PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

[JonPorobil]

I understand your logic, Hoblit, but I happen to know that electrolysis costs more energy than fusing hydrogen with oxygen yields. In other words, electrolysis followed by hydrogen bonding is still a net loss of energy. Which, in turn, means that the company is spending a lot more energy on electrolysis than the car gets from the hydrogen fuel cells.

Additionally, though MOST car batteries only power the car's electrical system and need constant recharging by the engine, electric and hybrid vehicles let the battery do more of the work, so it's not like charging a car battery with solar panels is such an outlandish idea.

[Billy's Little Trip]

So hey, if you're getting energy from an alternative source (such as, in this example, Solar Energy), then why use that energy on electrolysis for the express purpose of then using the hydrogen to power the car, instead of powering the car directly through that alternative source? In other words, why create solar energy just to make fuel, when we could have solar battery-powered cars?


On an unrelated note, I had a dream last night that John McCain died before election day. This is the second time I've had such a dream; the first time was before he announced his running mate. This one was longer and more vivid. How strange.

Because in your scenario the equipment to generate solar power may be better suited as a stimulus to the other energy system. Solar power can be stored in a battery. That battery system (not to mention potential limitations to solar panel build in space) may not be enough to power the whole car. The current battery (no pun intended) can't power your whole car by itself. It only powers the electrical system. It even has to get re-charged as you are driving. The solar power battery may just store enough energy for a rainy day to ignite the other fuel system.

I mean, in any given scenario that may be why.

That's exactly the reason. Solar power is great, but not always there and batteries by themselves are not reliable enough. Electric cars are very demanding, even the little ones. They need a ton of batteries to move them and they run out of juice very quickly. That's not saying that they'll never improve that technology, but we're way off from a semitrailer truck hauling a full load running on batteries. Hybrids, like the Prius, is a great step in the right direction, but still using fossil fuel and the issue of batteries and again, doesn't work well on large trucks hauling tons. They do have hybrid SUV's now, which is great, but they are still very dependent on fossil fuels. But every little bit helps.
But Canada already have semitrailer trucks running on hydrogen fortified bio diesel. It's not 100% hydrogen because they are using a traditional diesel engine. They use they same technology as a hot rod that runs on NOS (Nitrous Oxide). I've had a couple. Basically the hydrogen systems are installed on the trucks and use the alternator to power the systems to split the hydrogen. Then the hydrogen gas is injected in through the air intake where it is pulled into the cylinders with the air making the internal combustion much greater. Again, nothing close to the BMW I mentioned earlier, but it's cutting the need for fossil fuel and cutting down greenhouse emissions dramatically.
It's a step in the right direction, but in the US, it will be dogged and hidden as long as the oil tycoons (Bush Fam) can hide it.

[Hoblit]

I understand your logic, Hoblit, but I happen to know that electrolysis costs more energy than fusing hydrogen with oxygen yields.

But I think our point is that we're looking far into the future where that situation may be improved.

[jb]

Well, it's a matter of scale isn't it?

Image a large solar farm in Arizona. It collects the solar power and uses it to power electrolysis and generate Hydrogen, that is then transported across the country via pipelines and trucks and rail, etc.

The solar farm does this at something less than 100% efficiency, but so what? The sun will shine tomorrow. A portion of the sun's energy has been converted to hydrogen, which can be stored basically forever and transported efficiently via pipeline a-la natural gas.

So, I wouldn't give up on hydrogen cars just yet. It's in the future, sure, and it'll be a race to see whether solar power can be enough use on a small scale to beat hydrogen power on a large scale. Solar power will always have trouble in areas where the sun doesn't shine so much.

*shrug* lots of possibilities. Hope we live to see them.

[Billy's Little Trip]

Solar power will always have trouble in areas where the sun doesn't shine so much.

"you wish it was sunny, but it's not. hahaha"

[Lord of Oats]

Chris, that's the funniest thing you've posted all year. Good work.

[Caravan Ray]

So hey, if you're getting energy from an alternative source (such as, in this example, Solar Energy), then why use that energy on electrolysis for the express purpose of then using the hydrogen to power the car, instead of powering the car directly through that alternative source? In other words, why create solar energy just to make fuel, when we could have solar battery-powered cars?


