REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > REVscene Nation: Beyond The GVRD > Island Automotive Chat

Island Automotive Chat Victoria to Port Hardy and everything in between
For all your island car related talk.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-23-2008, 01:05 PM   #326
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Timpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: ...
Posts: 20,379
Thanked 4,550 Times in 1,368 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama View Post
The Volt is kind of pointless anyway, any of you guys seen the latest Top Gear. Hydrogen fuel cell is really the best thing going. Jay and James nail the point home later in the episode and it makes perfect sense.
The biggest problem is there is no hydrogen station other than California.
Unless the government is willing to build one.

Honda sells one already in California. http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
*edit* ok looks like you can only lease one.
Advertisement

Last edited by Timpo; 12-23-2008 at 01:07 PM.
Timpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 01:11 PM   #327
Island Mod
 
projectcivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 6,179
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
I believe there is a hydrogen station in Vancouver as well. But i think thats the biggest obsticle against hydrogen cars at this point.
__________________
1993 Civic Si - b18c1

Last edited by projectcivic; 12-23-2008 at 01:12 PM.
projectcivic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 01:16 PM   #328
Head Mod yo
 
Victoria SiR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 250
Posts: 8,803
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
That would come in time. propane was the same way when it started. That is really not the issue.
Victoria SiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 01:38 PM   #329
"They call me Bowser...RawR!"
 
!LittleDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,572
Thanked 351 Times in 141 Posts
Is there any method yet to produce hydrogen that doesn't create more greenhouse gasses than just burning petrol? With petrol, the pollution comes from the car... with hydrogen and electric cars, the pollution comes from producing the hydrogen or electricity.
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke
!LittleDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 02:15 PM   #330
RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 8,510
Thanked 2,597 Times in 849 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by !LittleDragon View Post
Is there any method yet to produce hydrogen that doesn't create more greenhouse gasses than just burning petrol? With petrol, the pollution comes from the car... with hydrogen and electric cars, the pollution comes from producing the hydrogen or electricity.
The big deal is efficiency.

Internal combustion engines are terribly inefficient (20-30%), meaning 70% of the pollution created did no useful work.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2

A vehicle for all occasions

Last edited by Great68; 12-23-2008 at 02:15 PM.
Great68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 03:23 PM   #331
Head Mod yo
 
Victoria SiR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 250
Posts: 8,803
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by !LittleDragon View Post
Is there any method yet to produce hydrogen that doesn't create more greenhouse gasses than just burning petrol? With petrol, the pollution comes from the car... with hydrogen and electric cars, the pollution comes from producing the hydrogen or electricity.
To be honest, who gives a fuck.

They'll get there eventually, all this hair splitting over this and that can go for eons, shit why not calculate the "Carbon Footprint" For building a gas plant, or for the machinery that did the construction. While we are at it, we better calculate the environmental impact producing the lunch that the field worker ate last Wednesday.

Fuck off with that.

The point of this isn't solely the environment. Yeah its a huge second, but the main reason is we are gonna run out of oil eventually.
Victoria SiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 06:01 PM   #332
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Fastam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: dumbmestic vile
Posts: 3,680
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
I disagree on Hydrogen. Its too hard to produce in the volume we need, i don't think it will ever be able to replace oil.

The way IMO is E85 type fuels , however we need to explore methods other then inefficient corn. Hemp and Algae look very promissing.
Fastam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 08:02 PM   #333
Head Mod yo
 
Victoria SiR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 250
Posts: 8,803
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
Have you looked at how much we'd need to grow in order to produce the fuel needed.

Hydrogen will happen.
Victoria SiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 08:12 PM   #334
RS.net, where our google ads make absolutely no sense!
 
oldskoolz24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Victoria
Posts: 925
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastam View Post
I disagree on Hydrogen. Its too hard to produce in the volume we need, i don't think it will ever be able to replace oil.

The way IMO is E85 type fuels , however we need to explore methods other then inefficient corn. Hemp and Algae look very promissing.
In Brazil, their ethanol fuel is derived from sugar cane, which they can grow quickly and in mass quantities and has something like twice the energy of corn based fuels
__________________
1990 Z24 - DSP bottom feeder
1994 Golf GL - "her" car

Victoria Motor Sports Club - President
oldskoolz24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 09:13 PM   #335
Banned (BBM)
 
Fleemer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Victoria
Posts: 668
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldskoolz24 View Post
In Brazil, their ethanol fuel is derived from sugar cane, which they can grow quickly and in mass quantities and has something like twice the energy of corn based fuels
you talking about butanol?

