Why wont this work?
could be worse
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah mostly the politics, no matter how safe that was able to get. I would never see that actually getting past the tree huggers.
TR Balla Donor Supreme
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 20,192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
enviromentalists are not the issue with that..it'd be security and the oil conglomerates .. to do it right you'd make the power cells transferrable.. you wouldnt put one in every car, you'd sell one to a driver for life and transfer it from car to car, and then resell it once the person dies.. LOL.. or have then leave it in their will etc etc..
anyhow was a random 10 second brain fart and not a real idea.
anyhow was a random 10 second brain fart and not a real idea.
__________________
Stuff.
Stuff.
Or we could just bomb a few overpopulated, underdeveloped countries and kill 2 birds with one stone. Overpopulation is the root problem, alternative fuel sources and crap are just a band-aid. I know it sounds cynical, but people need to die.
TR Balla Donor Supreme
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 20,192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh come on.. talk about band aid... lol
It's a limited resource, reducing the population only gives us more time. You could argue that reducing consumption does exactly the same thing.
It's a limited resource, reducing the population only gives us more time. You could argue that reducing consumption does exactly the same thing.
__________________
Stuff.
Stuff.
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, here's a band aid, nuke some under developed, over populated country, then wait a thousand years and use them as oil.
Chrysler proposed a nuclear powerred car back in the 50s.
Along with gas turbines and a lot of other stuff, Chrysler was actually way ahead of their time. A lot of that stuff developed by Packard, Chrysler, Ford, GM, Studebaker and others back in the late 40s and into the early 60s is showing up on rice burners these days as "advanced technology"....not!
Chrysler proposed a nuclear powerred car back in the 50s.
Along with gas turbines and a lot of other stuff, Chrysler was actually way ahead of their time. A lot of that stuff developed by Packard, Chrysler, Ford, GM, Studebaker and others back in the late 40s and into the early 60s is showing up on rice burners these days as "advanced technology"....not!
could be worse
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,421
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well obviously it didnt work with dord, chrystler or any of the others for some reason or another.
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iv been sayin this for years. each person requires "x" amount of energy to live each year. we live an average of "y" years. "z" is the number of people surviving to reach "y". x times y times z equals total energy consuption of humans (which wil be a HUGE under statement because i didnt figure in al of the people who dont make it to "y")
medical technoloy keeps pushing "y" up higher and higher, while at the same time pushing "z" higher and higher. our life styles keep pushing "x" higher and higher. and therefore the total energy cost of human life is outrageously high and the earth only has a finite amount of energy availible for us to harvest. now the politics...try and convince people to lower the values of "y" or "z" see if you get reelected. hell you might get shot!
but i do have a really big and expensive band-aid for ya....convert the whole country to nuclear power...use the power to make hydrogen/o2 from ocean water...use the hydrogen to power our cars, the o2 can be pumped into the air or mixed with the hydrogen and pu into our gas tanks and the left over heat from the power plants to heat out cities using steam like they did back in the day....efficiancy would be high polution would be virtually absent we could live forever as long as we can find uranium...which is everywhere by the way.
Last edited by freakasis; 07-18-2008 at 08:58 PM.
iv been sayin this for years.
but i do have a really big and expensive band-aid for ya....convert the whole country to nuclear power...use the power to make hydrogen/o2 from ocean water...use the hydrogen to power our cars, the o2 can be pumped into the air or mixed with the hydrogen and pu into our gas tanks and the left over heat from the power plants to heat out cities using steam like they did back in the day....efficiancy would be high polution would be virtually absent we could live forever as long as we can find uranium...which is everywhere by the way.
but i do have a really big and expensive band-aid for ya....convert the whole country to nuclear power...use the power to make hydrogen/o2 from ocean water...use the hydrogen to power our cars, the o2 can be pumped into the air or mixed with the hydrogen and pu into our gas tanks and the left over heat from the power plants to heat out cities using steam like they did back in the day....efficiancy would be high polution would be virtually absent we could live forever as long as we can find uranium...which is everywhere by the way.
b) the stoichiometric ratio for hydrogen is 2:1 (for pure oxygen not air), so that oxygen you're releasing into the air, will need to be reclaimed for a complete combustion.
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah but you could still use it. if we had a shit load of it we would find a way...im sure there are ways now
also i reworded alot while you were typing
