DIRIGIBLE DISASTER Another terrifying event occurred on July 21, 1919 when the Goodyear dirigible ( the forerunner of the "blimp") the WING FOOT, crashed into the Illinois Trust and Savings Building at 231 South LaSalle Street. Just minutes before the bank closed for the day, the dirigible, powered by 95,000 cubic feet of very flammable hydrogen, suddenly crashed to the earth. The WING FOOT tore into the iron supports holding the glass skylight of building in place and the two engines and gasoline tanks crashed to the floor of the bank. Glass and steel rained down onto the employees, along with a deadly shower of fuel. The rotunda was instantly consumed in flames, trapping tellers and stenographers inside. The resulting fire cut off all hope of escape and many were burned beyond recognition. The intense heat made rescue work virtually impossible for hours and 12 people died and many more were injured. The cause of the tragedy was determined to be static electricity and a rush of air from the propellers. The Goodyear company paid for the care of the victims and the bank chipped in $1,000 for the family of anyone who died in the disaster. The bank itself re-opened for business the very next day.
The WING FOOT tragedy, and others like it involving such aircraft, showed that such transportation was not safe and this incident pointed toward the end of an era. After the crash of the HINDENBURG in New Jersey in 1937, the use of dirigibles was abandoned as a means for passenger travel. This would be the only legacy of the event as no plaque or historical marker has ever been erected about this terrible event.
nope, they should be banned too because they can kill
Hammers aren't made for killing.
Re:Sounds Fantastic -- Now Why Not Hemp
on
Corn-Based Plastic
·
· Score: 1
you need someplace to grow it. With genetically modified crops, we can grow more food per acre, and thus free up farmland to grow hemp
So you're using 100% of your farmland and only just manage to feed everyone?
Harvested hemp would have to stored under weatherproof conditions
Just like crops.
while trees usually can be left outside with the elements.
Hemp can be made into at least as many products as wood.
Hemp would compete with other crops for manpower and machinery because it is a seasonal crop. [...] Basically, we would need an infrastracture change in order to accommodate large-volume hemp production.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you include the weight of the material around radioactive waste to keep it safe?
True. But why settle for radioactive shit when you can use the real thing as biomass?
the process of water condensing and falling out of the sky is usually associated with violent weather systems.
Like rain?
The point: Fuel cells are NOT non-polluting. Quit saying they are.
That depends on how you make the fuel. From ancient gas pockets it's the same as crude oil, but from methane created by decomposition of recent organic materials like manure and plants, the total polluting effect is neutral.
Point: Remember there's gray between black and white.
Even if it is satire, I feel I should make some things clear.
The real answer is to build nuclear power plants. You can argue windmills and solar all you want, but there is not enough surface area to have environmentally correct energy,
Proof please.
and, it probably takes more nasty chemicals to make solar panels and windmills anyway.
Keyword: probably.
Which specific nasty chemicals would a windmill need?
And what do you think happens to all the byproducts of a nuclear facility?
Even if you factor in one Chernobyl meltdown per year, you will wind up with far less environmental impact than you would by burning coal.
Source? Does that include cleaned coal by bacteria?
So called clean natural gas is in fact running out
So are places that are safe and willing enough to store radioactive waste.
Fusion is, yet again, 20 years away. That leaves nuclear.
You forgot about biomass and haven't given enough proof to refute windmills and solar cells.
This will make solar panels even more attractive.
Instead of lines, a few boosted solar panels should help.
Distributing biomass power plants is no bad idea either.
From this page:
"Any reaction that takes place will either result in the products becoming less ordered, or heat being given off. This means at some time far in the future, when all the possible reactions have taken place, all that will be left is heat (i.e electromagnetic radiation) and fundamental particles."
Sounds a lot like how I learned the early universe was like...
"No reactions will be possible, because the universe will have reached its maximum entropy. The only reactions that can take place will result in a decrease of entropy, which is not possible, so in effect the universe will have died."
So it will be completely stagnant? Not even gravity exists anymore?
Heat = energy. So what's their problem?
Anyhow, it was pretty dark & cold at the end.
Why are they not happy, going into hyperspace?
"When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too."
That's bull. Is it part of the last batch or something?
I wonder how FED would look.
On a different note, is there a free text mode SSL client for Windows that supports mouse events? I'd really like to use the scrollbar.
It's cheap, organic, carbon neutral and doesn't have nasty waste which could attract terrorists.
Plus you can make gas, oil, alcohol, paper, etc. out of a lot of it. Take hemp or algae for instance.
Alex Chiu
True. But I wasn't debating the cause of the crash, but the cause of death, which you implied was a hydrogen fire.
I found The Skeptic's Annotated Bible to be way more easy to search.
As said up this thread, regular fuel is the biggest threat. Quite obvious, really.
From http://www.prairieghosts.com/chi_fires.html (emphasis mine):
That depends on what kind of knife it is. (As seen on cop show.)
;)
Human nails aren't much of a weapon compared to those carried by the crew. Neither are pencils, though those are more deadly.
Besides, she'd have to clip them at the airport. Unless she plans to knit with them.
Dirty bombs & nuclear weapons.
nope, they should be banned too because they can kill
Hammers aren't made for killing.
How many schools could that support?
They could turn to tourism like I saw on National Geographic a while ago.
Else they must stick to common sense or starve.
Like, not understanding something or feeling frustrated at percieved inefficiency causes the release of stress hormones?
Pinball Fantasies (great game) played MOD perfectly through my 386's PC speaker. I bet the tinnyness is just the cheapness of the speaker.
You'd almost think they could negate gravity or something...
*Wonders if this post would be considered funnier if I added "oh wait."*
You mean what I just ate wasn't chicken??