On an unrelated note, I had a dream last night that John McCain died before election day. This is the second time I've had such a dream; the first time was before he announced his running mate. This one was longer and more vivid. How strange.

Because in your scenario the equipment to generate solar power may be better suited as a stimulus to the other energy system. Solar power can be stored in a battery. That battery system (not to mention potential limitations to solar panel build in space) may not be enough to power the whole car. The current battery (no pun intended) can't power your whole car by itself. It only powers the electrical system. It even has to get re-charged as you are driving. The solar power battery may just store enough energy for a rainy day to ignite the other fuel system.

I mean, in any given scenario that may be why.

That's exactly the reason. Solar power is great, but not always there and batteries by themselves are not reliable enough. Electric cars are very demanding, even the little ones. They need a ton of batteries to move them and they run out of juice very quickly. That's not saying that they'll never improve that technology, but we're way off from a semitrailer truck hauling a full load running on batteries. Hybrids, like the Prius, is a great step in the right direction, but still using fossil fuel and the issue of batteries and again, doesn't work well on large trucks hauling tons. They do have hybrid SUV's now, which is great, but they are still very dependent on fossil fuels. But every little bit helps.
But Canada already have semitrailer trucks running on hydrogen fortified bio diesel. It's not 100% hydrogen because they are using a traditional diesel engine. They use they same technology as a hot rod that runs on NOS (Nitrous Oxide). I've had a couple. Basically the hydrogen systems are installed on the trucks and use the alternator to power the systems to split the hydrogen. Then the hydrogen gas is injected in through the air intake where it is pulled into the cylinders with the air making the internal combustion much greater. Again, nothing close to the BMW I mentioned earlier, but it's cutting the need for fossil fuel and cutting down greenhouse emissions dramatically.
It's a step in the right direction, but in the US, it will be dogged and hidden as long as the oil tycoons (Bush Fam) can hide it.

It will only be a step in the right direction when you stop trying to think of alternatives for petrol. It is not really the fuel that is the problem - it is the mode of transport an dthe way the fuel is used.

[roymond]

It will only be a step in the right direction when you stop trying to think of alternatives for petrol. It is not really the fuel that is the problem - it is the mode of transport and the way the fuel is used.

Bingo! The game-changing innovation will come through therapy, not just alternative fuels. Consumerism has created an insane "stuff for stuff's sake" mentality. At least in the US, there's this deep-seated "more is better" approach to existence. It even extends to the packaging of the stuff that we're brain washed into thinking we need more of. The same thing is at work when North Carolina stands behind their tobacco industry to preserve all those precious jobs. Well, shift that work force to producing something that improves people's lives instead of snuffs them out. Get half the trucks off our roads in the first place, reduce the container ships on the seas, cut our trash which fucks up the oceans, etc.

Not saying this is easy, but at least start with a strategy and educating the next generation instead of digging deeper holes to stick our heads in. It's overwhelming. I need a latte.

[roymond]

I didn't get to know Sarah Palin any better last night. Failure on the moderator's part for not making these two strut their stuff instead of arguing over the presidential candidates' stances. What I did hear was "that's how we do things way up in Alaska". Well, I don't think Alaska's oil-lubed model applies to the nation as a whole.

[Hoblit]

I didn't get to know Sarah Palin any better last night. Failure on the moderator's part for not making these two strut their stuff instead of arguing over the presidential candidates' stances. What I did hear was "that's how we do things way up in Alaska". Well, I don't think Alaska's oil-lubed model applies to the nation as a whole.

Yeah, when she went the whole 'you Washington types' I got a little angry. I understand what she's doing. She's playing coy to politics and trying to connect with the 'people' with our distaste for those Washington types. Therefore grouping him into those 'types' we have a distaste for while distancing herself. A complete political ploy. Washington 'types' are not one entire group necessarily. But it comes with that negative connotation and Biden being a Senator can't HELP but be in Washington...associating himself with that phrasing. (I don't like Biden but I can still see a political phrasing ploy when I hear one)

Bleh. That debate didn't win me over to either side. But I suppose it didn't have to because I'm definitely not voting for one of those sides anyways.

[JonPorobil]

So does anyone else think that Biden just completely nailed that? I mean, wow.

On a related note, I'm starting to think that Sarah Palin might have some kind of cognitive disorder. Her arguments often come out resembling word salad.

