User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:01:59 AM EDT
[#1]
Or more emphasis on taking it from terrorist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:02:14 AM EDT
[#2]
Such as alcohol? Hell, I spend too much on alcohol now!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:02:36 AM EDT
[#3]
I agree. Instead of saying we have to reduce the dependency on foreign oil, we should be reducing our dependency on oil in general. There are plenty of other fuels out there but are too costly at the moment. Money should be spent finding more effecient ways to either produce or use those fuels.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:02:50 AM EDT
[#4]
If alternative fuels is a money maker, people will put their own private funds into it. Don't sound like a socialist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:03:47 AM EDT
[#5]
Hydrogen fuel cells, solar, wind, vegetable oils.
A new lasting fuel for our vehicles not Middle East oil. CRC |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:04:38 AM EDT
[#6]
drill alaska!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:04:47 AM EDT
[#7]
People are investing in it but right now oil is cheaper and gets cheaper when OPEC lowers oil prices to prevent gains in alternative fuels. CRC |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:05:33 AM EDT
[#8]
No the oil there should be kept only for a military or national emergency. CRC |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:06:05 AM EDT
[#9]
North Dakota + Fuel Cell or Solar = dead frozen motorists. We are starting to do tons of wind power now. Then again, ND exports the vast majority of it's power to other states who either can't produce their own or over regulate too much. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:07:03 AM EDT
[#10]
So then alternative fuel isn't cheaper, is it? Let the markets decide. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:07:32 AM EDT
[#11]
When gas gets so high we're all bleeding from the ears, then something will begin to happen. If big oil is smart (and they are), they will corner the market on alternative fuel research and technology. There has to be a buck in it though and people have to demand it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:07:57 AM EDT
[#12]
Well oil is going to eventually run out.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:08:37 AM EDT
[#13]
"Big Oil" is the leading producer of solar energy!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:09:59 AM EDT
[#14]
Maybe not. There are theories right now running around that oil is not naturally made from plant and animal decay. It is naturally made in the earth somehow not depending on pland an animal matter. Don't remember where I read it, but it was on one of the big online news services. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:12:07 AM EDT
[#15]
CRC,
Rather then making everyone pay for research on alternative fuels, why don't you put up your own venture capital and take the risk (and rewards) yourself? That would be a very free market thing to do. The alternative is way too socialistic for me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:16:08 AM EDT
[#16]
The market will decide.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:16:09 AM EDT
[#17]
Big oil thought they were smart and started buying metals/mining companies back in the 70's. They lost big time when metals prices returned to normal. One of my professors showed us proprietary metal price forcasts - totally unreal prices - gold well into 4 digits, silver over 100/oz, copper around 10/lb, and this is what those companies were basing acquisition strategies on. Stick to what you know - good slogan. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:21:23 AM EDT
[#18]
I would think that like Microsoft, rather than developing the stuff that people will need, you buy the companies that develop the stuff. The alternative is to eventually become obsolete. Diversify and push the monopoly thing to the edge.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:25:40 AM EDT
[#19]
"We need more money spent on alternative fuels"
Then spend it...What's this we jazz, you got a mouse in your pocket? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:29:59 AM EDT
[#20]
Were I the President, I'd call for an Engergy Manhattan Project. It would consist of al the following:
- LOTS of money for alternative fuel research. (All the foreign aid money would go here instead). - Drilling for oil wherever we can find it on our own soil or waters. Utilize all the technology we have to keep it safe and clean, but DRILL. - A 10 BILLION dollar bonus (either i cash or tax breaks) to the first manufacturer who developes a marketable car, SUV, and truck engine (three seperate awards) that DOESN'T use fossil fuels. - Freeze ALL OPEC assets in the U.S. and use the money to fund the project. Fuck 'em. Oh! I would also declare that as soon as we don't need them anymore, we will be pulling out of the Middle East permanently, and they will be free to fuck their goats, kill their women, beat their children, and drink their oil, but if they so much as FART outside their own countries, we will promptly nuke ALL of them off the face of the planet. Doesn't have to be done all at once, but quickly enough to make a difference. Anyway, that's the end of this internet rant.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:31:24 AM EDT
[#21]
Wasn't there a guy in WW2 that tried to sell the rights to the gov't a process that could make gasoline from some alcohol/water + his own proprietary chem mixture?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:37:39 AM EDT
[#22]
 Hoppy  8420
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:41:58 AM EDT
[#23]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Diesel is a fossil fuel.... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:43:59 AM EDT
[#24]
We already have 80-20 fuel and cars that run on it. That's 80% alcohol and 20% gas. CRC, you are using this already, right?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:45:57 AM EDT
[#25]
Here it is:
www.phoenixproject.net/ Read through the articles. Hydrogen would be an ideal course to take. Then we could tell the Arabs to drink their oil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:46:52 AM EDT
[#26]
In the automotive realm, one thing that stands in the way of alternate fuels is emissions standards. Bio-diesel is a great idea, but current clean air standards a harsh towards diesels and will get even tougher in MY08.
Funny thing is, there have been tremendous advancements in the area of emissions on internal combustion engines. I've read that the current engine technology could comply with 1992 clean air standards with no exhaust-side treatment, meaning no catalytic converters. Pretty impressive when you think about it. The problem is, every 3 or 4 years, the standards ratchet back up and everything starts from square one. And mileage standards are another thing, efficiency drops a bit with some of this blended fuel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:48:11 AM EDT
[#27]
Yes, we should have had alternative energy YEARS ago..but wth oil so cheap(even at $3/gal, our gas is still way cheaper than the rest of the world's prices), Americans got lazy and did not focus on it.
