Electric Sonex

"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
link.net...
wrote:
On Jul 24, 8:35 pm, Dan Nafe wrote:


I love it. We need to stop using ferin' oil, this is the first of many
steps in the right direction.


Except that way too much electricity is being generated
using oil or natural gas, and the losses of efficiency in first
burning the stuff, then generating electricity, transmitting it long
distances and losing more, then the heat losses in running chargers
and more heat off the batteries, I think we'd end up burning nearly
twice as much as if we just stuck a VW on it.
Coal is more available but is so dirty. Nuclear is really
avaiable but isn't cheap and scares too many folks.

Dan


I can almost envision a coal fired Sonex.

Fill the baggage compartment with coal and the "passenger" gets a
shovel...

I have a somewhat visual sense of humor, and that's FUNNY!

Peter

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.

"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

"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

"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

"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

"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

"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

"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

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 ...