At 12:16 PM 01/30/2003 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 08:05:46AM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
That's a pretty easy decision to make, eh? Ethanol is renewable,
oil isn't.
Ethanol doesn't pollute, oil does. Ethanol doesn't require troops in
the Middle
East, wars, and
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 11:32:08AM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Bill Stewart wrote:
The big pollution issues with ethanol are in growing the corn, sugar, etc.
that's used to brew the stuff, fermenting it, and distilling it.
There's no *real* pollution (toxic
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Bill Stewart wrote:
The big pollution issues with ethanol are in growing the corn, sugar, etc.
that's used to brew the stuff, fermenting it, and distilling it.
Ethanol from biomass is complete nonsense. So is biodiesel, given what
fuel yield/m^2 is (can make sense for you
On Thursday 30 January 2003 03:25 am, Bill Stewart wrote:
Remember the Synfuel boondoggles under Jimmy Carter?
Cracking otherwise-uneconomical oil shale might have been
a useful technology if the price of oil were $50-100/barrel.
(Meanwhile, we can feel nice and liberal about leaving all this
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 11:24:13AM -0800, James A. Donald wrote:
--
On 30 Jan 2003 at 12:16, Harmon Seaver wrote:
I'll have to find the studies, but it was the same oil
geologists (not enviros) who used the same model to
accurately predict the peak of US oil production who did the
--
These geologists very accurately predicted the peaking of oil
production in the US,
Completely false. These geologists are not Hubbert, nor did
they very accurately predict the peaking of oil in the US, nor
do they use Hubbert's methodology, though they claim to.
Rather, they are
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 07:59 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 06:38:11PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
(snip)
Since my life and my safety is vastly more valuable to me than saving
$350-$600 a year in gas, I'll be keeping my 3500-pound S-Class.
Ah, yes, the old big
At 07:52 PM 01/29/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote:
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 06:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:53:21PM -0500, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
One of the problems I think is rampant with, for instance, getting
alternate fuel sources off the ground is that
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 04:08:08PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
Really, Eugene, you need to think deeply about this issue. Ask your lab
associate, A. G., about why learning and success/failure is so
important for so many industries. Read some Hayek, some von Mises, some
Milton Friedman. And even
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 06:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:53:21PM -0500, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
One of the problems I think is rampant with, for instance, getting
alternate fuel sources off the ground is that government subsidies are
ensuring they don't
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 06:38:11PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
(snip)
Since my life and my safety is vastly more valuable to me than saving
$350-$600 a year in gas, I'll be keeping my 3500-pound S-Class.
Ah, yes, the old big cars are safer arguement. I've seen studies that went
both ways, yes,
When Bush is talking about a hydrogen economy,
remember that he's really referring to Orion-engine cars...
At 06:38 PM 01/29/2003 -0800, Tim May wrote:
It's why I'll be safer when I run into Harmon on the freeways.
His heirs will appreciate his savings in gasoline for the time he owned
his
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:53:21PM -0500, Jamie Lawrence wrote:
One of the problems I think is rampant with, for instance, getting
alternate fuel sources off the ground is that government subsidies are
ensuring they don't happen by distorting the market for fossil fuels.
More than that,
at Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:18 PM, Bill Frantz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] was seen to say:
Back a few years ago, probably back during the great gas crisis (i.e.
OPEC) years, there were a lot of small companies working on solar
power. As far as I know, they were all bought up by oil companies.
Of
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 04:23 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:36:20PM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Although canola oil is a much better source for fuel. And diesels
a much
better IC engine for hybrids. Even in
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 04:08:08PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
Really, Eugene, you need to think deeply about this issue. Ask your lab
associate, A. G., about why learning and success/failure is so
important for so many industries. Read some Hayek,
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Eric Cordian wrote:
Ovshinsky, the amorphous semiconductor guy, developed a relatively
efficient photovoltaic film that could be manufactured by continuous
extrusion by a simple machine.
For some reason, that never hit the big time either.
He had several problems in
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Actually, VW has a plant making synfuel out of biomass. And we won't have to
wait long before oil is $50-100 a barrel, it's at $35 right now and world oil
production will peak this decade.
In the '80's it was obvious that oil production would peak
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tim May
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 9:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: the news from bush's speech...H-power
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 06:33 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 09:46:00AM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
At 09:59 PM 1/29/2003 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 06:38:11PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
Diesel, Tim, they run on diesel. Too bad MB won't import any of those
hi-tech
diesel they make to the US because of the
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 08:05:46AM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Actually, VW has a plant making synfuel out of biomass. And we won't have to
wait long before oil is $50-100 a barrel, it's at $35 right now and world oil
production will peak this
At 09:59 PM 1/29/2003 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 06:38:11PM -0800, Tim May wrote:
Diesel, Tim, they run on diesel. Too bad MB won't import any of those
hi-tech
diesel they make to the US because of the crummy fuel here.
I had an '87 MB 300D terrible-diesel for about
--
On 30 Jan 2003 at 11:31, Eugen Leitl wrote:
I'm not arguing pro strong state. I'm merely saying that the
tax funded ivory tower RD is complementary in scope to
privately funded research. If 95% of it is wasted (and
lacking libertarian drive in Euland it's bound to stay that
way for
--
On 30 Jan 2003 at 12:16, Harmon Seaver wrote:
I'll have to find the studies, but it was the same oil
geologists (not enviros) who used the same model to
accurately predict the peak of US oil production who did the
one on world oil production.
