There are Lithium chemistries that are "safe". The LiFePo chemistry is relatively safe. It does not catch fire like the cobalt based Lithium Ion batteries can do. Valence Technology had an mpg on their site where they shot a bullet into their battery. The battery got badly distorted but it did not catch fire nor explode. Here is their latest video: http://www.valence.com/technology/battery_safety/battery_safety_video
Home Power magazine had an article about Solar Hot Water systems recently where Solar Hot Water could save about 10 kwhrs of electricity a day. 10 kwhrs is enough electricity to power an EV for 30 to 40 miles. With electrical rates at $0.10/kwhr, the cost of driving 30 to 40 miles is $1.00. With gasoline at $2/gallon and an equivalent 20 mpg car, the savings is $3/day. A $9K Solar Hot Water system would take about 3,000 days to pay off or roughly 10 years. It's called conservation and smart investing. As gasoline stocks dwindle, the payback could be much quicker.
The EVs of the future may have ranges of over 1,000 miles. I'm basing this on the tZero which has been driven over 300 miles on a charge on laptop batteries (www.acpropulsion.com) and the development of a lithium silicon nanowire battery with the potential of storing 10 times as much electricity as a laptop battery. (http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html). The idea is that the driver will be exhausted before the battery pack is exhausted. Therefore, the batteries can then be recharged over night.
If a person drives 400 miles a day at 4 miles per kwhr, the car would use about 100 kwhrs of electricity. At 220 volts and 10 hours of recharge time, the amphr load would be about 50 amphrs which is doable for a single car but the parking lot at the Holiday Inn would be rather warm.
The answer might be car trains where you hop aboard a train with your car, or overhead wires fed by day time solar cells, or extender packs that allow several thousand miles of travel per charge. At your destination, you drop off the extender pack and come back to pick it up recharged. The extender pack would act as a modifying influence on the grid to keep electrical generation even.
The person writing the article screwed up. However, the Alatair Nanotechnology Nanosafe battery pack with a 100 mile range has been recharged in 10 minutes. The test was conducted by Aerovironment. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altairnano)
The person conducting the experiment said the "conducting cables got warm" with the inference that the batteries themselves did not.
This is easily done with just a set of lead acid batteries. You might want to take a look at the EV Album (http://www.austinev.org/evalbum) where there are over 2,000 EVs listed. Many have ranges well over your requirements.
Using AC **and** heat together will reduce your range by about 15%.
The tZero (www.acpropulsion.com) has been driven over 300 miles on a charge using laptop batteries. A battery under development at Stanford University has the potential of extending that range to over 3,000 miles on a charge (http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html). But there are many obstacles before a battery in the lab can go into production. Still the battery pack for the new MacBook Pro is supposed to be able to be recharged a 1,000 times compared to a standard laptop's pack 200 to 300 times and the MacBook Pro is suppose to run 7 to 8 hours instead of the current 3 to 4 hours.
We have two Rovers crawling around on Mars for over 5 years in -100 degree Fahrenheit temperatures using only solar cells and Lithium Ion batteries. A portion of the battery's energy goes to warming them but the Rovers don't go very far per charge.
But how can you determine if the lithographic mask for the circuits and/or the chips been tampered with? When you figure it out, I got this real neat authentic Rolex off the Internet for you.
I did a scan of all the comments and "energy" was only mentioned **once**. This is the greatest issue of our time and of this election whether we recognize it or not. And the word was only mentioned ONCE!!!!!!!! No wonder we got "W" for a President... Ghawar, the world's largest oil reservoir is watering out. 70% of the top 100 oil reservoirs in the world are in decline. The world has to find 5 or 6 new Saudi Arabian size fields over the next 2 decades just to stay even. Oil Shale doesn't count because its "wax" (keratine) is embedded in solidified mud which means that its uneconomical to try to produce it. How many candidates are touting it as a energy savior? Do your homework!!!
If I had to list the top 5 issues of this election, they would be:
energy - how are these candidates going to address our energy needs? How are they proposing that we transition to a non fossil fuel economy? If we don't have energy, how are we going to make anything?
economy - There are over $500 Trillion Dollars in non secured derivatives out there. How are these candidates going to address a problem that threatens to take down the world economies and make the subprime mess look like a tempest in a teapot?
voting - Which one of these candidates will put in an Executive Order outlawing any voting method that does not produce a bonified paper trail?
education - It's evident it's lacking here!!!! Especially the thought process about what is really important. Candidates or issues. Until you identify the issues, you won't know who the candidates should be.
