In article
,
"Dan L." wrote:

Hmmm .... My 2 cents.
Uh, nice string of pronouncements Dan. Usually it is nice if you can
give them a little authority, names, places, logic based on an
acceptable premise. You know, something like that would have been nice,
instead of coming down the mountain with your clay tablets. (Yeah, I
know, sarcastic, people have told me that.

My thinking goes likes this.

I like my modern technological life. I like my computers, cars, lights,
HBO and modern medical techniques. I refuse to live in a cave. Street
maybe, if I keep spending the way I am
Keep your technology but Americans presently use 25% of the worlds
energy. That will change. We can look forward to a diminished way of
life. Sorry Dave. (Jeeze, I sound like Hal, the computer) The
alternative is to send out the troops with bayonets fixed and subjugate
the world. Since we are not alone in the nuclear club, some of those
suckers may not want to go down easily. How do you feel about trying to
swim in the non-radioactive end of the pool?

Solar and wind energy together is too expensive for the small amount of
electricity one receives. In order to get large amounts of energy one
has to destroy something to get it: be it coal, nuclear, Fusion is just
a dream a false hope, wood or any other agricultural source. If one (ok
the world) uses agricultural sources, bread will be twenty dollars a
loaf, greater starvation among the populated world.

Presently, wind, photovoltaic, and hydro power (including tides) is too
little and more expensive than fossil fuel (if you don't count the
social impact of global warming i.e. our extinction). Someone must have
forgotten to tell the international consortium that is constructing a
fusion reactor in France that Dave said it couldn't be done. Scrubbing
smoke stacks with water and calcium hydroxide Ca(OH)2 gives you calcium
carbonate and water. Chalk, Dave, chalk doesn't sound so polluting, does
it?

We are already over producing food (look at you waistline) and
demographics say that the population of the planet should drop to
replacement levels by 2050. Western Europe has been encouraging it's
citizens to have more babies because the indigenous populations are
declining. Pretty much the same deal for all industrialized nations.

Coal, CO2 scrubbers still leaves toxic waste in our land fills.
Hydrogen, needs electricity to extract from water. Bio-mass -
Agicultural, kiss all forest good-by, not just the rain forest.
There is even a new nut being introduced into Africa as a crop that
grows well on dry marginally useful agricultural land that is 40% oil.
We can keep our forests. Need to plant more actually. Maybe you will
have to do without quite so much beef. That's all.

If .... If and only if they can make them safe and put its waste in
outer space, are the breeder nuclear reactors. "The old saying - Is
anything safe? NO".
Great way to live, with the sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.
Thanks, but no. Fission can be buffed, tweaked, and polished but it is
just too freaking dangerous. That argument aside, how are you going to
transfer the energy down, by microwaves and fry migratory birds?

The only way to have a clean, healthy earth for everyone on this planet,
IS POPULATION REDUCTION. ie: make bombs not babies (ok, ok, forget the
reverse pun of the sixty's vietnam) just stop breeding like humans.
See above. Large families only make sense in in subsistence farming.

However, not sure of the future. My next truck will have an E85 engine.
I have read some where that all one has to do is combine 85 gallons of
ethanal with 15 gallons of regular gas. Buy a still, I have the 10 acres
of land to raise corn and have 6 acres of woods (energy source for the
still).
You haven't been reading this new group long, have you? Corn is grown
with natural gas and petroleum. It is not efficient unless you are an
oil company but not for consumers.

Its all about me, let the world starve. Conservation is a lost cause
without population reduction. I am single with no kids. With no social
life one has the time to do the things listed above.
A Cassandra in the wilderness, wandering in a hopeless quest, fade to
black, the lights come up and everybody stands and goes home. Quite a
martyr syndrome you have there Dave.

You really need to lighten up there Dave. Ya know. Girls really like
guys that can make them laugh.

So I agree with the original poster:
Home Gardening "is" Becoming Even More Imperative.

Enjoy Life ......... Dan.
I will. Thanks Dave. You really should read a book about this stuff some
day. Life is a tight rope, but it's doable.


In article
,
Billy Rose wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

electrical plugs just put off the problem. somebody somewhere gotta
burn something to make the electricity.

True, but then you can use bio-mass and your not burning fossil fuel.
Additionally, you have the option of scrubbing the smoke stack to
sequester the CO2 and reduce the over all amount in the atmosphere.

if they are making hydrogen from water, fine, if it is nuclear less than
ideal.

About as far as you can get from ideal, IMHO. In 30 - 40 years, fusion
reactors should be viable with lots of safe, clean energy. Why mess up
the planet for a 40 year fix, when it creates more problems than it
solves?

platinum is typically used to catalyze the splitting of water, used
with an electrical current in an ionic but not necessarily acidic
environment.

The April '07 issue of Scientific American addresses the issue of
hydrogen storage. The choices are (1) compressed hyrdogen, (2) liquid
hydrogen (Ever see the demonstration where they dip a rose into liquid
helium? Same kinda deal) (3) reversible "hydrogen metal hydrides" (they
generate H+ in response to heat and a catalyst and, they need to be
removed to recharge) and (4) "hydrogen adsorbents" that work like
sponges (don't need to be removed to recharge but research just
beginning).

Unfortunately, the full article isn't available on line without a
subscription but you could find it at the library and, the graphics are
very helpful in helping understand the problems involved.

Ingrid

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:35:35 -0700, Billy Rose

- Billy
Coloribus gustibus non disputatum (mostly)