Skip to content
BOL Conferences
Learn More - Click Here!

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
Thread Options
#948378 - 04/23/08 06:43 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong MB Guy
Mint Julep Offline
Diamond Poster
Mint Julep
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,152
Tennessee
I recently read an article stating that the planet is slowly getting closer to the sun and we would eventually be absorbed by it and everything would fry to a crisp long before that. So, even if we reverse global warming and defy another ice age, we are still doomed.

Might as well enjoy it while we are here and have it to enjoy!
_________________________
Just another self-proclaimed expert ...

Return to Top
Chat! - BOL Watercooler
#948434 - 04/23/08 07:41 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
i guess i don't understand wtf your point is here, straw.do you deny that there are other sources of altrnative energy that are more thermodynamically efficient than corn ethanol?


I am asking you if you know any.

perhaps the question is a little misleading: if all alternatives are negative thermodynamically efficient (takes more energy to produce than is produced) does it really matter what the actual numbers/alternatives are?

and bf, i am fairly certain the ecologist has a sophisticated enough technical background to compile the research regarding thermodynamic efficiency and opine on it.

Return to Top
#948447 - 04/23/08 07:52 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
i guess i don't understand wtf your point is here, straw.do you deny that there are other sources of altrnative energy that are more thermodynamically efficient than corn ethanol?


I am asking you if you know any.

perhaps the question is a little misleading: if all alternatives are negative thermodynamically efficient (takes more energy to produce than is produced) does it really matter what the actual numbers/alternatives are?

and bf, i am fairly certain the ecologist has a sophisticated enough technical background to compile the research regarding thermodynamic efficiency and opine on it.


Ron, I'm sure he also has the sophisticated technical background to compile research on why ducks fly south for the winter, but that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't mean anything if we are talking about Finches.

Return to Top
#948450 - 04/23/08 07:57 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong B_F
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
i'm not going to debate this with you, bf. if you want to think that these alternative-to-gas sources are the right way to go, i'm not going to stop you.

i think we need to invest in energy storage as opposed to sourcing.

Return to Top
#948456 - 04/23/08 08:03 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
RR Sarah Offline
Power Poster
RR Sarah
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,505
Up North
Interesting article but not sure about the whole bulldozing Siberia and Alaska theory. I'm thinking an ice age would be a hard thing to stop.

And speaking of the next ice age...weather forecast calls for snow in my area on Friday! Are they freaking kidding me?!?!?
_________________________
Sometimes you have to burn a few bridges to keep the crazies from following you.

Return to Top
#948459 - 04/23/08 08:10 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong RR Sarah
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
here's a question and it can build off of shemp-o's comments in this thread: if it is hogwash to believe in global warming yet acceptable to believe in global cooling (until some 'liberal' blames our human conduct on it)--even if that global cooling seems to be accelerating faster than it should-- what is the reason for it?

Return to Top
#948460 - 04/23/08 08:12 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
i guess i don't understand wtf your point is here, straw.do you deny that there are other sources of altrnative energy that are more thermodynamically efficient than corn ethanol?


I am asking you if you know any.

perhaps the question is a little misleading: if all alternatives are negative thermodynamically efficient (takes more energy to produce than is produced) does it really matter what the actual numbers/alternatives are?

and bf, i am fairly certain the ecologist has a sophisticated enough technical background to compile the research regarding thermodynamic efficiency and opine on it.


The only thing misleading about the question is it forces you to provide a clear answer to a simple question, which you have proven incapable of doing over and over again.

Since the ecologist's article states that corn is not thermodynamically efficient, but fails to list other energy sources that are theromodynamically efficient, I am betting that you do not know other any other energy sources that are more thermodynamically efficient.

Prove me wrong by listing alternative energy sources that are more thermodynamically efficient that corn ethanol. Seems like a pretty straight forward request.

Return to Top
#948462 - 04/23/08 08:14 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
i guess i don't understand wtf your point is here, straw.do you deny that there are other sources of altrnative energy that are more thermodynamically efficient than corn ethanol?


I am asking you if you know any.

perhaps the question is a little misleading: if all alternatives are negative thermodynamically efficient (takes more energy to produce than is produced) does it really matter what the actual numbers/alternatives are?


Then thanks for admitting that your original point was truly pointless.

Return to Top
#948468 - 04/23/08 08:26 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
i guess i don't understand wtf your point is here, straw.do you deny that there are other sources of altrnative energy that are more thermodynamically efficient than corn ethanol?


I am asking you if you know any.

perhaps the question is a little misleading: if all alternatives are negative thermodynamically efficient (takes more energy to produce than is produced) does it really matter what the actual numbers/alternatives are?

and bf, i am fairly certain the ecologist has a sophisticated enough technical background to compile the research regarding thermodynamic efficiency and opine on it.


