Why Hydrogen Cars Aren't Really "Green"

[gslack]

That's another good reason for developing fusion power. Preparation of fuel for the reactor would create enormous amounts of hydrogen unusable for fusion, but perfect for running automobiles.

For more info go to: ITER - the way to new energy or Department of Energy - Fusion

That's what I use to power my cars. Here's a picture of one:

NIICCCEE!! is that the new flux capacitor version 2 model?

 

[pans trogladyta]

And you're the one asking how old people are?

keep it up proxy boy, watch how long it takes a mod to notice your BS.... you do realize if you are too blatant like this, they don't have to rely on your IP. if you make it your entire tactic like this, eventually they will see you are behind a proxy and decide you are hiding something.... but please continue...

And this gibberish means, what?

 

[gslack]

And you're the one asking how old people are?

keep it up proxy boy, watch how long it takes a mod to notice your BS.... you do realize if you are too blatant like this, they don't have to rely on your IP. if you make it your entire tactic like this, eventually they will see you are behind a proxy and decide you are hiding something.... but please continue...

And this gibberish means, what?

keep playing socko and you will see what it means.... like I said if its too ridiculous and it is your only tactic, eventually you will be taken exception to......

 

[westwall]

Hello konrad,

When you look at the historical record starting oh lets say the 1970's, so you will agree that it is relevant,the world was cooling. So much so that your AGW gurus told us that a new ice age was coming. Then when they didn't generate the fear they needed to grab some serious cold hard cash they were gifted by the next climate trend which just happened to be a warming trend that went on until 1998. Fortunately for them they found some allies in the various governments of the world and pushed through all sorts of legislataion to control "the catastrophic" heating they observed. Remember governments love to tax people.

The problem was the climate science just could'nt prove what they were pushing (becaue it is pseudo science) and then came the real catastrophe CLIMATEGATE. Where it was shown for the whole world to see that the AGW proponents were lying to the whole world. They were falsifying data (that's where the 'hide the decline' originates) they were preventing dissenting papers from being published (academic fraud and conspiracy to commit said fraud) thus ensuring that the only "peer reviewed" papers were their own, and in the case of the IPCC using reports from activist organizations with no peer review at all to foment regulations that in the case of the head of the IPCC Dr. Pechauri were very, very, very lucrative.

So now do you see the time line...1970's cooling, 1980's-1990's warming, 1998 to the present cooling once again. And all the while the CO2 concentrations are increasing.

Show the posts I perpetrated the so-called global cooling hoax.....
---------------------------------

To the board: That would be ANY of gslack's posts.

Are you trying to tell us that you HAVEN'T said the globe is cooling. I thought that's what you Icers believed!!! You've been trying to tell us the earth is cooling as long as I've been here. Then what WERE you complaining about when one scientist talked about "hiding the decline"? Now you're saying there is no decline!!! Are you confirming that "Climategate" was nothing more than an exercise in distraction, since you Icers have obviously lost the scientific debate?

 

[pans trogladyta]

keep playing socko and you will see what it means.... like I said if its too ridiculous and it is your only tactic, eventually you will be taken exception to......

You're still talking gibberish, is it your mother tongue?

 

[gslack]

Hello konrad,

When you look at the historical record starting oh lets say the 1970's, so you will agree that it is relevant,the world was cooling. So much so that your AGW gurus told us that a new ice age was coming. Then when they didn't generate the fear they needed to grab some serious cold hard cash they were gifted by the next climate trend which just happened to be a warming trend that went on until 1998. Fortunately for them they found some allies in the various governments of the world and pushed through all sorts of legislataion to control "the catastrophic" heating they observed. Remember governments love to tax people.

The problem was the climate science just could'nt prove what they were pushing (becaue it is pseudo science) and then came the real catastrophe CLIMATEGATE. Where it was shown for the whole world to see that the AGW proponents were lying to the whole world. They were falsifying data (that's where the 'hide the decline' originates) they were preventing dissenting papers from being published (academic fraud and conspiracy to commit said fraud) thus ensuring that the only "peer reviewed" papers were their own, and in the case of the IPCC using reports from activist organizations with no peer review at all to foment regulations that in the case of the head of the IPCC Dr. Pechauri were very, very, very lucrative.

So now do you see the time line...1970's cooling, 1980's-1990's warming, 1998 to the present cooling once again. And all the while the CO2 concentrations are increasing.

Show the posts I perpetrated the so-called global cooling hoax.....
---------------------------------

To the board: That would be ANY of gslack's posts.

Are you trying to tell us that you HAVEN'T said the globe is cooling. I thought that's what you Icers believed!!! You've been trying to tell us the earth is cooling as long as I've been here. Then what WERE you complaining about when one scientist talked about "hiding the decline"? Now you're saying there is no decline!!! Are you confirming that "Climategate" was nothing more than an exercise in distraction, since you Icers have obviously lost the scientific debate?

Just talk to his sock puppet.... he does that when he is caught...

