CanadianGuy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2005
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- Canada eh!
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
stsburns said:I think "Global Warming" is a ploy to destroy OPEC and "Oil industries" though we get many products from crude oil. Such as plastics and rubber, which we use and re-use (recycle). Also since the whole debate of "Global Warming" car makers have made prototypes of cars that run internal combustion engines , through unconventional energy.
These are the ideas I've heard so far:
Hydrogen (Fuel Cell) cars: Though the car combines H and O2 molecules to create power for the car and produce a safe "water" out of the exost pipe, Pumping hydrogen in your car could potentially make it explode. Besides the obvious they have yet to have a way to safely contain Hydrogen, and it is more expensive that gas to purchase.
Solar Powered cars: Though they drive really slow, you can't take the car out on cloudy or rainy days.
Battery Powered cars: They plug into to your house just like any appliance, the only pollution being produced is the power for your house that is being used to charge the car, Also car batteries contain a highly toxic lead and explode if they get overheated. A battery powered car example "Think Golf Cart".
Hybrid Cars: I call these cars "Hybrid Hype" because they don't really do much different than a regular conventional internal combustion engine already does. The cars still runs on gas and still puts out the same quote "Pollution", they only difference is that the car doesn't run gas when you stop at a stop light, THATS IT! They just made the Alternator bigger and attached a generator to it to charge the battery in which the car ALREADY has.
Read more from people who actually know cars, Greenies aren't engineers so I leave to people who actually know what there talking about like the guys of "Car and Driver". Read they Hype on Hybrids it will show you what the treehuggers don't want you to know! Hybrid hype, and miscellaneous ramblings.
BY BROCK YATES
June 2005 :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Actually they would have to store it, also salt in the ocean water would carrode whatever container it would be put in. Yes splitting water into H and O2 would produce energy, but salt would still remain and carrode engine parts, potentially turning your car into a 2.5 ton paperweight.Missouri Mule said:I've read Car and Driver for decades and agree with Brock Yates on virtually everything but I don't happen to believe that hydrogen is not a viable concept. Yes, it is horribly expensive but in point of fact there are actually some experimental vehicles using it and in normal driving cannot be distinguished from gasoline powered car. If we were able to convert the ocean's water to hydrogen and oxygen (somehow), I think it is a viable concept that ought to be thoroughly investigated.
I drive a 4-person, 2-door coupe and it gets 33 mpg most weeks on a full tank, or 333 miles on a full tank of gas. Also I have added an APC intake and it drove smoother for my 2.0 liter 4-cylinder engine.The other area of investigation should be more use of advanced diesel engines that are inherently more efficient than gasoline engines and we should look at other engines such as the Stirling Engine. Ford looked at that some time ago and abandoned that idea but that is before we got the prices we now see. So it might be put back on the table. Variable valve timing; certainly weight reduction, more advanced transmissions (hasn't Mercedes just released a 7 speed auto transmission?) I know for a certainty that we can get 35-40 mpg from normal sized vehicles. But we have gotten too hung up on too many large vehicles (I'm guilty as the next person having a full sized pickup) and their gas mileage stinks to be blunt about it.
Yes the burning of forests is done to keep the brush from overgrowing and aiding a out of control buring fire.Solar is a dead end IMV. Mass transit certainly needs to be vastly expanded. We can insulate better. We can plant more trees and should do so immediately. This is where the "environmentalists" have spoken with forked tongue. Their utterly stupid "no burn" policy in our national forests has led to a lot of this problem.
Yes people have to put asside their biases and work with engineers to come up with new ideas. Though we all use petrolium products, I mean if you like plastic I don't see what all the fuss is about?This problem won't really be solved (if it is indeed a problem) until politics is put on the back burner and real science is put on the table. Until that happens it will be the SOS.
CanadianGuy said:Sorry but I think we got off topic and started talking about how cars harm the enviromnet. I just said the Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas and that is what cars release. I know that it is environmentalists who want to get gas burning cars off the road but it won't help we need to do something else and some what fast it is a slow process but we have to stop it before parts of LA are under water.
cnredd said:And where does the "bad part" come in?
FiremanRyan said:just a question....if water expands as it freezes, wouldn't the melting of our polar caps, in theory, lower the sea level?
FiremanRyan said:just a question....if water expands as it freezes, wouldn't the melting of our polar caps, in theory, lower the sea level?
CanadianGuy said:No the water expands in heat. Search the partical model of matter it will help you out. :mrgreen:
just a question....if water expands as it freezes, wouldn't the melting of our polar caps, in theory, lower the sea level?
I can show all sorts of data that just as easily shows that Earth will cool down as warm up.
CanadianGuy said:No the water expands in heat. Search the partical model of matter it will help you out. :mrgreen:
teacher said:Water increases in volume as it heats. Because the valence shell gains electrons. Water also grows in volume as it freezes. The closely packed molecules attaining a crystalline structure. So....your both right.
Ooops, sorry ncallaway, didn't see you post there.
Alastor said:Then would you please? I've yet to see any credible reports of this possibility. I'd love to be more well-educated on the matter.
That's not to say that I buy into the tree-hugging line either. Just that I haven't ever seen a credible source of the information you're offering here, while I've at least seen studies from credible schools and scientific associations on the concept of "global warming."
I'm someone you can sway if your sources are sound and rational. Here's your chance, come and get me.
Zebulon said:But the Permian Extinction killed off over 90% of ALL species on the planet, and yet, here we are.
From the physics theory, if the ice floats in the water, when it melts the water level won't get higher. But the Antarctic is not a huge ice floating on the ocean, it's really a continent. If the ice of the continent melts the ocean will definitely get higher.ncallaway said:Water expands as it freezes because, as it moves into the solid state, it forms small crystals which take up more volume that the otherwise solid "ice" normally would. This is fairly unique to water (I assume some other things also do this, but I don't know what). Most things usually do shrink as the freeze, and expand as they get warmer. Sorry for not being more specific, but I'm working off information I got in a bio class 2 years ago from a terrible teacher.
But even so, the water, as it's frozen is all in one place. As it melts, that water is put into all the oceans. Sorry for not explaining this better, but, you can see what I mean:
Take a glass of water, and toss a few ice cubes in it. Mark where the liquid comes up to. Wait until the ice all melts, and again mark how high up the liquid comes. Not sure how well this would work (it might be too small a scale, to notice a difference or something), but it would be interesting to see...
If I got anything wrong let me know.
Zebulon said:Global "warming" is a crock. :mrgreen:
Heat is energy. Putting more energy into a system as chaotic (in the mathematical sense) as our Earth's biosphere has UNKNOWN results. Scientists believe they can tell what the Earth's climate will be like 20 years from now, when they can't tell me if it's going to RAIN over the weekend with any sense of accuracy???
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?