The only thing misleading about the question is it forces you to provide a clear answer to a simple question, which you have proven incapable of doing over and over again.

Since the ecologist's article states that corn is not thermodynamically efficient, but fails to list other energy sources that are theromodynamically efficient, I am betting that you do not know other any other energy sources that are more thermodynamically efficient.

Prove me wrong by listing alternative energy sources that are more thermodynamically efficient that corn ethanol. Seems like a pretty straight forward request.


Hmmm, let's see. What about Quatrotriticallee? Thats what was used on the original star trek episode in Trouble with Tribbles?
Then there is Ron's favorite energy source, the Cannibus Plant, which can power a fleet.
Then there is always the Halfling Leaf from the Shire in the Lord of the Rings...
C'mon Ron, enlighten us
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#948470 - 04/23/08 08:27 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
Prove me wrong by listing alternative energy sources that are more thermodynamically efficient that corn ethanol. Seems like a pretty straight forward request.

solar, geothermal, nuclear, hydro to name a few...

Return to Top
#948471 - 04/23/08 08:30 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
See was that so hard. Now, which of those can you run your car on?

When you buy a solar powered car, then you can aver that they are thermodynamically more efficient in the same power gradient as ethanol.

Compare apples to apples Ron, or did the engineering articles you regurgiate not cover that?

Return to Top
#948472 - 04/23/08 08:31 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
Then thanks for admitting that your original point was truly pointless

you mean the original point about corn ethanol practicality being based in politics, not science? perhaps you get too twisted by the argumentative shenanigans that you try to twist discussions with.

Return to Top
#948475 - 04/23/08 08:35 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Originally Posted By: straw
See was that so hard. Now, which of those can you run your car on?

When you buy a solar powered car, then you can aver that they are thermodynamically more efficient in the same power gradient as ethanol.

Compare apples to apples Ron, or did the engineering articles you regurgiate not cover that?

if ultimately the issue becomes about energy in general, a discussion about using ethanol for cars becomes all the more relevant (afterall, you are wasting energy to produce it).

i did mention that perhaps the politics/subsidies aimed at energy should be focused on storage technology, not source technology (a point that i already made). i thought my point about me not being an engineer was sufficient to signal that exploring fuel alternatives was not the scope of my points here.

Return to Top
#948476 - 04/23/08 08:36 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Quote:
perhaps you get too twisted by the argumentative shenanigans that you try to twist discussions with.


Chutzpah? Irony? Absolutely priceless!!!
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#948477 - 04/23/08 08:36 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Ok perhaps your second point that ethanol is not thermodynamically efficient when no alt fuels are as efficient as oil, which is why we are where we are at in the first place.

But as the costs of oil rise, the gain in efficiency becomes offset by the commodities high price, which will eventually lead to solar, wind, hydro and some sci-fi energies to become more cost effective and efficient.

And don't deflect the fact that most of your posts are pointless.

Return to Top
#948479 - 04/23/08 08:38 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Originally Posted By: straw
See was that so hard. Now, which of those can you run your car on?

When you buy a solar powered car, then you can aver that they are thermodynamically more efficient in the same power gradient as ethanol.

Compare apples to apples Ron, or did the engineering articles you regurgiate not cover that?

if ultimately the issue becomes about energy in general, a discussion about using ethanol for cars becomes all the more relevant (afterall, you are wasting energy to produce it).

i did mention that perhaps the politics/subsidies aimed at energy should be focused on storage technology, not source technology (a point that i already made). i thought my point about me not being an engineer was sufficient to signal that exploring fuel alternatives was not the scope of my points here.


So the scope of your posts was to state that ethanol is a poor choice but not explore alt fuels, other than to make a vague, general statement that is absolutely meaningless.

In other words, just another normal day for Ron. Point out how he knows what doesn't work, but has no idea what does work.

It is much easier to criticize than to create, isn't it.

Return to Top
#948484 - 04/23/08 08:43 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
But as the costs of oil rise, the gain in efficiency becomes offset by the commodities high price, which will eventually lead to solar, wind, hydro and some sci-fi energies to become more cost effective and efficient.

i take it you are referring to ways that we can make corn ethanol production (for eample) more efficient? i guess this makes some broad sense. however, there are things like water needs and growing space that simply can't be efficiencied away.

in other words, rather than trying to adopt alternative sources (to make ethanol 'work'), why not focus on storage technology and just bypass the alternatives altogether?

the answer (and to bring us back full circle) is political expediency and the reason is short term thinking.

Return to Top
#948485 - 04/23/08 08:46 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Storage technology on what? Solar, Hydro, Nuclear. None of those energy sources can be substituted as easily as ethanol can.

