LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Turpenes,
Martin
| | |
Young trees may be growing faster but if the tree is 6 inches in diameter and it puts on an annual growth ring of 3/8" it is still sequestering less carbon than an older, bigger tree with a diameter of 18 inches that puts on an annual ring of 1/4".Originally Posted by fizzissist
It is commercially "viable" if you get wanking great subsidies.
Energetically it only comes out ahead if you make some dubious assumptions about the energy value equivalent of the by products that theoretically can be used for high protein animal feed. But if these are dumped or have to be trucked thousands of miles to where there are cattle to eat them this benefit is questionable.
One figure I have looked for and never found is the net energy used in the distillation. You are evaporating a lot of the stuff with the highest latent heat of vaporization of anything. In a correctly setup system some of the heat energy can be recovered when the water vapor condenses but Big Daddy entropy doesn't let you get it all back.
An open mind is a virtue...so long as all the common sense has not leaked out.
Turpenes,
Martin
Terpenes, dammit! Terpenes! How many times do you have to be told!!!!!
An open mind is a virtue...so long as all the common sense has not leaked out.
Dear Geof,Terpenes, dammit! Terpenes! How many times do you have to be told!!!!!
I am not worthy to sit at the feet of a spelling master... (enter room backwards).
I thought it had something to do with turpentine. Wrong again. It won't be the last time.....
Best Wishes,
Martin
Shamelessly stolen from Wikipedia:
"Turpentine (also called spirit of turpentine, oil of turpentine, wood turpentine, gum turpentine) is a fluid obtained by the distillation of resin obtained from trees, mainly pine trees. It is composed of terpenes, mainly the monoterpenes alpha-pinene and beta-pinene. It has a potent odor similar to that of nail polish remover. It is sometimes known colloquially as turps, but this more often refers to turpentine substitute (or mineral turpentine)."
So now I am confused: Are you right when you are wrong or wrong when you are right?
Perhaps this gives you some inkling of why some people detest chemistry.
An open mind is a virtue...so long as all the common sense has not leaked out.
Turpines are what eat the foundation of the nuculer plants, that's why the need to get inspected allthe time.Terpenes, dammit! Terpenes! How many times do you have to be told!!!!!
Don't let pests or turpines get the best of you! Call the Orkin man today!
Your right it isn't. Just a running bitter little joke I have with some people. Although the prices are forcing people to make the wise use decisions that rationing would also cause, only problem is the oil companies are profiting and only their stockholders reap any real benifit. An economics professor once told our class, if all the world's wealth was equally distributed to the entire population the same 20% would end up with the majority of it again in short order. Short of a socialist system the rich are just going to keep on keeping on how they please, and in a socialist system they are simply subsituted for a ruling class of politicians so it is the same effect.
The biggest problem I see with a true rationing system is something like a prohibition era criminal element popping up. The rich would still have an abundant supply while the everyday little guy got the shaft from every side. The oil companies would hike prices, claiming reduce market share requires higher prices to compensate. What we did get would only be sustainance level existance. Meaning we would be forced into purchasing blackmarket fuels if we went over our allotment for a given time, easily done if say your loved one is in the hospitial and you are staying the nights with them as an example. The standard of living would drop since goods would be so expensive just in the transport costs alone it would probably be regressive to the entire economy, add to that the tightening of belts that have consumers not spending and there is another blow to the consumer market that costs jobs. There is a solution, I just don't know what it is. Just my opinion of course.
Scott
Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
Mark Twain
Scott,
I was not thinking in terms of prohibiting the production of fuels, that would be a different scenario.
Rather something more along the lines of an national energy assessment would be carried out. This effort would be made to try to come up with an annual 'minimum energy consumption per capita', suitable for our climate. It would probably have to be regionally adjusted.
In most cases, this figure would be quite conservative, and most of us would have to go and buy additional fuel at the going rate, or purchase ration tickets from those who do use them, such as the elderly, those without vehicles, those who do not have excessive heating/cooling needs.
IMO, there needs to be tangible rewards for 'going green', and a good way to do that is to make it possible to make a few bucks by not using your share of fuel.
I do not see that the rise in fuel prices has yet advanced the cause of the green Earth crowd. It is about to burst into a rise in inflation (IMO), but paying more for energy is not going to curb consumption if we think the problem is dealt with by a wage increase.
First you get good, then you get fast. Then grouchiness sets in.