Whatever - There isn't going to be any whatevers if energy scarcity is going to cause hyperinflation.
It's about time this country got its act together!!!
I did a scan of all the comments and "energy" was only mentioned **once**. This is the greatest issue of our time and of this election whether we recognize it or not. And the word was only mentioned ONCE!!!!!!!! No wonder we got "W" for a President... Ghawar, the world's largest oil reservoir is watering out. 70% of the top 100 oil reservoirs in the world are in decline. The world has to find 5 or 6 new Saudi Arabian size fields over the next 2 decades just to stay even. Oil Shale doesn't count because its "wax" (keratine) is embedded in solidified mud which means that its uneconomical to try to produce it. How many candidates are touting it as a energy savior? Do your homework!!!
If I had to list the top 5 issues of this election, they would be:
energy - how are these candidates going to address our energy needs? How are they proposing that we transition to a non fossil fuel economy? If we don't have energy, how are we going to make anything?
economy - There are over $500 Trillion Dollars in non secured derivatives out there. How are these candidates going to address a problem that threatens to take down the world economies and make the subprime mess look like a tempest in a teapot?
voting - Which one of these candidates will put in an Executive Order outlawing any voting method that does not produce a bonified paper trail?
education - It's evident it's lacking here!!!! Especially the thought process about what is really important. Candidates or issues. Until you identify the issues, you won't know who the candidates should be.
? - There isn't going to be any if energy scarcity is going to cause hyperinflation.
It's about time this country got its act together!!!
As a System's Manager we are finding that Linux is becoming very stable. However, no matter how stable Linux becomes, the supporting hardware has to be of a better quality than just commodity parts. I have had Sun SCSI drives that are 10 years old and are still running 24x7. I can't begin to tell you how many IDE drives I have had to replace in that time frame to the detriment of production and happy customers. Quality pays for itself and then some.
Word is a pain at removing hidden codes while WordPerfect's Reveal Codes makes it extrememly easy to spot the problem and to delete it. I often cut and paste from Word into WordPerfect to get rid of Word's hidden codes. For instance, I was recently given an MS Word document with double pagination. My secretary spent several hours trying to get rid of it. I cut and pasted the document into WordPerfect and was done correcting the problem in a matter of minutes.
I don't hate MS because its MS. I hate MS because of what they have done to fine products that are not theirs.
Speaking of efficiencies, this article was publish about 3 years ago about a Los Alamos scientist working with Lead Selenium cells on a nanoscale level:
>Much of the time it is night, and storing that much juice in batteries is impractical.
Check out Altair Nanotechnologies (NASDAQ: ALTI). They have acheived a 20,000 useful number of cycles with their Nanosafe battery. (REF: http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&st oryid=1148) For those who don't subscribe, here's the quote: "The company is claiming that their battery is showing a cycle life in excess of 20,000 charges and discharges while still retaining 85% of its capacity to store energy."
If you cycle the battery 300 times a year, that's about a 70 year lifetime and you maybe able to avoid nuclear power to boot. Those in the sun could store and send electricity to cloudy areas.
If you use the battery in a pack that delivers a 100 mile range, that's 2 million miles on a pack. You trade in the **body** of the car and keep the pack. Finance the car, second mortgage the pack and pay the second mortgage off in 20 years. At a $1/watt for a 30Kwh pack (rough quess), that's 30,000/2,000,000 or $0.015/mile plus the finance charges.
Check out: http://66.218.37.153/news.htm November 7, 2006 article.
I would not be so sanguine about "This peak oil fearmongering is just silly." Here are some points to consider:
1.) We are still using 6 barrels of oil for every barrel that is found and it is getting worse.
2.) The tar sands require a lot of natural gas. Lee Raymond, ex-CEO of Exxon-Mobile thinks we may have peaked in natural gas production in North America (http://www.pastpeak.com/archives/2005/06/exxon_na tural_g.htm, http://www.energy.ca.gov/naturalgas/documents/2005 -04-19_WIEB_workshop/Dave%20M-Overview.ppt - slide 23). This means that we will have to import ever increasing amounts of LNG from the Middle East. This puts us at a strategic and economic disadvantage.