And that whole "I'm going to answer how I want" thing? Was she trying to piss people off? Was there anyone who actually liked that flagrant flippancy? Supposing that, after 9/11, Bush had said, "I know y'all are asking me about the terrorist attack that just happened, but I wanna talk for a minute about job creation." Sometimes, you really do just have to answer the question you're asked.

[Spud]

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see. This debate was a tie. So was the last one. He called the last on 80/20 for Obama. Give me a break. Just because you didn't like what the other person had to say, doesn't mean that they "lost", it just means that you disagree with them. However, I don't think that anyone has to 'win' one of these in order for the American people to see what their choices are. Yes, I imagine that there as some people who like her style. I am not one of them. But, you know, I have a hard time with people who, like, use the word "like" as a modifier.

In the end, I am glad that Biden didn't beat her to a pulp, but instead, let her stand up there and do what she wanted to do, which was make her pitch, and let it speak for itself. I just hope that there are enough reasonable people in this country who aren't buying the snake oil, and that the few who actually like her delivery and vote based on that and not the ridiculous content that it contains are far and few between.

[Billy's Little Trip]

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see.

I agree. I thought both sides connected well with their people. Which was kind of a problem for me. Neither really seemed to try to convince the opposing voters to their side.

By the way, it took me 15 minutes in before I could stop picturing Tina Fey when Palin started talking.

[erik]

I thought both sides connected well with their people. Which was kind of a problem for me. Neither really seemed to try to convince the opposing voters to their side.

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see.

[JonPorobil]

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see.

Maybe? I thought the first Obama/McCain debate was something of a draw, but I don't think that the results of the VP debate could possibly have been clearer. Palin avoided every question she was asked, and when forced to speak, spouted nonsense, strung together sound bytes into syntactically unstable "sentences," and got her facts wrong. Biden spoke clearly, effectively, and accurately.

I don't deny the charge of WANTING Biden to have won, but I also try to watch critically.

[Hoblit]

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see.

Maybe? I thought the first Obama/McCain debate was something of a draw, but I don't think that the results of the VP debate could possibly have been clearer. Palin avoided every question she was asked, and when forced to speak, spouted nonsense, strung together sound bytes into syntactically unstable "sentences," and got her facts wrong. Biden spoke clearly, effectively, and accurately.

I don't deny the charge of WANTING Biden to have won, but I also try to watch critically.

I thought she answered MOST of the questions BEFORE she went on with all of her tie-ins. (which she did do) She was in fact wrong about one of her facts although I didn't know it and I still don't know which it was. I'm going on a quick review of it where a commentator showed that she was mistaken about whatever it was she was mistaken about. (And CNN confirmed that she was wrong about something..hey it was early..I was still waking up so I didn't catch it there either)

Given the low bar that she had going into the thing she did pretty darn well.

[Billy's Little Trip]

I thought both sides connected well with their people. Which was kind of a problem for me. Neither really seemed to try to convince the opposing voters to their side.

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see.

Just like a Democrat, stealing someone else's speech. zing!

[erik]

I thought both sides connected well with their people. Which was kind of a problem for me. Neither really seemed to try to convince the opposing voters to their side.

I think you are falling into the Sober trap here, seeing what you want to see.

Just like a Democrat, stealing someone else's speech. zing!

You are very funny.

[Paco Del Stinko]

I hear the TV news in the background, local ABC, I believe, reporting that McCain is off the campaign trail this weekend to prepare for Tuesday's debate. They tagged it on to the end of the report about how Obama is linked to terrorists. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see if the war hero can actually talk economics and not insert the distracting fear factor instead.

Also: From an MSNBC report about the division in the Catholic church about who to vote for In Scranton, Pa., every Catholic attending Mass this weekend will hear a special homily about the election next month: Bishop Joseph Martino has ordered every priest in the diocese to read a letter warning that voting for a supporter of abortion rights amounts to endorsing “homicide.” Elsewhere this week I heard about Baptist churches somewhere thumbing their noses at the IRS who are after their tax exempt status. Church and state, peoples.

[roymond]

The National Debt Clock ran out of digits

[Hoblit]

The National Debt Clock ran out of digits

Yeah, I saw that a week or so ago on Fark.

If you really want to get your blood rolling:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... 6282.story

[Billy's Little Trip]

I never knew this, but it turns out I'm just a regular Joe six pack. Who knew?