ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , global warming , green energy issues

Reply
Old 8th February 2019, 01:21 PM   #121
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Bring back zeppilins!
NOT a stupid idea, and smaller ones can be powered with electric engines too

The problem there, however, is that helium is not an abundant gas, and hydrogen is, well, not a good idea because Hindenburg/R101
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 01:22 PM   #122
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,291
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I like it. Seems like the kind of disaster that you could easily write a superhero into, if that was your thing.
Isn't the movie set in '84?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 01:38 PM   #123
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,280
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Are those the only two options? Stop climate change completely or do nothing?
First, we can't stop climate change, the best we can do is alter it. Second, of course doing nothing isn't the only other option. But the "Green New Deal" is worse than doing nothing. That doesn't mean that there aren't any options better than doing nothing. That doesn't follow from anything I have said here or anywhere else.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 02:32 PM   #124
Lurch
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 940
Originally Posted by Donal View Post
It was passed in the middle of the night by the Republicans in late 2017. They are currently working on expanding it by eliminating the inheritance tax.
Awesome rejoinder!
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 02:57 PM   #125
Lurch
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 940
We need to get past non renewables. Including Nuclear. We already have an energy resource we're confident of lasting for billions of years--the Sun. It provides just about 1kW/m^2. And before the Moon sails too far in its expanding orbit, tidal energy from the movement of currents (as well as wave energy) in a medium of density 1t/m^3 is considerable. Even the motion of air, 1/1,000 the density of water, is a viable source to tap. And we already have the technology to tap these; simply expand and create more jobs in these fields.

As to the cessation of air travel. Intercontinental at least will be necessary for some time. And perhaps coast-to-coast. But high speed rail should be seriously looked at between at least major hubs within and among adjacent states.

We really have become spoiled by the high energy yield, low cost to obtain fossil fuels. The increasing cost to get at the dwindling stuff left, and its utility for more than just burning, demands that we get serious in transitioning.

As for pie-in-the-sky. Recall Kennedy's 1961 challenge to put men on the Moon before the end of that decade. The first little liquid-fueled rocket was lit only 32 years earlier! Suitably motivated, a nation can work seeming miracles. I only hope the motivator won't come down to actual, looming extinction.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 03:01 PM   #126
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 32,537
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
I think the key thing would be to convert aircraft to run on cow flatulence. There's a whole new industry just waiting to be created, the capture, containment, and transportation of Bovine Generated Aviation Propellent. Who says you can't kill one bird with two stones?
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Bring back zeppilins!
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
NOT a stupid idea, and smaller ones can be powered with electric engines too

The problem there, however, is that helium is not an abundant gas, and hydrogen is, well, not a good idea because Hindenburg/R101
I think the return of the grand airship is well past it's due. Okay, here's a question, are cow farts lighter than air? Granted, you'll still have the potential for another explosive disaster, but I'm getting the impression cow pooties are abundantly plentiful.
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 03:23 PM   #127
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,291
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
First, we can't stop climate change, the best we can do is alter it.
Pedantic. Can we reverse the effects and return to 1850 levels or not?

Quote:
Second, of course doing nothing isn't the only other option. But the "Green New Deal" is worse than doing nothing.
How so?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 04:16 PM   #128
The Shrike
Philosopher
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,035
Do belching cows produce a lot of methane? Yes. Is this good? No, not if we're concerned about greenhouse gas emissions. Also not good - methane release from melting permafrost.

High-speed rail? Bring it. Get rid of planes? Not happening. More efficient planes, fewer flights? Bring it.

Retrofitting every building? Bring it. But first, SMART GRID to accommodate distributed renewable installations all over our built environment. Vertical axis wind turbines and home solar (perhaps just enough to power a few major appliances like water heater, refrigerator) would be huge advance toward cutting down reliance on fossil fuels and create millions of manufacturing, retail, and service jobs.

NukesNukesNukesNukesandmoreNukes!

