Now that there is funny, -I don't care who you are...

 

I've read (and believe) that the cellular metabolism we run/walk/work on is the most efficient process known to man.

That makes the horse-drawn carriage a lot more efficient than anything on the road. Need fuel? Stop for a while and let the horse eat the grass on the side of the road. When it's done eating, continue on your journey. And if the horse has been trained well, you even have an autopilot for the way home

Anyway, the "bioengineered" gasoline plant is actually a VERY GOOD idea. Bring the process down to the cellular/molecular level.

Produce alcohol, acetone, benzene, xylol, could be almost anything. As long as it wasn't toxic to the plant/animal.

I can see PETA now. Millions of rats staked out in the sun converting sunlight to fuel for automobiles. Distilleries filled with rat-pee.

Or corn that you can just crush the kernels, distill the liquid and come up with fuel. Then, use the rest of the product as building materials.

I wonder, BTU vs. acreage, what could be produced that way vs. fermenting/distilling corn/soybeans/etc.

 

Oil we need to depend on those damn A-Rabs that we should have bombed out years ago, but acreage we've got plenty of right here in the good old USA! Lets get to planting, make some farmers happy instead of King Ala Areeb. Good for the environment too, for our economy and national pride!

 

We could use a little less talk like that around here, thank you.

I do agree with the acreage thing though.

 

Gool 'ol Mother Nature has had a few hundred million (billion?) years head start on us to perfect that one! We've got a ways to go yet!

Maybe the next step is exactly that... engines powered by artificial arms and biceps instead of pistons. Just feed it an extra dose of sugar to give it a 'sugar high' so you can pass the guy in front of you. Get that engine overhauled when the first sign of arthritis starts slowing you down ;-)

 

Well, yeah, that's a good point - but clone horse or some other long-distance sprinting type animal (not cheetah, no stamina) parts.

Clydesdale muscles for trucks, Race-horse muscles for sports cars...

Disgusting, but hey, it would work, and be darn efficient. Go down to the supermarket for an engine replacement. Open the cover on the motor, replace three large muscles, hook up the blood supply and away you go ...

I wonder if anyone actually took two or three muscles, mounted around a crankshaft, and using electrical shocks on each one in the right order, was able to turn the crankshaft???

I know, ethically, this is quite upsetting to some people...

Ever hear of nano-bots? Or nanomachines? I'm amazed at the technology, and what can be done on such a small scale, but compare the efficiency and longeviity (and self-replication) of a single cell to a nanomachine. We've been able to make our most inefficient machines the size of cells

 

The Amphitheatre at Shoreline Park near you is built on a landfill, and the first year of concerts people on the lawn got burned when their ciggies and other burnables ignited methane coming ut of the ground.

 

Some in the EV world say that the technology of lithium ion for EV's/hybrids is here but being squelched by Chevron. Some of these folks sound a little loopy, but others sound quite knowledgeable. PM me for the Yahoo group name if you are interested.

The story: A small company by the name of Cobaysys (sp?) had developed a L-ion battery that lasted through many charges, and stored a lot of power. These batteries could easily power a Rav-4 EV or one of Fords Ranger EV's over 150 miles on a charge, using the same number of batteries [as lead acid setup].

Chevron bought the company and when Toyota started using the batteries (or tech like it) they were sued by Chevron. The details are sealed by the court, but rumour has it that Toyota has agreed not to use the technology for ten years. Chevron refuses to comment on the suit, or deny the charges. Chevron refuses to sell the batteries to ANYONE.

A plug-in hybrid would be a huge step in the right direction (not all grid power is fossil fuel based).Even President Bush the other day endorsed the idea of plug in hybrids, something that EV'ers have been pushing for.

Even better would be "Serial Hybrids" where the car is really an electric car (with Cobaysys batteries) charged at night, then when extra power and/or distance is needed a samll generator kicks in to add what's needed. I seem to recall an EV'er tell me his car needed 20-25kw to cruise at 70 on the highway.

The REAL problem with getting car companies to build EV's is that they have so few moving parts as compared to internal combustion engines. And no oil changes, less fluids, etc.

 

Batteries store, not generate, power. You can believe cosnspiracy theories about oil comnpanies, car companies or the government all you want. That doesnt negate the laws of physics and chemistry.

Unless we go all, or mostly, nuke for electricity generation, these other arguments are moot. Plugging in a car to a power source that burns natural gas, fuel oil or coal wastes most of the energy and solves nothing.

Jim

 

I never said batteries generate power, in fact I specifically said the L-ion STORED more (per pound of battery) than lead-acid. And I specifically used the word "rumor" not "fact" in relating the story about Cobaysys.

But with something as vital to our country as this, rumors need to be checked out, and trees need to be shaken. Complacency is not a virtue.

And not all grid power is generated through fossil fuels, there is already wind, water, and solar to charge batteries from the grid. I know of several folks who have rooftop solar and their energy bills break even at years end (meaning they are energy producers to the grid part of the time). For one guy this includes charging his two electric cars at night, after feeding the grid during the day.

If the power companies would actually pay for the excess generation, these folks would increase the size of their systems. But there's no incentive.

Nukes may be needed as a stopgap until other technologies are produced, but even if scientists have figured out how to stabilize the waste for the needed thousands of years, the weak link is the human(s) in charge of the storage.

In a world where a scant 50 years after the fact schools and playgrounds are built on forgotton toxic waste dumps, you expect me to believe that people can be trusted to safely store nuke waste for a period longer than [to date] recorded history?

 

Actually, lead acid batteries store chemicals, a chemical reaction inside the battery _produces_ electricity. Capacitors store electrons (electricity). For proof of this, take a lemon, insert a strip of zinc, and a strip of copper roughly an inch apart, take a multimeter and test the two ends of metal. There is electricity, without putting any electricity into the lemon.

 

I think the original gist was that batteries need to be recharged, they do not recover on their own making "free" energy.

 

Rooftop solar cells and all the rest is nice to talk about, but not realistic for the masses anytime soon. I just read in National Geographic that coal provides about HALF of all electric power generated in the US. That much worse than I thought. A car recharged off the power grid, especially counting all the transmission and conversion losses, is a pollution disaster compared to a 2006 model year gasoline powered automobile of comparable size and performance.

Jim

 

Dry cell batteries are not as reliable as a good old lead acid battery. In fact, the National Fire Prevention Association prohibits the use of dry cell batteries in life safety devices because they are not reliable enough.

 

we need something like on an aircraft carrier or subamrine AKA Nuclear Power