The ethanol nightmare has arrived!

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:7417d5-p8l.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:1is5d5-uv9.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
LOCAL trucks, LOCAL trains, and LOCAL busses, but not those
hauling
crap between cities, much less across the country.

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to be
any
electric powered trucks hauling carrots from Fresno to
Chicago.

Ahem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive

Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long haul
there
is what would be called just down the road in the US and for
local
transit such as the Bay Area Bart system.

What, a 2,000 mile long electric system is down the road?

Where is there an electric train system 2000 miles long?

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to be any
electric powered trains between LA and Omaha or even El Paso.

Not with an attitude like that there isn't!

Attitude has nothing to do with it, it is economics.

Who is going to pay to string up and maintain the overhead wires
for
the 140,490 miles of freight railway in the US?


Same people that pays for everything, you.

And what would be the motivation to do this unless there was some
astounding breakthrough and electricity became esentially free?



Well, when it's cheaper than diesel.... That's what we're talking about,
I believe.

OK, so there is this astounding breakthrough and electricity becomes
essentially free and you electrify the roughly 150,000 miles of
freight railway.

That takes care of about 38% of the freight in terms of ton-miles.

Then all you have to do is electrify a couple of orders of magnitude
more highways and build electric trucks.

Then all you have to do is electrify all the roads between the rail
depots, distribution centers, and all the shops, stores, and supermarkets.

If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and cheaper
to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which isn't done
now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:7417d5-p8l.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:1is5d5-uv9.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
LOCAL trucks, LOCAL trains, and LOCAL busses, but not
those
hauling
crap between cities, much less across the country.

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to
be
any
electric powered trucks hauling carrots from Fresno to
Chicago.

Ahem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive

Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long haul
there
is what would be called just down the road in the US and for
local
transit such as the Bay Area Bart system.

What, a 2,000 mile long electric system is down the road?

Where is there an electric train system 2000 miles long?

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to be
any electric powered trains between LA and Omaha or even El
Paso.

Not with an attitude like that there isn't!

Attitude has nothing to do with it, it is economics.

Who is going to pay to string up and maintain the overhead wires
for
the 140,490 miles of freight railway in the US?


Same people that pays for everything, you.

And what would be the motivation to do this unless there was some
astounding breakthrough and electricity became esentially free?



Well, when it's cheaper than diesel.... That's what we're talking
about, I believe.

OK, so there is this astounding breakthrough and electricity becomes
essentially free and you electrify the roughly 150,000 miles of
freight railway.

That takes care of about 38% of the freight in terms of ton-miles.

Then all you have to do is electrify a couple of orders of magnitude
more highways and build electric trucks.

No I don't.


Then all you have to do is electrify all the roads between the rail
depots, distribution centers, and all the shops, stores, and
supermarkets.

Why would I do that?


If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and
cheaper to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which
isn't done now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.


OK, now you're thinking.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:7417d5-p8l.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:1is5d5-uv9.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
LOCAL trucks, LOCAL trains, and LOCAL busses, but not
those
hauling
crap between cities, much less across the country.

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to
be
any
electric powered trucks hauling carrots from Fresno to
Chicago.

Ahem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive

Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long haul
there
is what would be called just down the road in the US and for
local
transit such as the Bay Area Bart system.

What, a 2,000 mile long electric system is down the road?

Where is there an electric train system 2000 miles long?

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to be
any electric powered trains between LA and Omaha or even El
Paso.

Not with an attitude like that there isn't!

Attitude has nothing to do with it, it is economics.

Who is going to pay to string up and maintain the overhead wires
for
the 140,490 miles of freight railway in the US?


Same people that pays for everything, you.

And what would be the motivation to do this unless there was some
astounding breakthrough and electricity became esentially free?



Well, when it's cheaper than diesel.... That's what we're talking
about, I believe.

OK, so there is this astounding breakthrough and electricity becomes
essentially free and you electrify the roughly 150,000 miles of
freight railway.

That takes care of about 38% of the freight in terms of ton-miles.

Then all you have to do is electrify a couple of orders of magnitude
more highways and build electric trucks.

No I don't.


Then all you have to do is electrify all the roads between the rail
depots, distribution centers, and all the shops, stores, and
supermarkets.

Why would I do that?

You're the one advocating electric freight hauling, not me.

Don't be a MX.


If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and
cheaper to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which
isn't done now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.


OK, now you're thinking.