All kinds of other stuff, too: lawns, boo! xeriscaping, yay! leaf blowers, boo! rakes, yay!
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 04:54 PM   #129
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,661
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
I think the return of the grand airship is well past it's due. Okay, here's a question, are cow farts lighter than air? Granted, you'll still have the potential for another explosive disaster, but I'm getting the impression cow pooties are abundantly plentiful.
Cow Farts powering a Zeppelin?

Oh, the Humanity.....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 04:57 PM   #130
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,661
Originally Posted by Donal View Post
Both. No one should be forced into labor just to survive. Society has enough resources to make sure everyone has the basics.

How about we rethink the concept of "work"? Instead of "work or die" we work to better ourselves and the world around us?
Hate to tell you this, but the sixties are over....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:06 PM   #131
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,280
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Pedantic. Can we reverse the effects and return to 1850 levels or not?
No, we cannot.

Quote:
How so?
It won't accomplish much, and it will wreck our economy in the process.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:26 PM   #132
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
First, we can't stop climate change, the best we can do is alter it. Second, of course doing nothing isn't the only other option. But the "Green New Deal" is worse than doing nothing. That doesn't mean that there aren't any options better than doing nothing. That doesn't follow from anything I have said here or anywhere else.
So you acknowledge that climate change is real and is caused by human activity?

Well Angels and ministers of grace defend us!
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 8th February 2019 at 05:31 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:30 PM   #133
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Cow Farts powering a Zeppelin?

Oh, the Humanity.....

Nitpick: not "powering", "making buoyant"


However, I did see what you did there!
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:37 PM   #134
novaphile
Quester of Doglets
Moderator
 
novaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,974
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Retrofit every building in America??????????
Leaving cost aside is that even feasible?
There's no reason why it shouldn't be feasible.

Insulation may be fitted to the inside or outside, if you can keep the capitalists out of it, you don't have to use the extra-burny kind.

I've retro-fitted my place with insulation in the ceiling, double glazed windows, exterior window shades, solar thermal hot water system, solar (photo-voltaic) panels to generate electricity.

Even with the 20 kWh I use each week to re-charge my car, I still end up with ridiculously low power bills. (Last quarter was $20, highest usage quarter in winter is $200).

Solar panels (PV and thermal) can be fitted to the outside walls of a building as well as the roof. I've seen buildings with solar panels as window shades/awnings.

You can even use solar technology (glass box basically) to heat the air in your home during winter. The box, outside on the wall facing the sun, heats up due to the greenhouse effect, and the air is circulated through your home. These seem pretty common in Nordic/Scandanavian countries.

Feasible, yeah.
__________________
We would be better, and braver, to engage in enquiry, rather than indulge in the idle fancy, that we already know -- Plato.
novaphile is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:44 PM   #135
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
I was going to point out that, though replacing air travel with high speed rail is at least somewhat plausible on land, it's not going to work too well for crossing oceans. The whole thing is really pie in the sky nonsense anyway.
Well another thing is that both Boeing and Airbus are working with the likes of Rolls Royce and others to develop electric powered jet engines, which would make the entire argument moot. Airbus is hoping to have the world's first hybrid aircraft operational next year.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:47 PM   #136
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
We could do this with clean nuclear power in 10-20 years.

Plus it doesn't take into account the possibility of fusion power being possible in 10-20 years.
They have been saying that for the last 50-60 years!
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 05:50 PM   #137
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,280
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
So you acknowledge that climate change is real and is caused by human activity?
The climate is changing and humans contribute to that change, yes.

Quote:
Well Angels and ministers of grace defend us!
Your surprise indicates you don't actually know much about me.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:09 PM   #138
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
Do belching cows produce a lot of methane? Yes. Is this good? No, not if we're concerned about greenhouse gas emissions. Also not good - methane release from melting permafrost.
and even worse, from the frozen sea bed deposits, if they melt, we are cooked.

