How much longer?

On Apr 8, 10:08*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:

What parts of the airport are solar powered? *Runway lights? *Lights in the
FBO? * How do they supply heating/air conditioning?
--
Jay Honeck

No runway lights. One paved and two grass runways (Runways mowed by
fossil fuel burning tractor). EVERYTHING else, including the office/
bar is solar. I dont have one of those fancy electric hangar door
openers (I need the exersize anyways) but I do have electric outlets
in my hangar. The owner of the field is not a tree hugger or a
granola, I think he was just looking for the cheapest way to do
things.
As for heat and air; Swamp cooler in the summer (Or we sit outside on
the patio for our cookouts on the weekends) and the place is closed
much of the winter (Owner travels south for the winter and no snow
removal but you can land and take off when the runway is clear). I
will admit it is a bit out of the ordinary but I brought it up to show
a little of what is possible.
Frank

In article "F. Baum" writes:

Jay, Ill try to get things a little more on topic. The airport where I
keep one of my airplanes is run almost entirely on Solar power (There
is a small diesel engine for the well) . Most of the equipment ,
including the batteries, was purchased government surplus and the
system has payed for itself several times over.

And, paying for that stuff at retail would cost *lots* more. If the
taxpayers had not paid for it already, it would be way out of reach.

As an interesting side
note, all the hangars on the field are secondhand . I am 30 minutes
from a major metro area and I pay a buck fifty a month for a hangar.

And a bit farther than that out of San Francisco, $120/month will get
you a tail-in tie down outside, but talk is that it may go up substantially
in the next few months.

Alan

"Jay Honeck" wrote:
If I were "King for a day", I would decree the following "4 Steps to
American Energy Independence":

1. New refineries are not being built because draconian environmental
rules prevent them from being constructed. As of now, all
environmental restrictions on oil refinery construction are lifted.

It's probably cheaper to "outsource" refining and ship only the refined
product into the country. Not sure why it matters that the refineries are
in the country where the refined products are consumed - you may as well
decree that some of the international oil fields be moved into the country
too since it makes about as much sense. ;-)

3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian
environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all
environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are
lifted.

Not needed:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...n6xZeeLKqBXnLg

4. By decree, hydrogen fuel is now the way of the future -- period.
From this point on, by my decree, the scientific and industrial
capacity of the United States will be used to perfect a hydrogen
distribution system to replace our current gasoline distribution
system, and all cars will be powered by hydrogen. Source:
http://tinyurl.com/6hklhf

Well at least you linked to an article that makes clear that the hydrogen
has to be generated from another source of energy. H2 sucks anyway on
several counts - and your last decree will essentially ground all small
aircraft, including your own. Contrary to your ultimate goal, I assume.

Currently, the only known way of cramming hydrogen into a small enough
volume to be of use in your airplane is, ironically, by _lightly_ binding
the H atoms to something like, oh say, carbon. A hydrocarbon.

In article Bertie the Bunyip writes:
"Mike Isaksen" wrote in news:KRwKj.1375$XC1.1247
@trndny08:


"Alan" wrote ...
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
I will fly as long as there is air. Gasoline be damned.
I started without it and I'll finish withour if needs be.

You say you started without - how?
Even gliders seem to need tows.

Maybe he'll build an electric motor rope launch skid powered by wind
turbines.



Could do. There's lots of ways you can winch launch. The current world
record distance flight was launched off the back of a car. Probably a
thirty second tow, if that.

I doubt that this was an electric car charged from solar or wind power,
was it? I'll bet it burned gasoline (or perhaps diesel fuel).

Point is, there's a million ways to skin a cat. If neceesity dictated, a
way would be found.

And your answer is?

Unless you have a better answer, I suggest folks start building nuclear
power plants, and looking hard at extracting carbon from the atmosphere to
combine with hydrogen from water to produce various petroleum fuels.
We are not prepared to deal with hydrogen -- I can just imagine the news
stories about the result of accidents at hydrogen fueling stations.

Alan

"Phil J" wrote in message
...

So I guess the huge increases in demand for oil from China and India
aren't responsible for the high price of oil?

For that, we can thank Wall street and its sole focus on quarterly results,
which has resulted in the outsourcing of engineering jobs to India and
China.

In article Jim Logajan writes:
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian
environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all
environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are
lifted.

Not needed:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...n6xZeeLKqBXnLg

2 plants in the country? Good to get started, but We should probably
be building 20 - 30 in California alone.