Now?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:q5d7d5-26q.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:7417d5-p8l.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:1is5d5-uv9.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

Jim Logajan wrote:
wrote:
LOCAL trucks, LOCAL trains, and LOCAL busses, but not
those
hauling
crap between cities, much less across the country.

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going
to
be
any
electric powered trucks hauling carrots from Fresno to
Chicago.

Ahem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive

Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long
haul
there
is what would be called just down the road in the US and
for
local
transit such as the Bay Area Bart system.

What, a 2,000 mile long electric system is down the road?

Where is there an electric train system 2000 miles long?

Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to
be
any electric powered trains between LA and Omaha or even
El
Paso.

Not with an attitude like that there isn't!

Attitude has nothing to do with it, it is economics.

Who is going to pay to string up and maintain the overhead
wires
for
the 140,490 miles of freight railway in the US?


Same people that pays for everything, you.

And what would be the motivation to do this unless there was
some
astounding breakthrough and electricity became esentially free?



Well, when it's cheaper than diesel.... That's what we're talking
about, I believe.

OK, so there is this astounding breakthrough and electricity
becomes
essentially free and you electrify the roughly 150,000 miles of
freight railway.

That takes care of about 38% of the freight in terms of ton-miles.

Then all you have to do is electrify a couple of orders of
magnitude
more highways and build electric trucks.

No I don't.


Then all you have to do is electrify all the roads between the rail
depots, distribution centers, and all the shops, stores, and
supermarkets.

Why would I do that?

You're the one advocating electric freight hauling, not me.

Don't be a MX.

I'm not. You're the one offering up spurious arguments to beat the band!




If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and
cheaper to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which
isn't done now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.


OK, now you're thinking.

Now?



Maybe not.

Bertie

wrote

If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and
cheaper
to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which isn't done
now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.

That does not solve the carbon into the atmosphere problem, (which I
realize that everyone will not agree is a problem) unless you take the
carbon out of the atmosphere.
--
Jim in NC

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:20:54 -0400, "Morgans" wrote:


If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and
cheaper
to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which isn't done
now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.

That does not solve the carbon into the atmosphere problem, (which I
realize that everyone will not agree is a problem) unless you take the
carbon out of the atmosphere.


That's the idea. Or you get it from fossil fuel power plant
emissions.

I like the idea of electric cars and trucks better. For the long-haul
stuff you might have to stick with diesel longer, until there are
breakthroughs in supercapacitors and charging systems to make quick
"fill-ups" possible.
--
Dan
T182T at 4R4

Dan Luke wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:20:54 -0400, "Morgans" wrote:


If the astounding breakthrough occured, it would be far simpler and
cheaper
to just synthesize diesel fuel with the electricity, which isn't done
now because the cost of the energy to do it is too high.

That does not solve the carbon into the atmosphere problem, (which I
realize that everyone will not agree is a problem) unless you take the
carbon out of the atmosphere.


That's the idea. Or you get it from fossil fuel power plant
emissions.

I like the idea of electric cars and trucks better. For the long-haul
stuff you might have to stick with diesel longer, until there are
breakthroughs in supercapacitors and charging systems to make quick
"fill-ups" possible.

Never going to happen.

Batteries, maybe, capacitors, never; basic physics.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 00:05:03 GMT, wrote:

I like the idea of electric cars and trucks better. For the long-haul
stuff you might have to stick with diesel longer, until there are
breakthroughs in supercapacitors and charging systems to make quick
"fill-ups" possible.

Never going to happen.

Batteries, maybe, capacitors, never; basic physics.

Eh?

Why not?

Dan Luke wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 00:05:03 GMT, wrote:

I like the idea of electric cars and trucks better. For the long-haul
stuff you might have to stick with diesel longer, until there are
breakthroughs in supercapacitors and charging systems to make quick
"fill-ups" possible.

Never going to happen.

Batteries, maybe, capacitors, never; basic physics.

Eh?

Why not?

The short answer is the materials making up the capacitor start coming
apart when the internal field gets to a certain point for the energy
density and the relationship between current, voltage, and capacitance
for the charger.

Battery techonology improvements hold better promise for small vehicle,
such as automobile, use.

The bottom line is electricity doesn't store well, so carrying it with
you is problematic.

If electricity were free, the best use of it with existing technology
is to use it to manufacture chemical fuels, which would **** off the
green house gas faction, but real life is far from perfect.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.