Quote:
High-speed rail? Bring it. Get rid of planes? Not happening. More efficient planes, fewer flights? Bring it.
Not just more efficient, but also new power systems. Rolls Royce is working hard on their E-Fan, and converting to a hybrid plane with a high efficiency engine powered on ethanol partnered with an E-Fan engine on each wing would result in a very environmentally friendly aircraft.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:17 PM   #139
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Well another thing is that both Boeing and Airbus are working with the likes of Rolls Royce and others to develop electric powered jet engines, which would make the entire argument moot. Airbus is hoping to have the world's first hybrid aircraft operational next year.
There are already commercially available electrically powered light aircraft...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CS3isCH4bk

If we are to ever replace jet fuel powered airliners with electrically powered aircraft, we may have to settle for smaller aircraft with more flights.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:18 PM   #140
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
It won't accomplish much, and it will wreck our economy in the process.
Just like the motor car destroyed the economy by putting all the blacksmiths, cart makers and farriers out of business.

Moving to a non-fossil fuel based economy just means retraining people to do the jobs that will be needed creating the new technologies that will run the new economy. In a lot of cases factories can be retooled and workers retrained very quickly because the new tech is very similar to the older, in other cases it might require a lot of retraining, but that's how the world works.

The energy industries such as BP, Exxon-Mobil, Shell, and others have been preparing to switch to more green tech for over a decade. Doing so won't hit them as hard as you might believe. Likewise car manufacturers have been moving towards EV's. Appliance manufacturers have been making more efficiency appliances. They have all seen the writing on the wall and have been preparing to change over, and any that haven't, well they kinda deserve to fall behind for not evolving their business model to survive with the times.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:22 PM   #141
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
There are already commercially available electrically powered light aircraft...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CS3isCH4bk

If we are to ever replace jet fuel powered airliners with electrically powered aircraft, we may have to settle for smaller aircraft with more flights.
They are currently looking at short haul flights for pure electric, but once the tech is settled and they are confident, I can't see that there would be too many issues with something like an electric/ethanol based hybrid 787 for long haul flights as well.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:25 PM   #142
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Here is something worth considering too.

A typical short-haul jet airliner is in the air for approximately 40,000 flight hours over a lifetime of 25 years or 220,000 hours. This works out to about one hour in flight for every five hours on the ground. This means that there will be plenty of charging time for aircraft between flights even beyond the possibility of switching out the batteries for a fully charged set in the event of a quicker turnaround being needed.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:34 PM   #143
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Here is something worth considering too.

A typical short-haul jet airliner is in the air for approximately 40,000 flight hours over a lifetime of 25 years or 220,000 hours. This works out to about one hour in flight for every five hours on the ground. This means that there will be plenty of charging time for aircraft between flights even beyond the possibility of switching out the batteries for a fully charged set in the event of a quicker turnaround being needed.
This would probably be the better idea. Design the planes so that the battery arrays could just be slotted in and out on the ground, so the plane lands and once at the gate, they open the wings, pull the battery arrays and take them to the hanger, hook them up to the charger and pick up the set of fully charged arrays, take them back to the plane, slot them into place, and you're ready to go. It would even allow you to replace the arrays later with more efficient ones which could give the plane a longer range.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 06:37 PM   #144
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,772
I hope you have High-Speed Rail to the Moon
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:08 PM   #145
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
They are currently looking at short haul flights for pure electric, but once the tech is settled and they are confident, I can't see that there would be too many issues with something like an electric/ethanol based hybrid 787 for long haul flights as well.

The all-up weight of a B787-8 is 506,000lb. About 220,000 lb of that is fuel, which would not have to be carried. Yes, there would need to be batteries, but there is no way that they would weigh anywhere the fuel weight. There there is the engine weight - the RR Trent 1000 weighs about 13,000lb, and there are two of them.

Take a look at he Wright Electric Airliner



NOTE: Looks remarkably reminiscent of one of the first commercial jet airliners

Construction of an airliner of that size would be radically different from how current airliners are made.

1. Wings that do not need to contain fuel tanks can be made lighter and stronger and be made of composite materials.

2. The centre tank would be replaced with a battery bank that could simply be designed to be dropped out of the bottom.

3. The 16 electric-jet engines built into the wings would likely weigh much less than two fuel-jet engines, would dramatically reduce drag, and bring their weight closer to CofG.