However:
California law prohibits the construction of any new nuclear power
plants in California until the Energy Commission finds that the
federal government has approved and there exists a demonstrated
technology for the permanent disposal of spent fuel from these
facilities.
Source: http://www.energy.ca.gov/nuclear/california.html

We need to do something about that. We should be recycling this
slightly used nuclear fuel, not throwing it away.

[ Now, I would suggest that all electrical power to Sacramento (the
CA capitol) be shut off until the legislature comes to their senses. ]

4. By decree, hydrogen fuel is now the way of the future -- period.
From this point on, by my decree, the scientific and industrial
capacity of the United States will be used to perfect a hydrogen
distribution system to replace our current gasoline distribution
system, and all cars will be powered by hydrogen. Source:
http://tinyurl.com/6hklhf

Well at least you linked to an article that makes clear that the hydrogen
has to be generated from another source of energy. H2 sucks anyway on
several counts - and your last decree will essentially ground all small
aircraft, including your own. Contrary to your ultimate goal, I assume.

Indeed. Hydrogen is a difficult fuel, with fairly low energy density
for a givin volume. It is also difficult to handle and transport safely.

Currently, the only known way of cramming hydrogen into a small enough
volume to be of use in your airplane is, ironically, by _lightly_ binding
the H atoms to something like, oh say, carbon. A hydrocarbon.

Which makes for a better fuel, safer, and well suited to running our
aircraft.

All we need to do is extract the carbon from the atmosphere, and I have
seen hints that such may be reasonably doable.

Alan

In article Jim Logajan writes:
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

3. New nuclear power plants are not being built because draconian
environmental rules prevent their construction. As of now all
environmental restrictions on construction of new nuclear plants are
lifted.

Not needed:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...n6xZeeLKqBXnLg


Oh, in my previous post, I forgot to mention the drawback that next time the
government decides to run in circles about security from aircraft, they will
probably ban us from flying near these nuclear plants again, so not all is
good about them.

Last time they were including a small plant that had been decomissioned in 1967,
and had no nuclear material remaining on site. It just sat in a major VFR flyway.

Alan

"Tom Conner" wrote in message
m...

"Phil J" wrote in message
...

So I guess the huge increases in demand for oil from China and India
aren't responsible for the high price of oil?

For that, we can thank Wall street and its sole focus on quarterly
results,
which has resulted in the outsourcing of engineering jobs to India and
China.

"What would rather be doing in the 21st Century, toasters, or CAT Scan
machines?" - Jack Welch, CEO GE, 1981-2000.

Tom would rather be doing toasters, evidently.

On 2008-04-08, Jay Maynard wrote:
Alternatives are impractical until there's a complete, comprehensive
distribution infrastructure in place. That'll take 20 years. There's also a
significant chicken-and-egg problem.

Diesel from algae has the potential for 10000 usg/acre used (and is more
of an industrial than agricultural process). So far it's not been
developed because oil has been so cheap.

The infrastructure already exists for that sort of fuel.

There's also no chicken and egg problem for using fuel more wisely.
We've only been wasteful of it because it's been so cheap it's not been
worth using it efficiently. There are significant efficiencies that can
be had that do not result in "economic squalor". For example, insulating
my Victorian house halved my winter heating bills and made the house
more pleasant to live in. Hardly 'squalor', in fact the very opposite.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

On 2008-04-08, Jay Honeck wrote:
Back during the LAST "energy crisis" in the 1970s, solar collectors sprouted
on rooftops like daisies. Everyone wanted to harness all that "free"
energy.

What we soon discovered, however, is that it was far from free. The thermal
stress on all that black plastic soon reduced the collectors to cracked and
leaky junk -- and it was all ABOVE YOUR HOUSE so that the leaks did the most
harm to your home.

That's a classic example of a straw man argument - comparing 70s junk
with properly made stuff of 2008 with CE approval.

Incidentally, our roofs already stop water coming in, or it would be
very inconvenient when it rained. Modern solar collectors don't mean a
wholesale removal of the roof underneath them, just holes to allow the
mountings.

Now, you say, could these not be made more durable today? You bet they
could, but at a cost that would amaze you.

No, not really. The only 'cost would amaze you' items are solar
photovoltaic panels which ARE very expensive.

plumbing out of, no matter how much money you spend on it, there is one
truism that every long-term property owner knows to be true: Eventually, it
WILL leak.

One day these problems may be overcome. Until then, the natural gas
furnaces and water heaters will continue to be the most efficient choices.

Guess what, they leak too. I had to spend significant money on mine
after an internal steam leak corroded internal parts and caused it to
fail.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.