If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
Peter Dohm wrote:
We are along way from even getting close to a replacement for gasoline in aircraft or for that matter cars where weight isn't near as critical. BUT, if we would stop using petroleum products in everything other than the transportation sector we would reduce their use by 25%. And doing that would be huge. IMHO, the 25% figure is very low--by more than an order of magnetude. Thank God I didn't pull that fugure out of my ass. http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infoshee...mproducts.html Now since I spent a total of 2 minutes reading that page I may have mis-read it. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Dan Nafe" wrote in message ... In article , "Vaughn Simon" wrote: ... (add a GPS-informed computer to the mix and you could always be sure that you had enough energy to return to the field) [smacks myself on the forehead] What a great idea! Yes it is a great idea, but not mine. Such computers have been used on gliders for years. Vaughn |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
... Peter Dohm wrote: We are along way from even getting close to a replacement for gasoline in aircraft or for that matter cars where weight isn't near as critical. BUT, if we would stop using petroleum products in everything other than the transportation sector we would reduce their use by 25%. And doing that would be huge. IMHO, the 25% figure is very low--by more than an order of magnetude. Thank God I didn't pull that fugure out of my ass. http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infoshee...mproducts.html Now since I spent a total of 2 minutes reading that page I may have mis-read it. Wow, I stand corrected--even though I suppose that I could still argue that the combination of petroleum and natural gas could bring that number up from 25% to nearly 50%. Of course, that still just makes me a bigger booster of diesel power for automobiles. Peter |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Bill Daniels" wrote One thing that amazes me is that electrons weight almost nothing. A charged battery, for all practical purposes, weighes the same charged or not - the energy the battery contains weighs nothing. It seems like the boffins could figure out a way to pressurize a container with electrons. They can, but they would have to transport back from the future, from the Starship Enterprise, to give us some of their plasma !!! g -- Jim in NC |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote I think it is funny that the environmentalists are getting back on the Nuke bandwagon, since it was mainly they that stopped construction of new nuclear power plants in the first place. I had not heard that they were back on the nuke bandwagon. Could you point me at some reading along those lines? -- Jim in NC |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Morgans" wrote in message ... I had not heard that they were back on the nuke bandwagon. Could you point me at some reading along those lines? " "For years, environmentalists have attacked nuclear power. However, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace believes times have changed. " "Patrick Moore, Ph.D., environmentalist: "Nuclear is one of the safest industries in this country, and it's time that environmental activists recognize the facts around the fact that much nuclear energy is not only safe, but it's also clean." " From: "Change in Attitude About Nuclear Power" http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...ess&id=4185762 Vaughn -- Jim in NC |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Vaughn Simon" wrote in message ... "Morgans" wrote in message ... I had not heard that they were back on the nuke bandwagon. Could you point me at some reading along those lines? " "For years, environmentalists have attacked nuclear power. However, one of the co-founders of Greenpeace believes times have changed. " "Patrick Moore, Ph.D., environmentalist: "Nuclear is one of the safest industries in this country, and it's time that environmental activists recognize the facts around the fact that much nuclear energy is not only safe, but it's also clean." " From: "Change in Attitude About Nuclear Power" http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...ess&id=4185762 Vaughn -- Jim in NC It's fair to say THINKING enviromentalists are crossing over to the nuke side one-by-one. The ones that just say what they were told to say are still spouting the old propaganda. My concern is not with nuclear power technology, it's with the nuclear industry. That industry might as well have the motto: "Extend foot, aim, fire". The safety recond of US civillian nuclear power and that of many countries isn't all that great. Question 1: Can nuclear power be safe? Answer: The US Navy and the French do it safely so, yes, it can be safe. Question 2: Can your local power and light company operate a nuke safely? Answer: "No way! They can't even prevent blackouts." So, what to do? Here's my suggestion. Task the US Navy with operating all US nukes using only uniformed, nuclear trained, Navy personel subject to the UCMJ. The Navy's orders - "Do it right, regardless". Task the US Marine Corp with plant security. Orders? "Kill intruders, then ask questions." The Navy run nukes would sell electric power to the incumbent utilities who would distribute it and collect the bills - two things they are fairly good at. I've slept on a nuclear powered Navy ship and felt very comfortable about it. The Navy has the tradition of Adm. Rickover's obsession with safety. I've never been that comfortable with civillian nukes. A publically held utility run by executives compensated with stock options just has too much incentive to cut costs. Bill Daniels |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message . .. I've slept on a nuclear powered Navy ship and felt very comfortable about it. I am an ex-Navy nuclear power plant operator, so I have also slept a night or two on a Navy nuke ship (submarine actually). I am not nearly as down on the civilian plants as you are. In ways, their operations are safer (or at least easier) than those the of the Navy because they tend to operate at a constant power for months at a time. They have (for example) no such thing as a fast scram recovery procedure, and, being attached firmly to the ground, don't have to deal with the pitch, roll and vibration of operating at sea. Furthermore, they use injected fission poisons so that they can operate with the rods pulled out, resulting in safer core power distributions and giving them a tremendous shutdown margin for emergencies. The Navy has the tradition of Adm. Rickover's obsession with safety. Yes, they do. The nuke Nave has roving squads of examiners that descend on ships without notice and, after a white glove inspection, will drill the crew beyond mercy. Failing an inspection can be a career-ending event, especially for the Captain, XO, and Engineering Officer. A publically held utility run by executives compensated with stock options just has too much incentive to cut costs. That is a concern, and not just for the nuclear power industry. We threw out some canned goods today that my wife found on the government recall list. Vaughn |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Electric Sonex
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:33:13 -0400, "Peter Dohm"
wrote: ... we would reduce their use by 25%. And doing that would be huge. IMHO, the 25% figure is very low--by more than an order of magnetude. this i gotta see ... reduce by 250% means generate 150%. Exactly what conservation system will do that? The samd ones that give 100 HP on 2 gallons/hour? I love those who feel we can get something for nothing ... but have yet seen one that worked. Perpetual motion with energy supplied ... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
High-wing Sonex??? | Montblack | Home Built | 9 | April 8th 06 03:34 PM |
Static thrust for Sonex with 54" prop | Mel | Home Built | 3 | November 2nd 05 12:31 AM |
Electric DG | Robbie S. | Owning | 0 | March 19th 05 03:20 AM |
Spicer Sonex/Jabiru | [email protected] | Home Built | 1 | January 4th 05 02:39 PM |