4. No hydraulics, all controls are fly-by-wire. Even internal and external lighting can be LED.

5. Much of the upper surfaces could be covered or partially covered with solar-electric materials to help extend the range.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:09 PM   #146
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
I hope you have High-Speed Rail to the Moon
Why would be need it? We already have LH/LOX rockets capable of getting us to orbit.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:14 PM   #147
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,103
Batteries are the part that disturbs me about switching from fossil fuels to other power sources. You pretty much can't make an electric vehicle much smaller than an aircraft carrier without them, but the chemistry they involve is nasty, and I don't just mean in case of a leak. The stuff they're made of needs to be mined, then they wear out, and then there's no good place to dispose of it. Maybe there will be a way to recycle them, thus cutting off both the disposal problem and the production problem... or maybe supercapacitors will take over... but we're not there yet.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:15 PM   #148
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Take a look at he Wright Electric Airliner
Nice, either way, I think that the claim that we'd have to give up air travel in a green economy has been totally and completely debunked.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:17 PM   #149
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Batteries are the part that disturbs me about switching from fossil fuels to other power sources. You pretty much can't make an electric vehicle much smaller than an aircraft carrier without them, but the chemistry they involve is nasty, and I don't just mean in case of a leak. The stuff they're made of needs to be mined, then they wear out, and then there's no good place to dispose of it. Maybe there will be a way to recycle them, thus cutting off both the disposal problem and the production problem... or maybe supercapacitors will take over... but we're not there yet.
Last time I checked there has been numerous navy ships that were smaller than an Aircraft Carrier and used nuclear reactors (the last cruiser was decommissioned in 1999, but there are still a ton of subs used by multiple nations worldwide.) I would also think that Hydrogen Fuel Cells would be perfect for ships.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)


Last edited by PhantomWolf; 8th February 2019 at 07:21 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:26 PM   #150
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,280
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Just like the motor car destroyed the economy by putting all the blacksmiths, cart makers and farriers out of business.
You are correct, it didn’t. There was a very gradual transition over much more than 10 years, with horses only being eliminated as a common method of transportation when cars became more economical. No government fiat was required, and the economy had time to adjust.

Maybe electric cars will one day replace the internal combustion engine, but they aren’t ready to do so now.

Quote:
Moving to a non-fossil fuel based economy just means retraining people to do the jobs that will be needed creating the new technologies that will run the new economy.
This is delusional. Only a small fraction of the population is capable of creating new technologies, and they’re largely doing that already. And fossil fuels have inherent advantages that we aren’t even close to replicating with alternatives.

Quote:
In a lot of cases factories can be retooled and workers retrained very quickly because the new tech is very similar to the older, in other cases it might require a lot of retraining, but that's how the world works.
No, that is not how it works. Not even close. Factory worker training isn’t the problem. Retooling is a bigger deal that you seem to appreciate, and what exactly do you think they will be retooling for?

Quote:
The energy industries such as BP, Exxon-Mobil, Shell, and others have been preparing to switch to more green tech for over a decade. Doing so won't hit them as hard as you might believe.
Yeah, no. They have been preparing to make “green” energy a bigger part of their portfolio. None of them are prepared to stop using fossil fuels. And the problem isn’t what happens to them, the problem is what happens to their customers. Green energy can not satisfy the economy’s need for energy.

Quote:
Likewise car manufacturers have been moving towards EV's.
Which are too expensive, suffer range limits, and require fossil fuels to charge them. Our electric grid cannot provide enough electricity to charge our cars if everyone switched, and that’s with keeping fossil fuel plants, AND ignoring whether we can get enough lithium, cobalt, and rare earth metals to produce all those electric vehicles. They are a niche product, and will be for some time.