3.) In the mid 1980's, OPEC decided based their quotas on proved reserves (Ref:http://www.theoildrum.com/storyonly/2006/3/1/ 3402/63420). These are the reserves that you are very confident that are in the ground. Saudi Arabia went from around 170GB to 261GB. Kuwait went from 67GB to 99GB. Recently, Kuwait announced that their biggest field, Burgan was in decline. The Oil Minister was called in by the Kuwaiti Parliament and asked if they had 99GB or 48GB in the ground. The Kuwaitis believed their inflated numbers!!!! A similar question is being asked of the Saudis with regards to Ghawar and their other gigantic, but very aged, oil fields. Recent leaks of graphs concerning Ghawar do not bode well. Ghawar at its peak was prodcuing 5.4 Mbpd. Recently, the official estimates are down in the 4.x range.
4.) With regard to my statements in 3, the National Geographic published an article entitled: The End of Cheap Oil. On page 92 was a graph of orange boxes showing the oil reserves from around the world (Ref: http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/featu re5/). The squares represent the sizes of the oil fields ***when they were full.*** You'll note that National Geo used the inflated OPEC numbers...
5.) The Oil Shale of Colorado should be called Wax Shale for a better descriptive title to the actual consistency of the hydrocarbon. When oil gets expensive enough to actual make the Wax Shales profitable, we will be in a world of financial hurt.
6.) Yes Venezuela is sitting on top of some really large deposits of heavy crude/bitumen. This is expensive to refine. Projections are for it to grow at a 3% rate from a base of 600kbpd until 2015 and then it forecast to start to decline.
7.) Where are we exploring for more oil? The high artic, near Greenland, deep oceans, and there is talk of exploring in Antartica. The only place we have not thought about exploring for oil is the moon. The National Geo was right in its title. This is the end of **cheap** oil.
We could argue all we want to about how much oil is left and when the world will peak in production. The problem is that demand is increasing into a supply that is getting harder and harder to find and extract. Meanwhile, the results of using fossil fuels is contributing to wide spread climate change and environmental damage. We need to abandon use of fossil fuels and concentrate on using and developing alternatives.
My money is on:
1.) solar cells (http://www.trnmag.com/Stories/2004/051904/Solar_c rystals_get_2-for-1_051904.html),
2.) long life batteries (http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=communiqu e&newsid=10734), and
3.) fun EVs to drive (http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1 ).
Note that a "100 mile pack" capable of 9,000 cycles is 900,000 miles of driving. That's about a human life time of driving...
By the way, the US Army Corps of Engineers is Federal and therefore comes until the control of the Federal Government. This mighty President let a "liberal" Governor wrestle control away from him? Tsk tsk. What was he suppose to do?
I'm tired of Bush supporters shifting blame from this Presidental imbecile. The New Orleans Levees are number 3 on FEMA's mostly likely diasters after an earthquake in LA and a tsumani hitting the Washington State coast. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this administration knew it would eventually come but did nothing to shore up the levees.
Reports have it that parts of the levee system had weakened to the point that they would have had a tough time surviving a Category 1 Hurricane. The levee maintenance has been neglected under this and a hellva lot of other past administrations. They all knew the levees were weak they just didn't want to spend the money. When disaster finally hit, all I see is a bunch of politicos at all levels covering their butts.
NO!!!! YOU are missing a critical piece here!!! Even if you use alternative and/or renewable fuels, HYDROGEN PRODUCTION IS INEFFICENT!!! For instance, the well to wheel efficency of an Electric Vehicle is roughly equivalent to 50 MPG while running a fuel cell vehicle from hydrogen via electrolysis is roughly eqivalent to 12 MPG. Why would I want to have to pay for something that is 4 times as inefficent? I may have room on the roof of my house for solar cells that provide enough energy to recharge (indirectly) an EV to and from work. For a hydrogen powered equivalent, I'd have to find space on my property for 3 more sets of cells!! No way I could afford that!!!!
