Episode 2: Joy of discussion

Answer for Wyley..I came from the old days when dinasaurs were made into crude petroleum beneath the earth.. everyone accepted the fact back then.. well.. err.. that is until I saw the Grand Canyon and read the plaque provided by the US Park Service that stated it took umpeen million years

100 New British Nukes

I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol. This article: http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by cracking water.

Re: 100 New British Nukes

Terry Blanton writes: I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol. I do not know about the U.K., but the U.S. would require about twice as much land as we possess to grow enough biomass to replace all

RE: 100 New British Nukes

From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 11:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 100 New British Nukes Also, I forgot to mention, the author's plan to use nuclear power generators to make electricity, to perform electrolysis, to produce hydrogen, is preposterous. Methods using

Re: 100 New British Nukes

Jed Rothwell wrote: they forgot that hydrogen transport is roughly three times more efficient than conventional oil, so they need only 18 MTOE Is this based on mass alone? Does it include extra transport loses (eg hydrogen loses in metal pipelines)? Terry (watching my 50th birthday mylar

Re: 100 New British Nukes

Terry, This article: http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html claims it would take 100 new nuclear plants to create enough hydrogen by cracking water. I think one of the reasons you threw this pile of disinfo out to foul the air was to show the incompetence of Energy Consultants in

I'm back

OK, some of you guys may remember me from 5-6 years ago. I've been lurking the past couple months just reading the posts online, but decided it was time to stick my oar in. Jed, I'm currently an architectural CAD drafter at a building company and would be happy to help you out. Curious to say the

Re: 100 New British Nukes

Terry Blanton wrote: they forgot that hydrogen transport is roughly three times more efficient than conventional oil, so they need only 18 MTOE Is this based on mass alone? Does it include extra transport loses (eg hydrogen loses in metal pipelines)? Hydrogen pipeline losses are modest;

FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 08, 2004

[Original Message] From: What's New [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Akira Kawasaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 10/8/2004 8:58:33 AM Subject: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 08, 2004 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 8 Oct 04 Montreal, CA 1. OUTER LIMITS: PERIMETER INSTITUTE FOR THEORETICAL

Re: Episode 2: Joy of discussion

Blank- Original Message - From: RC Macaulay Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 6:57 AM Subject: Episode 2: Joy of discussion Answer for Wyley..I came from the old days when dinasaurs... Sorry for the apparent misunderstanding. I thought you might have an interesting viewpoint on the argument

Re: WHAT'S NEW Friday, October 08, 2004

WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 8 Oct 04 Montreal, CA snip I find daily jogging helps. TIMBER! eg

Re: X Prize sponsors plan other prizes

Johnson, Steven wrote: CNN.COM has come out with an article about the sponsors of the X prize. Did you catch the news on Bigelow's $50M prize for a vehicle to service his hotel? http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0409/27bigelow/ UFO enthusiasts might remember Robert for his NIDS:

Jacques Benveniste dies

I am sorry to see this news: http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-19.html Here is something amazing though; Nature actually deigns to mention CF is semi-partly-conceivably positive manner. The rest of the article is bunk, including Nature's version of its own role in this travesty.

Re: Jacques Benveniste dies

Hell is thawing At 05:53 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, you wrote: I am sorry to see this news: http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-19.html Here is something amazing though; Nature actually deigns to mention CF is semi-partly-conceivably positive manner. The rest of the article is bunk,

Re: Hydrogen energy x 100

Interesting point from M.C. : With all this talk about ethanol and hydrogen, let me take note of the water bath calorimetry experiments of Mills which showed a heat release from hydrogen 100 times greater than by combustion of the same amount of hydrogen. The only obvious drawback to the

Tectonic versus planetary expansion

Wylie asks if I have an interesting viewpoint on the subject. No, just the ongoing dialoguementioned with a since passed geologist friend. Your interest leads me to believe that you have some views. Please feel free to express them here. Perhaps the first recorded discussion on the matter