Quote:
Appliance manufacturers have been making more efficiency appliances.
Exactly: they are already doing that. No green new deal required. And there aren’t a lot more gains to be had without degrading performance, which is already a problem.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:32 PM   #151
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
This would probably be the better idea. Design the planes so that the battery arrays could just be slotted in and out on the ground, so the plane lands and once at the gate, they open the wings, pull the battery arrays and take them to the hanger, hook them up to the charger and pick up the set of fully charged arrays, take them back to the plane, slot them into place, and you're ready to go. It would even allow you to replace the arrays later with more efficient ones which could give the plane a longer range.
Having worked in the aviation industry and in military aviation, I was more thinking of aircraft flying to smaller destination airports, where having "universal aircraft chargers" would be more likely and more practical, than having a supply of spare battery packs. Since aircraft spend that 5 to 1 ratio on the ground, it makes sense for airports to have built in chargers right there at the hard-standing. They could even have charging trucks which would trail out a mains power lead from the terminal.

However, that brings up a very important thought.... STANDARDISATION. Currently, the aviation industry uses a universal jet fuel, Jet A or Jet A-1, which is produced to a standardised international specification. Anywhere in the world that an aircraft lands, they can refuel with Jet A or Jet A1 dispensed either at the hard standing point, or brought out to them on a fuel truck. This must be made the same for electric aircraft. Very early on in development, if they hope to have a viable electric aircraft, the industry MUST make a decision to standardise their battery packs. This may need some kind of modular design to allow large packs for large aircraft to be assembled from small packs used on smaller aircraft. A situation where your Airbus A-320e arrived at an airport, only to find that they only have battery packs for the Boeing 727e and the two are not interchangeable would make an electric based aircraft industry untenable. Even a universal cradle and connection system would probably suffice.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:44 PM   #152
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Last time I checked there has been numerous navy ships that were smaller than an Aircraft Carrier and used nuclear reactors (the last cruiser was decommissioned in 1999, but there are still a ton of subs used by multiple nations worldwide.) I would also think that Hydrogen Fuel Cells would be perfect for ships.
A nuclear powered icebreaker...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Let_Pobedy
...one of nine that have been built, six of which are still in service, and a further two are under construction.

Also, there this one...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_submarine_NR-1

A nuclear powered deep submergence vehicle, it only weighed 400 tons...
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:45 PM   #153
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,280
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
The all-up weight of a B787-8 is 506,000lb. About 220,000 lb of that is fuel, which would not have to be carried. Yes, there would need to be batteries, but there is no way that they would weigh anywhere the fuel weight. There there is the engine weight - the RR Trent 1000 weighs about 13,000lb, and there are two of them.

Take a look at he Wright Electric Airliner
The 787-8 has a range of over 7,000 miles. The Wright has a range of under 300 miles. These are not comparable aircraft. You cannot make an electric passenger plane that can travel 7,000 miles because the batteries would weigh far more than an equivalent amount of fuel. And so far, the Wright is just a design idea, so who knows when or even if they can get an actual working plane that performs like they claim. I wish them luck, and it would be cool if they can pull it off, but either it will work on its own and the Green New Deal isn't necessary to get it off the ground, or it won't work and the Green New Deal won't rescue it from failure.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:48 PM   #154
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,291
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No, we cannot.
So you're saying that we can increase the amount of heat in the atmosphere, but not reduce it? I don't think you'll find many experts to agree with you.

Of course we can STOP global warming. If we go pie in the sky, we can stop all emissions immediately, and it'll stop the warming. As for the warming we've already contributed to, we could sequester the carbon and methane over a certain amount of time, which would bring the temperatures back down. Now, I'm not saying that's politically feasible or easy in any way, but it's not impossible.

Quote:
It won't accomplish much, and it will wreck our economy in the process.
Specifics.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:52 PM   #155
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,291
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Quote:
So you acknowledge that climate change is real and is caused by human activity?
The climate is changing and humans contribute to that change, yes.



Your surprise indicates you don't actually know much about me.
Well, we know enough to tell you've changed Cooky's question while answering it.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 07:54 PM   #156
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Maybe electric cars will one day replace the internal combustion engine, but they aren’t ready to do so now.
There is no "maybe" about it.