I did a little bit a research on butonal and its extreamly similar to gas. SO much so that you can pump it straight it without mods.

I think i read somewhere that it costs about 1.28$ a litre to produce butanol and the US says thats impossible or something. Also some are skeptical that it even exists.

I think thats why the gas is so cheap as they are trying to be cheaper and prolong the discovery/implementation of other fuel sources.
Fleemer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 09:25 PM   #336
"They call me Bowser...RawR!"
 
!LittleDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,572
Thanked 351 Times in 141 Posts
Isn't there like at least 1.7 trillion barrels in Alberta? That's enough to last the world a VERY long time... it'll be hideously expensive when it gets more and more difficult to extract tho.
__________________
"Damn fine car Dodge... Ran over me wife with a Dodge!", Zeke
!LittleDragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 09:52 PM   #337
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Fastam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: dumbmestic vile
Posts: 3,680
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama View Post
Have you looked at how much we'd need to grow in order to produce the fuel needed.

Hydrogen will happen.
http://www.culturechange.org/hydrogen.htm

Some how i don't see Hydrogen working.

Quote:
The basic problem of hydrogen fuel cells is that the second law of thermodynamics dictates that we will always have to expend more energy deriving the hydrogen than we will receive from the usage of that hydrogen. The common misconception is that hydrogen fuel cells are an alternative energy source when they are not.

In reality, hydrogen fuel cells are a storage battery for energy derived from other sources. In a fuel cell, hydrogen and oxygen are fed to the anode and cathode, respectively, of each cell. Electrons stripped from the hydrogen produce direct current electricity which can be used in a DC electric motor or converted to alternating current.

Because of the second law of thermodynamics, hydrogen fuel cells will always have a bad EROEI. If fossil fuels are used to generate the hydrogen, either through the Methane-Steam method or through Electrolysis of Water, there will be no advantage over using the fossil fuels directly. The use of hydrogen as an intermediate form of energy storage is justified only when there is some reason for not using the primary source directly. For this reason, a hydrogen-based economy must depend on large-scale development of nuclear power or solar electricity.
And then we have these possiblites.
http://gas2.org/2008/01/13/gm-announ...green-ethanol/
http://www.hemphasis.net/Fuel-Energy/fuel.htm

Not sure if these numbers are correct , but if they are, it wouldn't take much land to grow enough hemp.
Quote:
Hemp is at least four times richer in biomass/cellulose potential than its nearest rivals: cornstalks, sugarcane, kenaf, trees, etc.

Hemp produces the most biomass of any crop, which is why it is the natural choice for an energy crop. Hemp converts the sun's energy into cellulose faster than any other plant, through photosynthesis. Hemp can produce 10 tons of biomass per acre every four months. Enough energy could be produced on 6% of the land in the U.S. to provide enough energy for our entire country (cars, heat homes, electricity, industry) -- and we use 25% of the world's energy.

To put which in perspective, right now we pay farmers not to grow on 6% (around 90 million acres) of the farming land, while another 500 million acres of marginal farmland lies fallow. This land could be used to grow hemp as an energy crop.

Last edited by Fastam; 12-23-2008 at 10:18 PM.
Fastam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2008, 10:08 PM   #338
Head Moderator
 
Lomac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1982
Location: Great White Nor
Posts: 22,593
Thanked 6,400 Times in 2,052 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldskoolz24 View Post
In Brazil, their ethanol fuel is derived from sugar cane, which they can grow quickly and in mass quantities and has something like twice the energy of corn based fuels
Yup. However, Brazil is also razing a large portion of their usable farmland in order to grow these sugar canes. In order to supply a country like the USA, you'd be looking at such a large amount of land needed to grow the sugarcane that we will be looking elsewhere for our vegetables and fruit.
Lomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:04 AM   #339
Banned (BBM)
 
Fleemer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Victoria
Posts: 668
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
vertical farms people, think vertical. :P
Fleemer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:14 AM   #340
Technology Information Auditor
 
aspect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: arizona
Posts: 135
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastam View Post
Some how i don't see Hydrogen working.
Quote:
The basic problem of hydrogen fuel cells is that the second law of thermodynamics dictates that we will always have to expend more energy deriving the hydrogen than we will receive from the usage of that hydrogen. The common misconception is that hydrogen fuel cells are an alternative energy source when they are not.

