OT: The price of Gas..

[Loser]

Originally posted by Kamog:
Hopefully, the satellites would transmit the power in the form of a tight beam, precisely aimed at the receiving stations on the ground.

It would have to, otherwise you'd lose so much that the technique would be useless.

The question is, where do you put it?

Perhaps it would be best to have three or four in equatorial geo-synch. That way, even on those rare occasions when one is eclipsed by the earth, you still have a significant percentage in operation. Additionally, this may make it easier to keep the beam focused.

Or you could put one huge solar energy collection structure in an orbit Trojan to Earth's (that is, Lagrange points 4 or 5 on Earth's orbit around Sol). This would have the advantage of being forever in direct sunlight, but would have to generate a truly Herculean amount of energy, as it would be the only thing supporting Earth and because it would lose so much over the distance.

In order to mitigate loss of power in the transmission, it would be best to use coherent microwave, or 'maser' (may-zer), technology. This is basically a laser, but in the microwave range of the spectrum.

The beam would need to stay precisely on target, as it would have a rather destructive effect on anything that got in its way, so the speed of light may limit this possibility. I'd ask someone else to do the math, because it's early here, but I believe there will be quite a few seconds of delay between Earth and a point sixty degrees away in Earth's orbit.

So yeah. Back to fusion.

[solops]

Originally posted by Loser:
The beam would need to stay precisely on target, as it would have a rather destructive effect on anything that got in its way, so the speed of light may limit this possibility.

What a great weapon.

[dogscoff]

Just looked at Atrocities' Bell curve post. I was reading and reading and wondering when they would get to the sell. And here it is:

If you would like to know more, I highly encourage you to look through Infinite Energy Magazine or read Dr. Eugene Mallove's article, Universal Appeal for Support for New Energy Science

I'm all for slating the oil companies and resisting short-sighted wanton consumerism but I think that article is more than a little hysterical.

[Atrocities]

Originally posted by dogscoff:
Just looked at Atrocities' Bell curve post. I was reading and reading and wondering when they would get to the sell. And here it is:

quote:

---

If you would like to know more, I highly encourage you to look through Infinite Energy Magazine or read Dr. Eugene Mallove's article, Universal Appeal for Support for New Energy Science

I'm all for slating the oil companies and resisting short-sighted wanton consumerism but I think that article is more than a little hysterical.

---

Everything is to be taken with a grain of salt, but remember what they said about the guy who thought the world was round and NOT the center of the universe?

Often time more than not, information like this is viewed as a joke, and then later proven to be accurate.

Look at what happened when the Army Pilot said the Pearl Harbor was a target way back in I think 1932, and was court marshelled out of the service only to later be proven nearly 100% correct.

Or about the people who said putting a man on the moon was utter insain nonsense.

Laugh now, it is easyier to ignor and ridicule than to accept and believe. I think the same thing happened to a guy named Jesus once.

Then again, Oil will Last forever and always be afordable. We will never run out of food and our populatio growth will never reach 7 billion.

[Fyron]

What about the millions more lunatics that were ignored and turned out to just be lunatics?

[Loser]

Hi, my name is Charlie and these are my Angels.

They work for me.
(saw this on a T-shirt recently. Wrong, wrong, wrong. But clever enough to repeat.)


Not all crazy people are prophets or visionaries. For example Manson's war, Helter Skelter, never happened. Which is good.

[ February 12, 2004, 19:04: Message edited by: Loser ]

[oleg]

Argue as much as you like but it is a proven fact that right now the ratio of newly discovered oil reserved to the oil consumed during that time period is 1:4 - it used to be 3:1 in 70s... The correct estimate may vary but even the most optimistic ones state it will take more energy to extract oil from future reservours then they contain.
Edited for many mistakes

[ February 12, 2004, 19:57: Message edited by: oleg ]

[Parasite]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
If you have the large amount of money to buy one, sure. You will save a lot more money by getting a normal car than one of those hybrids, as the (useful) hybrids are quite expensive.

True, Hybrids cost more than a Hugo or German Trabant, but they cost about as much as a normal American car. Less than half a standard SUV. I doubt you will save enough in gas to totally pay for it, but you will save something.

Useful depends on the person. If you have kids, go Offroading, or take multiple people in your car than the Insight is out. Used for commuting to work and normal driving, I think it is great.

[Kamog]

I just filled up my car today. I usually buy the 'regular' fuel, not the more expensive stuff with extra octane. The price was 72.9 cents per liter, so it cost me $35.00 to get 48.008 liters. I am happy to get that price, because the price was higher just a few days ago. But I remember a time when the price was about half of what it is today...

[solops]

I saw this when it was published in my society journal in October, 1980 to help educate people about oil and gas. For those who are interested:

The contents of a common barrel of crude:

Gasoline-------------- 46.2%
Fuel Oil-------------- 28.6%
Petrochemicals*----- 10.1%
Jet fuel--------------- 7.4%
Asphalt--------------- 4.0%
Kerosene------------- 2.1%
Lubricants----------- 1.6%

Petrochemicals include: pLastics, nylon, rayon, cosmetics, detergents, paint, drugs and tires.

Courtesy of the Society of Petroleum Engineers
Source: U.S. Bureau of Mines

[ February 18, 2004, 02:01: Message edited by: solops ]