Can you state what you have in mind using energy related numbers and efficiencies instead of adjectives?
shine a laser pen light into its daylight sensor. The sensor will look like a black dot; usually on the west side of the lights. On the "cobra head" lights, it's in a protrusion cap above the lamp base. A light pen strapped to a tripod with tape works best for long periods of darkness.
"... the gas costs less because they're feeding money back to their own economy, as opposed to petroleum."
Lee Raymond, CEO of Exxon Mobile was quoted as saying that he thought Natural Gas production had peaked in North America. Expect natural gas to become more expensive even without the hurricane effects until the energy companies import enough LNG to compensate. In either case, natural gas may not be the answer.
Still 350 psi (~70 bar) is a lot better than 700 bar which is 5 tons per square inch without the absorbant material. The technology is impressive.
Most hard disk drive companies will cross ship a drive to you if you pony up your credit card number. If they do not receive your old drive in x number of days, your credit card gets dinged. It's best if you ship your old drive back using a carrier with a tracking number system.
If they receive your drive within x number of days, your credit card is not dinged. I use it a lot in my system support role. Never had a problem and the beauty of the system is that I get an almost immediate ship on a replacement drive.
The Toyota Rav4 Electric uses 0.301 Kwh of electricity per mile. At $0.10/Kwh, that's $0.90 every 30 miles or $0.90/gallon of gasoline equivalent. Add in the road taxes of gasoline and your at $1.20/gallon of gasoline equivalent. I saw gasoline at $2.50/gallon today. To me, this is a better way of making the equivalency between electricity and gasoline.
According to the people on the EVDL & RAV4E discussion lists (google: EVDL) **GM said there was NO list!!!**
How do we advance if we keep on crushing innovations that may one day save our bacon?
Slashdot Mirror
There are Lithium chemistries that are "safe". The LiFePo chemistry is relatively safe. It does not catch fire like the cobalt based Lithium Ion batteries can do. Valence Technology had an mpg on their site where they shot a bullet into their battery. The battery got badly distorted but it did not catch fire nor explode. Here is their latest video: http://www.valence.com/technology/battery_safety/battery_safety_video
Home Power magazine had an article about Solar Hot Water systems recently where Solar Hot Water could save about 10 kwhrs of electricity a day. 10 kwhrs is enough electricity to power an EV for 30 to 40 miles. With electrical rates at $0.10 /kwhr, the cost of driving 30 to 40 miles is $1.00. With gasoline at $2/gallon and an equivalent 20 mpg car, the savings is $3/day. A $9K Solar Hot Water system would take about 3,000 days to pay off or roughly 10 years. It's called conservation and smart investing. As gasoline stocks dwindle, the payback could be much quicker.
The EVs of the future may have ranges of over 1,000 miles. I'm basing this on the tZero which has been driven over 300 miles on a charge on laptop batteries (www.acpropulsion.com) and the development of a lithium silicon nanowire battery with the potential of storing 10 times as much electricity as a laptop battery. (http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html). The idea is that the driver will be exhausted before the battery pack is exhausted. Therefore, the batteries can then be recharged over night.
If a person drives 400 miles a day at 4 miles per kwhr, the car would use about 100 kwhrs of electricity. At 220 volts and 10 hours of recharge time, the amphr load would be about 50 amphrs which is doable for a single car but the parking lot at the Holiday Inn would be rather warm.
The answer might be car trains where you hop aboard a train with your car, or overhead wires fed by day time solar cells, or extender packs that allow several thousand miles of travel per charge. At your destination, you drop off the extender pack and come back to pick it up recharged. The extender pack would act as a modifying influence on the grid to keep electrical generation even.
The person writing the article screwed up. However, the Alatair Nanotechnology Nanosafe battery pack with a 100 mile range has been recharged in 10 minutes. The test was conducted by Aerovironment. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altairnano)
The person conducting the experiment said the "conducting cables got warm" with the inference that the batteries themselves did not.
This is easily done with just a set of lead acid batteries. You might want to take a look at the EV Album (http://www.austinev.org/evalbum) where there are over 2,000 EVs listed. Many have ranges well over your requirements.
Using AC **and** heat together will reduce your range by about 15%.