In reality, hydrogen fuel cells are a storage battery for energy derived from other sources. In a fuel cell, hydrogen and oxygen are fed to the anode and cathode, respectively, of each cell. Electrons stripped from the hydrogen produce direct current electricity which can be used in a DC electric motor or converted to alternating current.

Because of the second law of thermodynamics, hydrogen fuel cells will always have a bad EROEI. If fossil fuels are used to generate the hydrogen, either through the Methane-Steam method or through Electrolysis of Water, there will be no advantage over using the fossil fuels directly. The use of hydrogen as an intermediate form of energy storage is justified only when there is some reason for not using the primary source directly. For this reason, a hydrogen-based economy must depend on large-scale development of nuclear power or solar electricity.


Yes, fuel cells have a "bad" return on energy because they obey the laws of physics. Good argument. The guy that wrote that quote obviously has no idea why fuel cells are even used. Of course it's just a storage medium...one that's more efficient than batteries.

First of all, a hydrogen fuel cell car has a very similar level of efficiency to a standard electric car. Instead of sending the energy over a line and then storing it in a battery, it's stored in the hydrogen and transported. What's the point? You don't need thousands of battery cells that weigh down the car, require manufacturing in the first place, and will eventually need to be replaced. Batteries also get less efficient each time you recharge them.

Second, burning fossil fuels in a large scale utility generator and then producing liquid hydrogen is way, way, WAY more efficient than burning gasoline in thousands of tiny car engines. You think a 50MW natural gas plant has the same percentage of heat energy loss as a car engine? Yes, of course there are losses in transferring that energy through the hydrogen process and in the fuel cell, but it's nowhere close to the massive amount of waste you get with internal combustion piston motors.

Besides, in many places (like BC for example), the electricity available on the grid which would be used to produce hydrogen is only partially generated using fossil fuels and is otherwise generated by hydroelectric etc.
__________________
1999 silver impreza squirrel mincer VTEC

Last edited by aspect; 12-24-2008 at 12:26 AM.
aspect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 06:45 AM   #341
I answer every Emotion with an emoticon
 
Nightwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Van Isle
Posts: 7,653
Thanked 443 Times in 188 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleemer View Post
you talking about butanol?

I did a little bit a research on butonal and its extreamly similar to gas. SO much so that you can pump it straight it without mods.

I think i read somewhere that it costs about 1.28$ a litre to produce butanol and the US says thats impossible or something. Also some are skeptical that it even exists.

I think thats why the gas is so cheap as they are trying to be cheaper and prolong the discovery/implementation of other fuel sources.

Nope, this is about ethanol. Brazil punked the world on this since they jumped on it during the oil crisis in the 70s (due to having 80% of their oil being imported and getting bent over when the prices skyrocketed). In that time, they've reduced production costs to about 22 cents usd per liter of ethanol and have zero dependence on foreign oil (they are projecting a net export for 2009). Having the second largest proven oil reserves in South America just after Venezuela doesn't hurt on that part though, it's not like they don't still use oil.

It's pretty awesome seeing what they've done though. They burn bagasse (the leftover tissue from the sugar cane stalks) to power the production facilities too.

There's a wiki page on it that has a ton of great info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajinHurricane View Post
who would ban me? lol. Look at my post count.

Last edited by Nightwalker; 12-24-2008 at 07:08 AM.
Nightwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 08:53 AM   #342
Head Mod yo
 
Victoria SiR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 250
Posts: 8,803
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspect View Post


Yes, fuel cells have a "bad" return on energy because they obey the laws of physics. Good argument. The guy that wrote that quote obviously has no idea why fuel cells are even used. Of course it's just a storage medium...one that's more efficient than batteries.

