[0mar]

People on this board are Carbon men and women, just with a greater perspective.

[I_Like_Plants]

Omar you are correct!!

We all are Carbon Man (and carbon woman)

There was a time when I was growing up that I lived close to like a normal human being, that is, owning not much more than the clothes on my back and darned little of those (climate didn't require much) and eating rather little, ready willing, able, and eager to walk miles, yes, barefoot, to earn a few calories. What can I say? The 70s, to quote Ted Rall, were a time when it was not cool to be a kid.

That's what the lucky 10% of us get to look forward too, the other 90% I guess, make-die-dead hopefully by just gearing back birthrate.

[jvangi]

We get propaganda in our newspapers... (Western ones)
They get propaganda in theirs. (Others...)

I'm used to reading their propaganda, especially the "people's daily" of China because they speak plainly.

I like this editorial that touch some interesting point about western propaganda lately (that is this fuss about China, CNOOC, army general that talks about nuclear response, etc...):
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/20050 ... 98631.html

What do you think of it?
Isn't that a wiser point of view than the editorials we get around here?

[Doly]

I think the ideas in it are fundamentally correct, but it's clearly a Chinese point of view. The Chinese never saw their civilization as a whole package that has to be bought as a lot. They were mostly happy to sell it bit by bit to their neighbours (something having to do with Confucius, I think).

On the other hand, Western civilization is usually seen as a whole. You can't accept industrialization but not democracy, and until fairly recently Christianism was inseparable from the whole lot. This, of course, causes friction much more easily.

Another problem comes from the fact that the three One God religions (Judaism, Christianism and Islam) are exclusive, as opposed to Buddhism, that is inclusive. You can be a Buddhist Christian, a Buddhist Hindi, or any combination of Buddhism with any other religion.

[jvangi]

Thanks for giving this analysis, Doly. I didn't know these things about buddhism...

That's conforting my idea that I should be more afraid of the propaganda of my own country (Fance) than of China. After all, the 2 world wars were started in Europe...

[Tyler_JC]

I found this site about Fuel Cells and how they will save the day. Most of their science is easily corrected. I tried to do just a basic critic of their "Just The Basics" section. It's sad that this site was used as an example of a solution to peak oil by someone in another forum.

(My comments in bold)

http://fuelcellsworks.com/Justthebasics.html

What makes hydrogen an energy tool?

The most common element in the universe, hydrogen has the highest energy content per unit weight of any known fuel. Yet it never occurs by itself in nature - it always combines with other elements such as oxygen (for water) and carbon (for fossil fuels).
Once separated, hydrogen is the ultimate clean energy carrier. It can be non-polluting, is as safe as gasoline and can be produced anywhere.

<b> OK, so basically you want us to turn natural gas into hydrogen...how is that getting us off of fossil fuels? And where in here do you mention cost?</b>

NASA's space shuttles use hydrogen-powered fuel cells to operate electrical systems and the key emission, water, is consumed by the crew.
<b>That's great. NASA's 2 billion dollar shuttles are the perfect model for a replacement to the $15,000 passenger Sedan.</b>

How is hydrogen produced?
It can be extracted from any substance with hydrogen: water, fossil fuels and even some organic matter.
Almost all of the 40 million tons of hydrogen used worldwide today comes from natural gas though a process called reforming. Natural gas is made to react with steam, producing hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The hydrogen is then used to make ammonia for fertilizer, in refineries to make reformulated gasoline, and in the chemical, food and metals industries.
<b>Again, where are we going to get the extra natural gas to produce all of this wonderful hydrogen? Do you have an extra trillion cubic feet in your basement? I don't.</b>

This is the cheapest way to make hydrogen today and is likely the way we will make hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles in the near future. Hydrogen also can be made from coal in a similar process where the coal is reacted with steam. Either way, though, the process releases carbon dioxide, a gas tied to global warming.

Carbon-free methods involve splitting water into its component parts of hydrogen (H2) and oxygen (O).

Electrolysis uses an electric current to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen. The electric current has to itself be produced, and the easiest but least efficient way is via some fossil fuel. The holy grail of hydrogen is to use a renewable source like solar, wind, hydro, geothermal or biomass power to create the current, making the process pollution free and sustainable.

Heat or electricity from a nuclear power plant could also be used to split water, but that path still faces nuclear waste and security issues. Future possibilities include using the power of ocean waves to generate electricity and microorganisms that could be adapted to produce hydrogen.

<b>More of this fossil fuel to hydrogen crap. You don't save money on clothing by wearing your shirt backwards. It's nonsense to waste a perfectly good fossil fuel by turning it into something else.</b>


How much water would we need if we got hydrogen that way?