The tZero (www.acpropulsion.com) has been driven over 300 miles on a charge using laptop batteries. A battery under development at Stanford University has the potential of extending that range to over 3,000 miles on a charge (http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html). But there are many obstacles before a battery in the lab can go into production. Still the battery pack for the new MacBook Pro is supposed to be able to be recharged a 1,000 times compared to a standard laptop's pack 200 to 300 times and the MacBook Pro is suppose to run 7 to 8 hours instead of the current 3 to 4 hours.
Buy the book Convert It and build your own.
We have two Rovers crawling around on Mars for over 5 years in -100 degree Fahrenheit temperatures using only solar cells and Lithium Ion batteries. A portion of the battery's energy goes to warming them but the Rovers don't go very far per charge.
But how can you determine if the lithographic mask for the circuits and/or the chips been tampered with? When you figure it out, I got this real neat authentic Rolex off the Internet for you.
Just where did they point this thing and why is my coffee cup leaking?
I did a scan of all the comments and "energy" was only mentioned **once**. This is the greatest issue of our time and of this election whether we recognize it or not. And the word was only mentioned ONCE!!!!!!!! No wonder we got "W" for a President... Ghawar, the world's largest oil reservoir is watering out. 70% of the top 100 oil reservoirs in the world are in decline. The world has to find 5 or 6 new Saudi Arabian size fields over the next 2 decades just to stay even. Oil Shale doesn't count because its "wax" (keratine) is embedded in solidified mud which means that its uneconomical to try to produce it. How many candidates are touting it as a energy savior? Do your homework!!! If I had to list the top 5 issues of this election, they would be: energy - how are these candidates going to address our energy needs? How are they proposing that we transition to a non fossil fuel economy? If we don't have energy, how are we going to make anything? economy - There are over $500 Trillion Dollars in non secured derivatives out there. How are these candidates going to address a problem that threatens to take down the world economies and make the subprime mess look like a tempest in a teapot? voting - Which one of these candidates will put in an Executive Order outlawing any voting method that does not produce a bonified paper trail? education - It's evident it's lacking here!!!! Especially the thought process about what is really important. Candidates or issues. Until you identify the issues, you won't know who the candidates should be. Whatever - There isn't going to be any whatevers if energy scarcity is going to cause hyperinflation. It's about time this country got its act together!!!
I did a scan of all the comments and "energy" was only mentioned **once**. This is the greatest issue of our time and of this election whether we recognize it or not. And the word was only mentioned ONCE!!!!!!!! No wonder we got "W" for a President... Ghawar, the world's largest oil reservoir is watering out. 70% of the top 100 oil reservoirs in the world are in decline. The world has to find 5 or 6 new Saudi Arabian size fields over the next 2 decades just to stay even. Oil Shale doesn't count because its "wax" (keratine) is embedded in solidified mud which means that its uneconomical to try to produce it. How many candidates are touting it as a energy savior? Do your homework!!!
If I had to list the top 5 issues of this election, they would be:
energy - how are these candidates going to address our energy needs? How are they proposing that we transition to a non fossil fuel economy? If we don't have energy, how are we going to make anything?
economy - There are over $500 Trillion Dollars in non secured derivatives out there. How are these candidates going to address a problem that threatens to take down the world economies and make the subprime mess look like a tempest in a teapot?
voting - Which one of these candidates will put in an Executive Order outlawing any voting method that does not produce a bonified paper trail?
education - It's evident it's lacking here!!!! Especially the thought process about what is really important. Candidates or issues. Until you identify the issues, you won't know who the candidates should be. ? - There isn't going to be any if energy scarcity is going to cause hyperinflation.
It's about time this country got its act together!!!
As a System's Manager we are finding that Linux is becoming very stable. However, no matter how stable Linux becomes, the supporting hardware has to be of a better quality than just commodity parts. I have had Sun SCSI drives that are 10 years old and are still running 24x7. I can't begin to tell you how many IDE drives I have had to replace in that time frame to the detriment of production and happy customers. Quality pays for itself and then some.