In Sweden, electric cars will be 65% of the market by 2025 this is only six years away)

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/02...are-in-sweden/

... and Volvo are going all-electric. They are ceasing the manufacture of internal combustion powered cars this year.

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style...tric-from-2019

Other manufactures will follow, or die.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 8th February 2019 at 08:02 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 08:01 PM   #157
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,525
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The 787-8 has a range of over 7,000 miles. The Wright has a range of under 300 miles. These are not comparable aircraft. You cannot make an electric passenger plane that can travel 7,000 miles because the batteries would weigh far more than an equivalent amount of fuel. And so far, the Wright is just a design idea, so who knows when or even if they can get an actual working plane that performs like they claim. I wish them luck, and it would be cool if they can pull it off, but either it will work on its own and the Green New Deal isn't necessary to get it off the ground, or it won't work and the Green New Deal won't rescue it from failure.
Even so, if the amount of fuel-jet flying can be reduced so that only long-haul international flights, with highly fuel efficient airliners use jet engines, and shorter commuter flights are almost exclusively electric powered, that will go a long, long way towards reducing the airline industry's contribution to emissions.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 08:17 PM   #158
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Having worked in the aviation industry and in military aviation, I was more thinking of aircraft flying to smaller destination airports, where having "universal aircraft chargers" would be more likely and more practical, than having a supply of spare battery packs. Since aircraft spend that 5 to 1 ratio on the ground, it makes sense for airports to have built in chargers right there at the hard-standing. They could even have charging trucks which would trail out a mains power lead from the terminal.
The problem with the 5:1 ratio is that a plane doesn't fly 1 hour and then spend 5 on the ground, it flies a whole bunch of 1-2 hour legs through the day with perhaps an hour between each at most, and the sits on the ground over night, and it does this day in and day out for 18 months, and then goes to maintenance where it is on the ground for several weeks before going back into service to rinse and repeat.

This really doesn't allow for 5 hours of charging to one hour of flight, so you want to be able to have the plane back ready to go afap for its next flight, and the best way to handle that is via the ability to swap in a fully charged pack and the charge the old one up and put it into a different aircraft when it's finished charging. Smaller air ports are likely to have less flights in and out, so it's quite possible that the next plane to visit would be the one you'd be putting the pack in.

If for example we look at the flights to my home town, we basically have one plane that flies from here to wellington at just before 7am, leaves Wellington to return here at 8:40am, then heads back to Wellington at 10am before servicing several other routes in the afternoon, then it returns here at 8:10pm where it stays over night. Flights are about an hour, and it stays on the ground at the airports from half an hour to an hour between flights. Trying to keep it charged all day would be a bit of a nightmare.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 08:19 PM   #159
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,750
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Even so, if the amount of fuel-jet flying can be reduced so that only long-haul international flights, with highly fuel efficient airliners use jet engines, and shorter commuter flights are almost exclusively electric powered, that will go a long, long way towards reducing the airline industry's contribution to emissions.
And it would be even better if those long hauls were using hybrid systems, and ethanol rather than A1.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2019, 08:24 PM   #160
The Shrike
Philosopher
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,035
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Even so, if the amount of fuel-jet flying can be reduced so that only long-haul international flights, with highly fuel efficient airliners use jet engines, and shorter commuter flights are almost exclusively electric powered, that will go a long, long way towards reducing the airline industry's contribution to emissions.
Exactly. So often in discussions like this, people lose sight of partial solutions because the full solution is untenable. Home solar is fraught with this. So many people want to install home solar but lack the $$ to pony up the tens of thousand$ needed for full conversion. Instead, solar calculators should focus on reducing – not eliminating – a home's reliance on fossil fuels. Heck, just running an air conditioning unit or hot water heater on solar would help enormously to reduce a home's carbon footprint. A partial set-up like this would (I think) also negate the issue of the panels generating too much capacity on sunny days and having to account for that extra going into the grid.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:23 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.