Actually, not that much compared to what we already use. If we converted the current U.S. light-duty fleet (some 230 million vehicles) to fuel cell vehicles we would need about 310 billion gallons of water per year. Domestic water use is about 4.8 trillion gallons per year, and 70 trillion gallons a year are used for thermoelectric power generation. Interestingly enough, the refinery industry uses about 300 billion gallons of water a year to produce gasoline.
How do fuel cells fit in the hydrogen picture?
Fuel cells are often compared to batteries. Both convert the energy produced by a chemical reaction into usable electric power. However, the fuel cell will produce electricity as long as fuel (hydrogen) is supplied, never losing its charge.
And while hydrogen could be used to run an internal combustion engine, fuel cells are inherently 2-3 times more efficient – in the case of a car; that means they can get 2-3 times the mileage.
Like batteries, fuel cells’ performance declines over time and they have to be replaced. The goals for fuel cells are 5,000 hours of operation for transportation (representing about 150,000 miles) and 40,000 hours (about 5 years) for stationary applications. Some fuel cell technologies can match the stationary needs for 40,000 hours, but we are only about a third of the way there for vehicles, a much more demanding application.

<b>Since when did a water shortage cause problems with producing hydrogen? How is going from water to hydrogen + oxygen back to water again an energy source? It's thermodynamically impossible.</b>

What's holding up widescale production?

Cost is the biggest impediment. Electricity is required by many hydrogen production methods, which so far makes hydrogen more expensive than the fuels it would replace. With cars, gasoline is still easier to store than hydrogen, which needs to be compressed or kept at very cold temperatures.
In addition, an infrastructure would have to be built, and paid for, in order to produce, transport and store large quantities of hydrogen.

<b>So you finally admit that hydrogen is cost prohibitive...good for you.</b>

Wouldn't we run out of oxygen and see excess water vapor?

No. Producing hydrogen produces and consumes oxygen in the same ratio.
As for water vapor, burning gasoline already does that, though fuel cell vehicles produce about twice as much per mile. This is still a relatively small amount compared to what is already in the atmosphere naturally, and a tiny amount compared to what is being added by global warming.

<b>???RUN OUT OF OXYGEN???</b>

How much does hydrogen cost?

Most of the hydrogen produced today is consumed on site, such as at an oil refinery, where it costs 32 cents a pound.
When hydrogen is sold on the market, the cost of liquefying and transporting it to the user increases the price to $1-1.40 a pound.

A pound of hydrogen has a bit less energy than a half gallon of gasoline.

<b>Not true. Hyrdogen costs $12 per gallon of gasoline equivalent if you take away the cheap oil subsidy</b>

Is hydrogen safe and didn't it cause the Hindenburg disaster?

In general, hydrogen is neither more nor less inherently hazardous than gasoline, propane, or methane.
As for the Hindenburg, a recent study found the paint used on the blimp's skin was to blame since it contained the same component as rocket fuel. An electrical discharge ignited the skin. While the hydrogen gas used to float the blimp did ignite, it burned upward and away from the people on board and actually provided a slow, safe descent for those who stayed on board.

<b>Ah yes, the ball of flames of the Hindenburg was a "good" thing</b>

Don’t you lose a lot of energy when you make hydrogen?

Indeed, all energy systems lose energy (an average coal plant loses 70 percent of the energy in the coal), so we need to think very carefully about where we are going to get this energy. The sun could be the answer. Think about it for a minute and you’ll realize that we are all solar powered - the food we eat for our energy ultimately comes from plants converting solar energy to carbohydrates with an efficiency of about 1 percent. Of course, by the time the food hits the table the efficiency is much lower, probably around 0.1 percent. Current commercial solar cells can convert solar energy with an efficiency of more than 15 percent.
If we take that energy and make hydrogen and then use that hydrogen in a fuel cell vehicle, the overall efficiency of sunlight to vehicle power is about 4 percent. So using hydrogen from sunlight, we can drive ourselves around with an efficiency of at least 40 times greater than we can walk.

<b>Now you finally admit that your solution is thermodynamically impossible. And solar power? When you get solar power to be in line with the cost of say, wind or coal...come talk to me.</b>

How much is hydrogen from renewables going to cost?
With today’s technologies using electricity from wind, hydrogen would cost between 3 and 5 times that of gasoline. In Europe, where gasoline is already 3 to 5 times higher than the U.S. prices, hydrogen represents a cost-competitive fuel and with the higher efficiency of fuel cell vehicles, a strong possibility as an alternative fuel.