You can still purchase WordPerfect, http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/us/en/Conte nt/1150905725000
Word is a pain at removing hidden codes while WordPerfect's Reveal Codes makes it extrememly easy to spot the problem and to delete it. I often cut and paste from Word into WordPerfect to get rid of Word's hidden codes. For instance, I was recently given an MS Word document with double pagination. My secretary spent several hours trying to get rid of it. I cut and pasted the document into WordPerfect and was done correcting the problem in a matter of minutes.
I don't hate MS because its MS. I hate MS because of what they have done to fine products that are not theirs.
Speaking of efficiencies, this article was publish about 3 years ago about a Los Alamos scientist working with Lead Selenium cells on a nanoscale level:
_ get_2-for-1_051904.html
www.trnmag.com/Stories/2004/051904/Solar_crystals
He was trying to get efficiencies up to 60%. Any words on how this is progressing?
>Much of the time it is night, and storing that much juice in batteries is impractical.t oryid=1148) For those who don't subscribe, here's the quote: "The company is claiming that their battery is showing a cycle life in excess of 20,000 charges and discharges while still retaining 85% of its capacity to store energy."
Check out Altair Nanotechnologies (NASDAQ: ALTI). They have acheived a 20,000 useful number of cycles with their Nanosafe battery. (REF: http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=article&s
If you cycle the battery 300 times a year, that's about a 70 year lifetime and you maybe able to avoid nuclear power to boot. Those in the sun could store and send electricity to cloudy areas.
If you use the battery in a pack that delivers a 100 mile range, that's 2 million miles on a pack. You trade in the **body** of the car and keep the pack. Finance the car, second mortgage the pack and pay the second mortgage off in 20 years. At a $1/watt for a 30Kwh pack (rough quess), that's 30,000/2,000,000 or $0.015/mile plus the finance charges. Check out: http://66.218.37.153/news.htm November 7, 2006 article.
I would not be so sanguine about "This peak oil fearmongering is just silly." Here are some points to consider:
a tural_g.htm, http://www.energy.ca.gov/naturalgas/documents/2005 -04-19_WIEB_workshop/Dave%20M-Overview.ppt - slide 23). This means that we will have to import ever increasing amounts of LNG from the Middle East. This puts us at a strategic and economic disadvantage.
/ 3402/63420). These are the reserves that you are very confident that are in the ground. Saudi Arabia went from around 170GB to 261GB. Kuwait went from 67GB to 99GB. Recently, Kuwait announced that their biggest field, Burgan was in decline. The Oil Minister was called in by the Kuwaiti Parliament and asked if they had 99GB or 48GB in the ground. The Kuwaitis believed their inflated numbers!!!! A similar question is being asked of the Saudis with regards to Ghawar and their other gigantic, but very aged, oil fields. Recent leaks of graphs concerning Ghawar do not bode well. Ghawar at its peak was prodcuing 5.4 Mbpd. Recently, the official estimates are down in the 4.x range.
u re5/). The squares represent the sizes of the oil fields ***when they were full.*** You'll note that National Geo used the inflated OPEC numbers...
c rystals_get_2-for-1_051904.html),
u e&newsid=10734), and
1 ).
Note that a "100 mile pack" capable of 9,000 cycles is 900,000 miles of driving. That's about a human life time of driving...
1.) We are still using 6 barrels of oil for every barrel that is found and it is getting worse.
2.) The tar sands require a lot of natural gas. Lee Raymond, ex-CEO of Exxon-Mobile thinks we may have peaked in natural gas production in North America (http://www.pastpeak.com/archives/2005/06/exxon_n
3.) In the mid 1980's, OPEC decided based their quotas on proved reserves (Ref:http://www.theoildrum.com/storyonly/2006/3/1
4.) With regard to my statements in 3, the National Geographic published an article entitled: The End of Cheap Oil. On page 92 was a graph of orange boxes showing the oil reserves from around the world (Ref: http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/feat
5.) The Oil Shale of Colorado should be called Wax Shale for a better descriptive title to the actual consistency of the hydrocarbon. When oil gets expensive enough to actual make the Wax Shales profitable, we will be in a world of financial hurt.
6.) Yes Venezuela is sitting on top of some really large deposits of heavy crude/bitumen. This is expensive to refine. Projections are for it to grow at a 3% rate from a base of 600kbpd until 2015 and then it forecast to start to decline.