First of all, a hydrogen fuel cell car has a very similar level of efficiency to a standard electric car. Instead of sending the energy over a line and then storing it in a battery, it's stored in the hydrogen and transported. What's the point? You don't need thousands of battery cells that weigh down the car, require manufacturing in the first place, and will eventually need to be replaced. Batteries also get less efficient each time you recharge them.

Second, burning fossil fuels in a large scale utility generator and then producing liquid hydrogen is way, way, WAY more efficient than burning gasoline in thousands of tiny car engines. You think a 50MW natural gas plant has the same percentage of heat energy loss as a car engine? Yes, of course there are losses in transferring that energy through the hydrogen process and in the fuel cell, but it's nowhere close to the massive amount of waste you get with internal combustion piston motors.

Besides, in many places (like BC for example), the electricity available on the grid which would be used to produce hydrogen is only partially generated using fossil fuels and is otherwise generated by hydroelectric etc.
Exactly.

I think you need to look at whats been going on with hydrogen and Honda Terrence instead of just grabbing articles and posting shit off Google.. GM is just behind as usual.
Victoria SiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 10:29 AM   #343
I subscribe to the Fight Club ONLY
 
Type R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Pimp Palace
Posts: 7,236
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
GM is far from behind, the hydrogen Equinox has been on the road and running since 05, and driven by Leonardo DiCaprio. GM and Ford palled up with Mercedes to fund Ballard who runs fuel cell bus's in Vancouver, and thats been running since 99 I believe.
__________________
-=Teh Kooler Paisan=-

Well Spank My Ass And Serve Me A Milkshake!!
_________________
Sales & Leasing / Wheaton Nanaimo
Type R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 11:43 AM   #344
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Fastam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: dumbmestic vile
Posts: 3,680
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspect View Post


Yes, fuel cells have a "bad" return on energy because they obey the laws of physics. Good argument. The guy that wrote that quote obviously has no idea why fuel cells are even used. Of course it's just a storage medium...one that's more efficient than batteries.

First of all, a hydrogen fuel cell car has a very similar level of efficiency to a standard electric car. Instead of sending the energy over a line and then storing it in a battery, it's stored in the hydrogen and transported. What's the point? You don't need thousands of battery cells that weigh down the car, require manufacturing in the first place, and will eventually need to be replaced. Batteries also get less efficient each time you recharge them.

Second, burning fossil fuels in a large scale utility generator and then producing liquid hydrogen is way, way, WAY more efficient than burning gasoline in thousands of tiny car engines. You think a 50MW natural gas plant has the same percentage of heat energy loss as a car engine? Yes, of course there are losses in transferring that energy through the hydrogen process and in the fuel cell, but it's nowhere close to the massive amount of waste you get with internal combustion piston motors.

Besides, in many places (like BC for example), the electricity available on the grid which would be used to produce hydrogen is only partially generated using fossil fuels and is otherwise generated by hydroelectric etc.
I think you missed the point. Clearly using fossil fuel based hydrogen production is more efficient then millions of gasoline engines.

The point is outside of BC (since we have mostly hydro power) The majority of the world still uses Coal Fired plants. We would still be tied to non-renewable fuel sources. A crop like hemp would provide a renewable source ,and start a whole new farming economy.

Last edited by Fastam; 12-30-2008 at 11:12 PM.
Fastam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:06 PM   #345
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Fastam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: dumbmestic vile
Posts: 3,680
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R View Post
GM is far from behind, the hydrogen Equinox has been on the road and running since 05, and driven by Leonardo DiCaprio. GM and Ford palled up with Mercedes to fund Ballard who runs fuel cell bus's in Vancouver, and thats been running since 99 I believe.

Exactly GM has always been on the forefront of fuel cell delevopment.

http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/gm-electrovan.htm

They even have a fuel cell version of the volt
http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/chevy-volt-hydrogen.htm

Last edited by Fastam; 12-24-2008 at 12:20 PM.
Fastam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 12:33 PM   #346
RS.net, helping ugly ppl have sex since 2001
 
Great68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Victoria
Posts: 8,510
Thanked 2,597 Times in 849 Posts
I can't see farmed energy ever being a replacement for fossil fuels.

You need:

1) Lots of space
2) Time to grow the crop
3) Farm equipment
4) Fertilizers and chemicals - A lot of which are petrochemical based
5) Lots of labour to farm it.