With oil prices rising, there will be a push in the private sector. Let's face it-the person who gets another fuel source (assuming the oil compaines don't buy the patents or make it clear to the person that if they do go mass market, bad things will happen to them) is going to make BIG $$$$$$. however, with Peak Oil coming, it may be too late. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 11:50:39 AM EDT
[#28]
Hoppy  8420
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:12:42 PM EDT
[#29]
Hydrogen is the answer . No carbon , so no Co2 in exhaust . The BTU is more then double that of gasoline . 99% of existing engines can use it without any internal changes .
The metal oxide storage matrix has been developed and is safer then a conventional fuel tank . Hydrogen can be stripped from Sea water and has been done since the 1950s on every submarine , only they discard the hydrogen and use the O2 also produced . Why don't you see it in use , you ask ??? I'd have to put on a tin hat to answer that Then there is small detail that about 7 years ago a small company invented a way to strip hydrogen on board the vehicle from a 10 gal water tank using a retentive system that produced the needed current from the energy generated during braking . This was a closed loop system that reclaimed the H2o from the exhaust at about a 1% loss . They predicted that once in production , the unit would cost about $5000 per vehicle . Would you be willing to pay $ 5K extra for a vehicle that would go about 20,000 miles on 10 gallons of salt water . |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:15:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Roger that. Check the link in my post on the previous page. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:17:30 PM EDT
[#31]
Chrome, you may be right, but my general feeling is that if this were possible, we'd be doing it right now. I'd like to see nuclear power plants, the new small ones running on helium 3 on every corner. Or in my back yard. I'lll get all the power I need and I'll sell you guys what I don't use. Battery tech needs to come a ways to make the use of electric cars feasible but this is proven technology that we could use now. But you're right, If I could pay 5000 bucks, and make my car run even 100 miles on ten gallons of sea water, I'd be installing it right now........ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:18:50 PM EDT
[#32]
One word: Hindenberg. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:20:59 PM EDT
[#33]
That's the first thing everyone thinks of. Go to the Phoenix Project site. That is discussed there. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:21:22 PM EDT
[#34]
http://www.greasecar.com/
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:21:34 PM EDT
[#35]
Ah! I see.... |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:24:59 PM EDT
[#36]
Serious question: I'm well aware of how seawater is split by applying a current through it in order to get O2 (I'm qualified in Submarines). However, if hydrogen later releases its fuel energy by burning (i.e. - combining it with oxygen to create water), then isn't the energy output equal to or less than the energy needed to split it from water in the first place? What am I missing? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:25:57 PM EDT
[#37]
Only when gaseous Hydrogen is stored under pressure. Wouldn't be a problem with a water-based engine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:27:08 PM EDT
[#38]
I'm not a phyicist, nor do I play one in the movies. However, wind farms can produce current for the electrolysis, so it doesn't have to be a question of expending more energy than we get back. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:27:52 PM EDT
[#39]
And that is the crux of the problem. We can do all kinds of cool things. We can even do fusion if we want to. The problem is that it takes more energy put into the system than energy removed. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:28:25 PM EDT
[#40]
But according to the post above, all this would occur internally to the car....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:28:52 PM EDT
[#41]
Hemp Oil
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:29:22 PM EDT
[#42]
Damn straight, I would! If only to tell the Arabs to take their oil and shove it! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:29:28 PM EDT
[#43]
And we are back to battery powered cars. Sorry, that dog won't hunt. Remember some of us have to have heat produced along with power to move the car. Forget about air conditioning. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:30:38 PM EDT
[#44]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:33:17 PM EDT
[#45]
The guy sounds like he is full of shit. The author of that site: HARRY BRAUN III The man with a plan to shift from oil to hydrogen with wartime speed. Harry Braun has worked as an energy analyst for the past 20 years. He is Chairman and CEO of Sustainable Partners, Inc., a systems integration company that is involved in a number of renewable energy projects including the development of a 180 megawatt Mesa Wind project in New Mexico. He is a graduate of Arizona State University where his undergraduate interests evolved from anthropology, history and general science. His post graduate research has focused on energy technologies and resources, as well as molecular biology, protein evolution and nanotechnology. He has been an advisory board member of the International Association for Hydrogen Energy (Coral Gables, Florida) since 1981. Mr. Braun also served as the Democratic Candidate for Arizona’s First Congressional District in 1984. His opponent was John McCain. Currently, Harry is campaigning for president as an independent candidate.. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:33:43 PM EDT
[#46]
It will also eat your car's guts out.... Alchohol + present-era cars DO NOT MIX, the practical limit is 10% corn juice to 90% petrol (which we are allready at) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:35:16 PM EDT
[#47]
Sorry, but you are wrong. There are plenty of 80-20 certified vehicles and more on the way. You need to do a little more research. Check your fuel cap. You may be driving one and not even know it. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:35:56 PM EDT
[#48]
That is the current problem with almost EVERY alternative combustion fuel The energy input to refine it is higher than the energy produced by consuming it... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:36:02 PM EDT
[#49]
http://www.greasecar.com/
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2004 12:38:19 PM EDT
[#50]
My service manual says no more than 10% alchohol, 91 or higher octane gasoline only. The car is a 97 Z28 running a 350cid LT1 Flexible Fuel Vehicles are limited to a few types commonly purchased by government. The Ford Taurus is one that I can think of, and only certain models... |
|||
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