<b>You are forgetting sir that the extra cost of gasoline in Europe is in the form of taxes. Those taxes fund the governments of Europe. They would have to raise other taxes in order to make up for the gas taxes. If everyone switched to hydrogen (somehow), the UK would be hurting for tax revenue and would be forced to tax hydrogen, driving up the price. And don't forget that European prices in America would destroy our economy.</b>

Can’t I put water in my tank – it’s got hydrogen in it?

Water is not an energy carrier like hydrogen and gasoline. You have to take the water and add energy to split it into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen then becomes a fuel, because it now carries that energy that you added. When that hydrogen reacts with the oxygen in the air it releases that stored energy and you can use that to move the car. So if you wanted to use water as a “fuel” you would have to have two power plants in your car, one to make the hydrogen and one to run your vehicle. Better to make the hydrogen separately and just fill your car with energy.

<b>I don't see the point of responding to this irratingly ignorant question.</b>

How about putting solar cells on the roof of my car?

Our cars take a lot of energy and while there is a lot of energy in sunlight, the rooftop of your car does not have enough area. For an average car you’d need something like the size of a football field – not very practical.

<b>At least this paragraph is truthful</b>

[whiteknight]

Yes, anyone who dares to point out that DOOM DOOM DOOM might be mitigate or reduced by anything is a heratic that must be countered by the agents of the holy inquisition...

[glug_glug]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('whiteknight', 'Y')es, anyone who dares to point out that DOOM DOOM DOOM might be mitigate or reduced by anything is a heratic that must be countered by the agents of the holy inquisition...

[whiteknight]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('glug_glug', 'A') false messiah like the "hydrogen economy" is about as useful as just sticking your head in the sand and saying that Peak Oil will never happen.

[mjdlight]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jeezlouise', 'P')icked up this brochure in the local BP the other day: link
It doesn't say when it was printed... wonder how long they'll leave it up...

[pea-jay]

The dinosaur chase scene in Jurassic Park II shows a UnoCal station with gas in the low dollar-teens or so.

It's fun even to watch gas station file footage at times used during local news casts or even car commercial. They can be 40-80c cheaper than current prices.

[greenworm]

When one hears the term "internet wars" one quickly thinks about denial of service attacks, worms that destroy economies, spying, but it seems the big players are now focusing their attention on the hearts and minds of the sheeple.

Jews


al qaeda

more jews


Tis the age of disinformation!

[lateralus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('greenworm', 't')he sheeple.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lateralus', '
')Sheeple, is that sheep people? That's a good one, I'll adopt it if you don't mind.

[greenworm]

I think I first heard it in reference to Wal-Mart shoppers. It is used a lot on these boards.

I would've posted American propaganda, but I had a feeling some of our neoconservative friends on the boards would do so. Please checkout Specops latest post for good ol' US of atrocity propaganda.

[Rambo]

[web]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6058970.stm[/web]

[dukey]

interesting
i am pretty sure the bill was like the exact opposite as described in the BBC news

[joewp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Science Teachers’ Organization Distributes Oil Industry Funded Propaganda, Rejects Copies of Inconvenient Truth', '
')In tomorrow’s Washington Post, global warming activist Laurie David writes about her effort to donate 50,000 free DVD copies of An Inconvenient Truth (which she co-produced) to the National Science Teachers Association. The Association refused to accept the DVDs:

In their e-mail rejection, they expressed concern that other “special interests” might ask to distribute materials, too; they said they didn’t want to offer “political” endorsement of the film; and they saw “little, if any, benefit to NSTA or its members” in accepting the free DVDs. …

[T]here was one more curious argument in the e-mail: Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place “unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters.”

As it turns out, those supporters already include “special interests,” including Exxon-Mobil, Shell Oil, and the American Petroleum Institute, which have given millions in funding to the NSTA. And while the NSTA showed no interest in helping educators get copies of Al Gore’s movie (which scientists gave “five stars for accuracy“), it has distributed oil industry-funded “educational” content, like this video produced by the American Petroleum Institute:

(More at link)

[jeezlouise]

So this girl wakes up to find that all her favorite niceties that came directly or indirectly from oil are gone... yet she still has a car, a huge house in the suburbs... a large city in which to live...

That aside, this video, however cheap-looking and cheesy, could have been at least something to wake 6th through 8th graders to the extent to which oil is pervasive in their lives, and how dangerous that is... but instead is just being positioned as a statement: "You can't live without oil, don't even try, so you might as well stop worrying about this Global Warming stuff or even better, accept that it's all hippie propaganda."

Way to go, teachers of America. Science teachers, no less. Quite shameful.

[Zardoz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '.')..“unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters.”