Not true.
Rather, what happened is that
Tim May wrote:
For example, the space program. The Moon Flag Planting cost about
100,000 slave-lives (about $125 thousand milliion in today's dollars) to
finance. It distorted the market for things like single stage to orbit,
which might have happened otherwise. And it created a bureaucracy
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, James A. Donald wrote:
--
On 30 Jan 2003 at 11:31, Eugen Leitl wrote:
I'm not arguing pro strong state. I'm merely saying that the
tax funded ivory tower RD is complementary in scope to
privately funded research. If 95% of it is wasted (and
lacking libertarian
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Howie Goodell wrote:
Tim May wrote:
For example, the space program. The Moon Flag Planting cost about
100,000 slave-lives (about $125 thousand milliion in today's dollars) to
finance. It distorted the market for things like single stage to orbit,
which might have
At 09:08 PM 1/29/2003 -0500, Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim May wrote...
Ask why the U.S.S.R., which depended essentially solely on federal
funding, failed so completely. Hint: it wasn't just because of
repression. It was largely because picking winners doesn't work, and
command
At 06:23 PM 1/29/2003 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:36:20PM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:
Although canola oil is a much better source for fuel. And diesels
a much
better IC engine for hybrids. Even in non-hybrids, VW builds
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 11:14:56PM -0800, James A. Donald wrote:
(snip)
Tyler said:
and the buying up (and
subsequent dismantling) of lite rail systems in the LA basin
in the 30s and 40s apparently had a major impact on the
rollout of vehicles Might we have seen much better public
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:55:55PM -0800, Steve Schear wrote:
If they intend to sell thin in the US they would be advised to have one 3
wheels instead of an apparent 4. In many states (incl. California)
3-wheeled vehicles are considered motorcycles and get to use the diamond
lanes even
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
Oh come on. Its all economics. (With tech changing the params)
Fuel cells for cars are too expensive today. There is not enough
methanol
production/distrib infrastructure, which costs to create. [insert
Metcalfe's law (aka fax or network
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 10:53 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Tyler Durden wrote:
And don't forget his promise that we'll all be able to buy
Hydrogen-powered
cars by 2020 or so. Guess that's how long he thinks this war on
terrorism
Don't get it: onboard fuel
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Tim May wrote:
Nonsense. What political science do you think was stopping Ford or
Honda or Volvo or GM from introducing a hydrogen fuel cell car by 1980?
What I meant is lack of lots of fat federal grants for research on fuel
reformers, hydrogen separation, proton
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Tyler Durden wrote:
And don't forget his promise that we'll all be able to buy Hydrogen-powered
cars by 2020 or so. Guess that's how long he thinks this war on terrorism
Don't get it: onboard fuel reforming with methanol is almost done, fuel
cells with polymer proton
And don't forget his promise that we'll all be able to buy Hydrogen-powered
cars by 2020 or so. Guess that's how long he thinks this war on terrorism
will last (and its probability for ending!).
-TD
_
Tired of spam? Get advanced
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 05:05:22PM -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
Mike Rossing wrote...
Just gotta kill off a few more arabs to extend the time when that happens
is all.
That gives me a damned good idea. Perhaps we can use Camp XRay to do some
research on how to melt down Muslims and convert
Mike Rossing wrote...
Just gotta kill off a few more arabs to extend the time when that happens
is all.
That gives me a damned good idea. Perhaps we can use Camp XRay to do some
research on how to melt down Muslims and convert then directly into fossil
fuels, bypassing all the
At 3:43 PM -0800 1/29/03, Tim May wrote:
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 03:18 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
Back a few years ago, probably back during the great gas crisis (i.e.
OPEC)
years, there were a lot of small companies working on solar power. As
far
as I know, they were all bought up
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Tim May wrote:
The 2-4 year payback cycle in the electronics industry, from roughly
1955 to the present, was terribly important. Each generation of
technology paid for the next generation, and costly mistakes resulted
in companies ceasing to exist (Shockley Transistor,
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 03:18 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
At 2:24 PM -0800 1/29/03, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Feds are sure inefficient, but the random dispersal of funds does
tend to
hit the far shots now and then. The private sector tends to ruthlessly
optimize on the short run (because the
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 02:24 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Feds are sure inefficient, but the random dispersal of funds does tend
to
hit the far shots now and then. The private sector tends to ruthlessly
optimize on the short run (because the long shot doesn't pay if you go
broke before
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:18:44PM -0800, Bill Frantz wrote:
At 2:24 PM -0800 1/29/03, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Feds are sure inefficient, but the random dispersal of funds does tend to
hit the far shots now and then. The private sector tends to ruthlessly
optimize on the short run (because the long
At 2:24 PM -0800 1/29/03, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Feds are sure inefficient, but the random dispersal of funds does tend to
hit the far shots now and then. The private sector tends to ruthlessly
optimize on the short run (because the long shot doesn't pay if you go
broke before you can reap the
On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 02:24 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Tim May wrote:
Nonsense. What political science do you think was stopping Ford or
Honda or Volvo or GM from introducing a hydrogen fuel cell car by
1980?
What I meant is lack of lots of fat federal grants
Tim writes:
There is no way to control fundamental breakthroughs, whether PV
conversion or caburetors that violate the laws of physics!. Any of
the above non-oil companies (and one can add Texas Instruments and
others to the list) which develops a more efficient, cheaper to
manufacture
46 matches
Mail list logo