7.) Where are we exploring for more oil? The high artic, near Greenland, deep oceans, and there is talk of exploring in Antartica. The only place we have not thought about exploring for oil is the moon. The National Geo was right in its title. This is the end of **cheap** oil.
We could argue all we want to about how much oil is left and when the world will peak in production. The problem is that demand is increasing into a supply that is getting harder and harder to find and extract. Meanwhile, the results of using fossil fuels is contributing to wide spread climate change and environmental damage. We need to abandon use of fossil fuels and concentrate on using and developing alternatives.
My money is on: 1.) solar cells (http://www.trnmag.com/Stories/2004/051904/Solar_
2.) long life batteries (http://www.evworld.com/view.cfm?section=communiq
3.) fun EVs to drive (http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=
By the way, the US Army Corps of Engineers is Federal and therefore comes until the control of the Federal Government. This mighty President let a "liberal" Governor wrestle control away from him? Tsk tsk. What was he suppose to do?
I'm tired of Bush supporters shifting blame from this Presidental imbecile. The New Orleans Levees are number 3 on FEMA's mostly likely diasters after an earthquake in LA and a tsumani hitting the Washington State coast. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that this administration knew it would eventually come but did nothing to shore up the levees.
Reports have it that parts of the levee system had weakened to the point that they would have had a tough time surviving a Category 1 Hurricane. The levee maintenance has been neglected under this and a hellva lot of other past administrations. They all knew the levees were weak they just didn't want to spend the money. When disaster finally hit, all I see is a bunch of politicos at all levels covering their butts.
By the way, who's administration gutted FEMA?
>>you're missing a critical piece here
NO!!!! YOU are missing a critical piece here!!! Even if you use alternative and/or renewable fuels, HYDROGEN PRODUCTION IS INEFFICENT!!! For instance, the well to wheel efficency of an Electric Vehicle is roughly equivalent to 50 MPG while running a fuel cell vehicle from hydrogen via electrolysis is roughly eqivalent to 12 MPG. Why would I want to have to pay for something that is 4 times as inefficent? I may have room on the roof of my house for solar cells that provide enough energy to recharge (indirectly) an EV to and from work. For a hydrogen powered equivalent, I'd have to find space on my property for 3 more sets of cells!! No way I could afford that!!!!
Can you state what you have in mind using energy related numbers and efficiencies instead of adjectives?
and add to your list How much energy is needed to UN freeze the water in winter...
shine a laser pen light into its daylight sensor. The sensor will look like a black dot; usually on the west side of the lights. On the "cobra head" lights, it's in a protrusion cap above the lamp base. A light pen strapped to a tripod with tape works best for long periods of darkness.
"... the gas costs less because they're feeding money back to their own economy, as opposed to petroleum."
Lee Raymond, CEO of Exxon Mobile was quoted as saying that he thought Natural Gas production had peaked in North America. Expect natural gas to become more expensive even without the hurricane effects until the energy companies import enough LNG to compensate. In either case, natural gas may not be the answer.
Still 350 psi (~70 bar) is a lot better than 700 bar which is 5 tons per square inch without the absorbant material. The technology is impressive.
Most hard disk drive companies will cross ship a drive to you if you pony up your credit card number. If they do not receive your old drive in x number of days, your credit card gets dinged. It's best if you ship your old drive back using a carrier with a tracking number system.
If they receive your drive within x number of days, your credit card is not dinged. I use it a lot in my system support role. Never had a problem and the beauty of the system is that I get an almost immediate ship on a replacement drive.
The Toyota Rav4 Electric uses 0.301 Kwh of electricity per mile. At $0.10/Kwh, that's $0.90 every 30 miles or $0.90/gallon of gasoline equivalent. Add in the road taxes of gasoline and your at $1.20/gallon of gasoline equivalent. I saw gasoline at $2.50/gallon today. To me, this is a better way of making the equivalency between electricity and gasoline.
The author sig'ed: "If you hear a person say it's illegal to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, douse him in gasoline and light a match."
And let's hope he gives you a big long hug!!!
According to the people on the EVDL & RAV4E discussion lists (google: EVDL) **GM said there was NO list!!!** How do we advance if we keep on crushing innovations that may one day save our bacon?
They were bought by M[e?]yers Motors. Not sure of what they are doing.