 

[gslack]

You're still talking gibberish, is it your mother tongue?

Dude I don't even want to know about your mother's tongue..... Seriously... mother tongue????? Is this bring your ignorant kid to the forum day?

 

[konradv]

Westwall, regardless of the data on temps you care to chose, if CO2 levels keep going up, warming is inevitable. Where's the extra energy going, if not to heat the earth?

 

[gslack]

Westwall, regardless of the data on temps you care to chose, if CO2 levels keep going up, warming is inevitable. Where's the extra energy going, if not to heat the earth?

So according to you no matter what data or science shows, you are going with the warmers anyway.... Nice....

Still waiting on that link punk..... Come on asshole lets see a link to back your claim now...

 

[westwall]

Once again and in my own words, maybe there isn't a single bit of extra energy as written about here

Some Comments on Earth?s ?Missing Energy? Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

and simplified below


OK,

In a nutshell the good Doctor postulates that there is no missing energy. Instead he suggests that the missing energy is from the incoming solar radiation , not the outgoing IR radiation.

The mount of energy supposedly missing is actually very small, roughly 1 watt per square meter out of a total incoming energy of 235-240 watts per square meter. The problem as he sees it and he mentions the work of two other researches who's names I don't recall (because you want me to use my own words) is that the instrumentation is not accurate enough to measure such small amounts of energy.

He further states that between 2000 and 2008 CERES (the satellite data he used) shows no trend at all which suggests to him that the measurements themselves are suspect. He then goes on to show that measuring the temperatures of the oceans is much easier than trying to calculate the Earth Radiation Budget which is what the AGW folks were trying to do.

So in a nutshell there you go. Pseudo scientists trying to measure a extraordinarily small amount of energy with instruments that are not capable of the job while ignoring the extraordinarily difficult task of calculating the ERB in the first place.

Westwall, regardless of the data on temps you care to chose, if CO2 levels keep going up, warming is inevitable. Where's the extra energy going, if not to heat the earth?

 

[Old Rocks]

Hmmm, I bet that when you compare the relative efficencies the fuel powered vehicle is far more planet friendly.

Welcome to Plasma Boy Racing, home of White Zombie, the world's quickest street legal electric door slammer in the 1/4 mile drag.

Really fucking dumb, dummy. The efficiencies vastly favor the electric vehicle, even when the electrical source is a coal fired plant. When that source is rooftop solar, ICE are totally blown away.

 

[gslack]

Hmmm, I bet that when you compare the relative efficencies the fuel powered vehicle is far more planet friendly.

Welcome to Plasma Boy Racing, home of White Zombie, the world's quickest street legal electric door slammer in the 1/4 mile drag.

Really fucking dumb, dummy. The efficiencies vastly favor the electric vehicle, even when the electrical source is a coal fired plant. When that source is rooftop solar, ICE are totally blown away.

HAHHAHHAHAHA! well then show me a city that you can power by rooftop solar asshole..... or a solar powered electric car... or anything solar powered that will work at night or in a storm... Your solar powered pipe dream is about 10% efficient at the panels. SO your pipe dream relies on the idea we can fill all the rooftops and open spaces will solar panels and power the planet.... Well tell that to places like northern ALaska where the days and nights are so wierd...... Or how about the guy needing emergency surgery in the middle of the night....

Seriously man get your head out of the clouds....

 

[westwall]

Ol Fraud,

If the effiencies vastly favoured the electric cars why are there so few of them? I'ts real basic question and the answer is because they aren't. A solar powered generation system would take a week to recharge your precious electric car...sorry but that won't cut it pal. People actually need to get from point A to point B in under a week. The when you calculate in the cost of battery replacement (20-30K) you are actually paying more than 3 times the cost of a ICE vehicle.....yep that sounds like a real winning proposition to me.

For the umpteenth time. People aren't stupid...well some on this board have me worried,
if there were truly an efficient electric car they would be everywhere because car companies just LOVE to make money. And if the people wanted them they would have them. It is simple econ 101......which all of you obviously failed or didn't bother to take.

Hmmm, I bet that when you compare the relative efficencies the fuel powered vehicle is far more planet friendly.

Welcome to Plasma Boy Racing, home of White Zombie, the world's quickest street legal electric door slammer in the 1/4 mile drag.

Really fucking dumb, dummy. The efficiencies vastly favor the electric vehicle, even when the electrical source is a coal fired plant. When that source is rooftop solar, ICE are totally blown away.

 

[gslack]

Ah don't ya just love the way oldsock's mind works..... He sees a solar powered calculator and says "eureka! all we have to do is make this bigger!"... And then runs off screaming how it will work. Reality never comes into it at all....

 

[westwall]

Yes, it is sad. He is either senile or intellectually challenged.

Ah don't ya just love the way oldsock's mind works..... He sees a solar powered calculator and says "eureka! all we have to do is make this bigger!"... And then runs off screaming how it will work. Reality never comes into it at all....