(Note: The opinions expressed in this post are my own and are not necessarily those of CNCzone and its management)
Why the hell didn't I think of this?
If you cut it to small you can always nail another piece on the end, but if you cut it to big... then what the hell you gonna do?
Steven
OK I'm seeing your point better now. I did understand not a reduction in production, I was refering to a higher pump price to pay for a glut in storage that is costing money rather than paying for itself. Last time I saw a comparision our (USA) usage was outragous when compared globally. Some curtailing of that is warranted. Improved infrastructure would go a long way, more mass transit for example. The Japanese have a good model to examine for strength and weakness to build off of. Mass Transit is a joke in many less than metro areas. I believe a transfer to diesel engines in passenger cars would help, and you may soon see this. Cleaner, more effecient and less refined fuel means more fuel per gallon of crude oil with lesser emissions, plus supplemental biodiesel mixes would further extend the crude oil supply while alt energy is being studied.
Alternitive engery sources are IMO the only real solution. If anyone reads Popular Mechanics they probably read the article about Jay Leno's antique alt energy cars. I agree the the comment made by the gent that manufactured an electric car back before the production of the Model T to Mr. Henry Ford, "The electric car is dead". I think we are going down some bad roads right now. Luckily scientist globally are working on it. I believe a lot of the hype, dooms-day predictions and refusals to listen to facts on both sides are more a result of the resistance to cultural change we are starting to go through.
We do need a monetary incentive to go green, without it your right that it would be hopeless to try. Money lubes everything and the rich ARE definately going to keep getting richer and they have the best government that money can buy to see to it.
Green Earth factions:
The increase prices do seem to be effecting their cause, if they don't acknowledge it then it is for their own reasons. MSNBC had an article a few weeks ago about the average amount of driving people where doing, some poll or study (sorry don't remember the specifics) that showed people have been curtailing excessive driving, ipso facto less CO2 emmisions. It is only a change on average of the people included of around 15%, but it is a real number. If we have an increase in the minimum wage to keep up your right people will start traveling again. However I do feel that this is a short term problem that everyone is inflating. Conservation of resources needs to be the by word for all societies, but not to the detriment of society as a whole.
Scott
Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
Mark Twain
Hu's concept makes one hell of a lot more sense than the Carbon Credit scams. There is going to be inflation out of all of this but his idea in essence makes it possible for the people who choose to conserve or who have limited income to benefit from the extra amount paid by the ones who can afford the higher costs without cutting their consumption.
An open mind is a virtue...so long as all the common sense has not leaked out.
Most definately more sense. I'm just not sure it is workable considering human nature and the cost of getting it started. During WWII Americans accepted gas rationing, with so many Americans overseas needing fuel for their war effort, and the fact that those at home for the most part where fully behind the effort, it worked. Today most/many people wouldn't be behind it at all. What I see happening in this era is bootleg gas runners that steal fuel and sell it on the blackmarket with all the associated criminal complications. Also I see speculators buying up ration tickets at todays value and selling them next week for a profit at that price. This isn't going to help you or me, it will help the rich get richer.
I'd have to assume we would all be issued fuel cards that will be read by the pumps credit card reader, possibly some sort of national database similar to the credit card companies that citizens can access to prepay for their ration similar to upping the minutes of a phone card. All this could be done right there at the gas station, just like the phone cards are today. To make things fool proof and difficult to hack I can't believe the gov't would make it possible for someone to actually transfer credit unless they are present to input their card at the pump for the person buying their credit.
I'm all for killing the carbon credit schemes, they just make fat cats fatter without a bit of improvement and even open the doors to the con games like the terra pass as posted earlier. I just have to agree to disagree that rationing will be the way to go, my opinion anyway. That and 2.50 will buy you a small cup of coffee
To help reduce and conserve I've heard of an idea of alternate days driving privilages. In effect it is a rationing system and would half fuel consumption and CO2 output immediately. Of course you have to have mass transit to make it work as well as a system for emergency/hardship exceptions. RFID chips with a fast pass type system as well as color coded holographic decals for easy visual inspection would be needed. That would be nearly revenue nuetral once it was started and those people with privilages could sell rideshare services or barter them as they saw fit and then the private citizen could make a nice underground economy that keeps money in the community and away from fat cats and politicians. Just a thought.
Scott
Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
Mark Twain
Posting Permissions
| | |