All of that is WAY more expensive than sticking a pipe in the ground and pumping out oil.
__________________
1968 Mustang Coupe
2008.5 Mazdaspeed 3
1997 GMC Sonoma ZR2

A vehicle for all occasions
Great68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 01:19 PM   #347
Head Mod yo
 
Victoria SiR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 250
Posts: 8,803
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Type R View Post
GM is far from behind, the hydrogen Equinox has been on the road and running since 05, and driven by Leonardo DiCaprio. GM and Ford palled up with Mercedes to fund Ballard who runs fuel cell bus's in Vancouver, and thats been running since 99 I believe.
That right there illustrates the point precisely as to why GM has missed the fucking boat AGAIN. Its like their V8's that have a hamster wheel of an electric motor and then that makes it a hybrid. They don't take it seriously.

An Equinox... are you fucking kidding me? How about a car that EVERYONE could use as a commuter like what Honda just did. Instead of a huge ass SUV. You wonder why they fail as a business.

Also who gives a shit what DiCaprio drives. He has three Prius's (Priuii?) too.
Victoria SiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 01:52 PM   #348
I subscribe to the Fight Club ONLY
 
Type R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Pimp Palace
Posts: 7,236
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama View Post
That right there illustrates the point precisely as to why GM has missed the fucking boat AGAIN. Its like their V8's that have a hamster wheel of an electric motor and then that makes it a hybrid. They don't take it seriously.

An Equinox... are you fucking kidding me? How about a car that EVERYONE could use as a commuter like what Honda just did. Instead of a huge ass SUV. You wonder why they fail as a business.

Also who gives a shit what DiCaprio drives. He has three Prius's (Priuii?) too.

Do you actually think before type? Here are the facts:

There are presently 700 Hybrid city buses (GM-Allison) running in Canada & US, and 1000 worldwide. They save an estimated 5.3 million litres of fuel a year. Putting hybrids in larger vehicles makes perfect sense (and everyone can use them).

GM is focusing on larger vehicles for its Hybrid system because they are sold almost as much as cars in our market. Truck sales are a big business, and a big expense to customers when it comes to their fuel bills. Having a full size truck or SUV that can get 30mpg does help the urban family or contractor, and its easier to soak up the added expense in the sticker price of a pickup then a prius.

Read my earlier arguments about the added cost of Hybrids (eg honda/toyota) and how they help (or don't) the average person. This is a good plan on GM's part, and the Volt is the next step in many things to come.

Hybrids excel in high mileage situations, much like diesels. Anything under 20k a year just isn't cost affective in most cases.
__________________
-=Teh Kooler Paisan=-

Well Spank My Ass And Serve Me A Milkshake!!
_________________
Sales & Leasing / Wheaton Nanaimo

Last edited by Type R; 12-24-2008 at 02:07 PM.
Type R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2008, 02:41 PM   #349
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Fastam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: dumbmestic vile
Posts: 3,680
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great68 View Post
I can't see farmed energy ever being a replacement for fossil fuels.

You need:

1) Lots of space
2) Time to grow the crop
3) Farm equipment
4) Fertilizers and chemicals - A lot of which are petrochemical based
5) Lots of labour to farm it.

All of that is WAY more expensive than sticking a pipe in the ground and pumping out oil.

Hemp can be harvested 4 times a year. It grows anywhere, and does not require much to grow.

Most of the petrochemicals currently used can also be made of hemp seed oil.
Fastam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2008, 09:56 AM   #350
I answer every Emotion with an emoticon
 
Nightwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Van Isle
Posts: 7,653
Thanked 443 Times in 188 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great68 View Post
I can't see farmed energy ever being a replacement for fossil fuels.

You need:

1) Lots of space
2) Time to grow the crop
3) Farm equipment
4) Fertilizers and chemicals - A lot of which are petrochemical based
5) Lots of labour to farm it.

All of that is WAY more expensive than sticking a pipe in the ground and pumping out oil.
Look at the oil sands. You may have been right in the 60s but as prices increase, more and more methods of production are cost effective.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajinHurricane View Post
who would ban me? lol. Look at my post count.

Last edited by Nightwalker; 12-29-2008 at 09:57 AM.
Nightwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net