Scientists Develop New Hydrogen Reactor

Akron Beacon Journal ^ | 2/13/04 | GREGG AAMOT

[spunkets]

I'm the sorce for that calc. It's original and it's an absolute check on any computer models conjured up. As far as worrying about the increase in water vapor going up...It's a 13% increase in water at a 2% concentration level. So, 2%=>2.24%. From an avg temp of 17^o to 19^oC the vapor pressure of water goes from 14.53mm Hg to 16.48mm Hg, out of 760 mm Hg for the atmospheric P. That's not significant. That 2^oC increase is also on the order of 100 years.

[VetoBill]

How much land are we going to have to plow/plant with corn to match our current energy production/usage?

I don't believe anyone seriously believes that all our current demand can be addressed by renewable sources at this time. Just as there are no coal powered airplanes or natural gas fueled motorcycles, renewable will be used in those areas where liquid portable fuels sources are in demand.

How much pollution in the form of farm runoff will be generated matching our current energy output?

Thanks to GMO's I have reduced my chemical requirements drastically and switched toward more environmentally friendly herbicides such as Round Up. With the combination of variable rate fertilizer equipment and genetic engineering I predict within 7 years the concerns about nitrogen leaching will all but evaporate.

How much additional water are we going to need to cultivate this crop (enviros are already screaming about the lack of clean water around the world)?

I cannot help but see that in agricultural terms of water use, we are at the height of demand and are on a downward slope from here on out. 5 years ago I was raising 180 bu corn... I am now averaging over 210 with less water. The hybrids are better, the irrigation systems are more efficient, no-till cropping is catching on, and new narrow row corn options are being explored.

I agree with you about costs, that is spot on. Cost is the area that concerns me about renewable fuels. Environmental concerns and the energy balance issue are non-issues

[The_Victor]

Thanks for your answers (I'm guessing you're a farmer). The environmentalists don't ever want to talk about the downsides to all their solutions, but we need to be sure the cure isn't worse than the disease.

I like the news about fertilizers. The enviros are squealing about GMO haven't mentioned the reduced pollution and water usage benefits.

[ScudEast]

I wasn't looking for a source for that calculation, as it seems straightforward enough. What I was after was some source that says whether the number you gave was, or wasn't significant. I know it's a low number, but a lot of scientists are getting quite steamed up (ho ho) about it which leads me to believe that it can't be quite that simple. After all, if they could be refuted by a simple equation then there wouldn't be a debate about it, which there is.

[spunkets]

It really is that simple. I just took 2^oC as an outside number for the temp. rise the warmists guess at. It also comes from rough calcs w/o considering the effect of water and it's cycle. That is a number that might be found 75+ years from now. The warmists don't account for water vapor, or water cycling very well also. That's a complication that reduces the effect of CO₂ increases and tends to keep the temp constant.

2^oC is 3.6^oF at the avg temp for the Eath's atmosphere, 18^oC. That's not much of a change, either in energy, or qualitatively. It's also an outside number that might occur 75+ years from now. There is no justification to turn over energy use to the leftists on these grounds. The time is sufficient for adjstments to be made w/o going pre-stone age under the leftists. They obfuscate in the complexity of modeling for political purposes and for cash flow reasons.

Here's a link to the GW report from the National Acad. of Sciences. There's a link in there to an overview of the science involved given by some FReepers. Also if you do an FR search with the terms "National Academy of sciences global warming", you'll get a CATO report and a bunch of others. It's also important to note that the sun's output has the big influence. I think FReeper Old(new?) Geezer has a lot of info regarding that.

[zuko]

Man I can't believe what some people are saying on these posts and seriously doubt their intelligence.

First time post, so go ahead and criticize me for letting anger be my motivator.

Constants:
1. Oil will run out.
2. We need power to survive since we have become so dependent on it.

These two items you cannot change. Hemp can produce more biomass to produce ethanol almost 30% more than corn can. It is easier and cheaper to harvest and convert into ethanol fuel. The latest technology does not require all water to be taken out of ethanol fuel.

Forget hydrogen storing systems. That's corporate propaganda. The hydrogen is only needed to be produced for long enough for the energy to be extracted. JIT system for all you capitalists out there.

If a harvester takes just as much power as it does to harvest the crop , that the crop actually produces, then the harvester is inefficient and needs to be changed. Use the model of a human being: do we need to eat as much or more than we can possibly harvest? I realize that no machine will ever reach this level of efficiency, but its something to strive for.

Of course its going to take money to make this conversion (and we will make this conversion). Its going to take lots and lots of money. Its going to take legislation. Its going to take protests. Its going to take picket lines. Its going to take wars. Its going to take mankind pushing itself to the brink of total destruction before any of the fat swine in the upper branches of our society will even roll off their fat asses to allow it to happen.

Beleedat!

[spunkets]

" Hemp can produce more biomass to produce ethanol almost 30% more than corn can. It is easier and cheaper to harvest and convert into ethanol fuel."

Nope. Hemp is a very indigestable cellulose. Corn is digestable carbohydrate. Nuclear power is the answer.

" Its going to take legislation. Its going to take protests. Its going to take picket lines. Its going to take wars. Its going to take mankind pushing itself to the brink of total destruction before any of the fat swine in the upper branches of our society will even roll off their fat asses to allow it to happen.

You're a commie troll.