Also, if you know anything about this, storage is no longer the inhibitor it was. Battery technology has made giant leaps and solar batteries are 100 times more efficient that they were 20 years ago.

The problem remains transmission degradation. Too much is lost from storage to transformer to make it cost efficient.

Return to Top
#948487 - 04/23/08 08:48 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
It is much easier to criticize than to create, isn't it.

again, i am not a scientist/engineer. i do have the ability to opine on the big picture as it relates to politics though.

perhaps you could criticize my position that storage rather than alternative fuels are what is needed because storage is impossible (of course i will ask you to support that).

but don't deny the fact that you love to focus on subordinate points that i make and try to paint them as though they were main points. the fact is, you don't want discussion, you simply want to attack ron. whatever floats your boat. i hope you give your employer this much passion and zeal. do you take assignments and attach a picture of my avatar to motivate you?

Return to Top
#948492 - 04/23/08 08:51 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong straw
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
Storage technology on what?

energy. you know, the thing that ultimately makes cars run and lights houses?

thanks for the input on transmission degradation. i will change my opinion from 'storage' to 'transmission degradation' then. (was that so hard?)

Return to Top
#948505 - 04/23/08 09:03 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
Pale Rider Offline
10K Club
Pale Rider
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 34,318
under the Lone Star
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
here's a question and it can build off of shemp-o's comments in this thread: if it is hogwash to believe in global warming yet acceptable to believe in global cooling (until some 'liberal' blames our human conduct on it)--even if that global cooling seems to be accelerating faster than it should-- what is the reason for it?



one word - sunspots
_________________________
Societies that do not find work in and of itself "pleasing to God and requisite to Man," tend to be highly corrupt.


Return to Top
#948507 - 04/23/08 09:04 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong TheManofSteel
GLKS Offline
Gold Star
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 344
Originally Posted By: GarlicNoseItalyn

Hmmm, let's see. What about Quatrotriticallee? Thats what was used on the original star trek episode in Trouble with Tribbles?
Then there is Ron's favorite energy source, the Cannibus Plant, which can power a fleet.
Then there is always the Halfling Leaf from the Shire in the Lord of the Rings...
C'mon Ron, enlighten us


Back in the 80's the Decepticon's were always after Energon. The Autobots seemed to get by without it. Maybe we should be consulting Optimus Prime??

Return to Top
#948508 - 04/23/08 09:05 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
Pale Rider Offline
10K Club
Pale Rider
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 34,318
under the Lone Star
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Quote:
It is much easier to criticize than to create, isn't it.

again, i am not a scientist/engineer. i do have the ability to opine....



not the ability as much as the privilege; I think the matter is still under consideration as to your ability
_________________________
Societies that do not find work in and of itself "pleasing to God and requisite to Man," tend to be highly corrupt.


Return to Top
#948520 - 04/23/08 09:20 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Quote:
It is much easier to criticize than to create, isn't it.

again, i am not a scientist/engineer. i do have the ability to opine on the big picture as it relates to politics though.

perhaps you could criticize my position that storage rather than alternative fuels are what is needed because storage is impossible (of course i will ask you to support that).

but don't deny the fact that you love to focus on subordinate points that i make and try to paint them as though they were main points. the fact is, you don't want discussion, you simply want to attack ron. whatever floats your boat. i hope you give your employer this much passion and zeal. do you take assignments and attach a picture of my avatar to motivate you?


Since you make so many subordinate (or perhaps nonsquitur would be more appropos) points, I try to focus on all of them. You don't make it easy though.

And yes, it is pretty simple to attack you since you really have nothing of value to add.

Just look at this string. You started by saying ethanol is wrong and ended by saying we should focus on storage. What a joke.

Return to Top
#948703 - 04/24/08 01:11 PM Re: Al Gore may have gotten it wrong Hated By Some
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: Ronzilla
Quote:
Prove me wrong by listing alternative energy sources that are more thermodynamically efficient that corn ethanol. Seems like a pretty straight forward request.

solar, geothermal, nuclear, hydro to name a few...


Well, we've seen attempts at solar powered cars. They failed.

We've seen wind powered vehicles, they call them sailboats. Strangely, rather than rely on the wind, we added gas powered engines to make them more efficient, and called them yachts.

You'll never see a nuclear car, because the same greenies who want to not drill for oil are scared of the cleanest energy source we have. Not only that, but I'm sure if we did have a nuclear car, a terrorist would find a way to turn it into a suicide bomb.

Now, please turn your attention back to the matter at hand, a replacement for oil based gasoline, and leave the larger matter behind. Ethanol is the most efficient alternative we have right now.

Return to Top
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4