Go Back   Team-BHP > Under the Hood > Technical Stuff


View Poll Results: what would you think is the future
hydrogen 35 55.56%
ethanol 4 6.35%
air 9 14.29%
electric 15 23.81%
Voters: 63. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 7th July 2008, 20:04   #46
Senior - BHPian
 
DirtyDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dharamsala
Posts: 1,798
Thanked: 745 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsk1979 View Post
Hydrogen was responsible for Zepplin disaster, whats your point?
3 mile and chernobyl are strawmen arguments.
Technology had advanced a lot.
For example in 1900, flying was a risky business in bad weather, but todays Aircraft can withstand violent storms.


Once Diesel prices go through the roof, farmers will start growing Jathropa instead of wheat if it pays better.
There were MANY survivors of the Hindenberg disaster. This is because hydrogen, being lighter than air, burns upwards when it explodes, unlike say, gasoline which spreads out at ground level.

Years ago when 3 mile Island and Chernobyl ocurred after many public figures had already made exactly the same arguments you make, "the technology is vastly improved". A little maybe, but MEN have not vastly improved. They are still corrupt, they still cheat upon construction of such things as reactors, they still falsify tests, they still make mistakes.

Now, you say "strawman arguments"? You compare a local fire, the Hindenberg, which barely involved a 500 meter square area and killed less than 100 people with a disaster that is STILL ongoing over an area of thousands of square kilometers? And then you simply dismiss Chernobyl? And then, after dredging up a disaster that ocurred with the technology of more than 70 years ago, you argue that nuclear can be made safe because of modern tech? Do you really think anyone in their right mind is going to store hydrogen in something like the dirigible technology of the 1930s? It is not even the same application. The Hindenberg was not an energy based application of hydrogen. It had to be flimsy to get off the ground, not because it stored hydrogen to be used for energy. If anyone is throwing "straw" with his arguments it is you, sir.

There may be an ocassional catastrophe with hydrogen but it will be nothing in its scope and duration compared to a nuclear accident. And, I again remind you, there have been several such accidents already both in military an non-military reactors all of which were claimed to be "fool proof".

There are many other alternatives to nuclear energy. All of them far safer. One I might mention is the collection of solar energy from cheap wide area foil collectors in space and its transmission down to Earth in the form of microwave energy. The technology to do this has been around for more than 30 years. No polution, no nuclear waste. Of course, you can not monopolize sunlight either. Is that a problem?

And, you have not addressed the cost and dangers involved in disposing or storing nuclear waste. The "waste" of hydrogen is dystilled water, hardly a problem at all.

You wanted to know my point? I hope that clarifies my point for you.
DirtyDan is online now   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2008, 23:11   #47
Team-BHP Support
 
tsk1979's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 22,953
Thanked: 15,641 Times
Default

Umm when was the last time a nuclear mishap happened. Please let me know the year.
tsk1979 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2008, 02:52   #48
Senior - BHPian
 
DirtyDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Dharamsala
Posts: 1,798
Thanked: 745 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by srijit View Post
ps: Are we discussing possible automobile fuels? Or just any and all alternate fuel sources? This thread has been moved so many times that I am confused
If we are discussing all alternate fuel options, then I request the mods to create an appropriate poll. The current poll is only for automobiles fuels.
Electric cars beg the question of where the electricity comes from. Future energy concerns will likely be interrelated in many ways.

I am old enough to remember when oil was discovered in abundance on the North Slope (Artic region) of Alaska. There was great debate about the environmental impact that the pipeline south and the ocean oil tankers would have.

The long pipeline was then built South with many safeguards in place that were insisted upon over loud objection from oil men and has not been a problem. But, the oil wizzards assured us all that modern technology would eliminate the tanker risk. Then, not long after, the huge oil tanker Exxon Valdez went aground on the Alaska coast and spewed crude oil all over the shoreline for hundreds of miles. If history shows us one thing it is that there are powerful moneyed men who are quite willing to risk public cataclysm and catastrophe in pursuit of, what else, more power and more money. And, moreover, they often think they are somehow entitled to do this and they will persist in their misadventures even in the face of overwhelming scientific and technological evidence from their own staffs. Exxon board members were told by their own people that their tankers were dangerous.
DirtyDan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2008, 09:01   #49
Senior - BHPian
 
shankar.balan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BLR
Posts: 8,027
Thanked: 5,325 Times
Default

This is the tragedy of our times - rampant, unfettered capitalism, with no regard or concern at all for the good earth.

Money and Power are the new Gods on whose tainted and stained altars, every other thing that one holds dear, will be sacrificed.

Sincerely hope that WATER POWERED vehicle developed in Japan takes off, or that Hydrogen powered vehicles appear soon.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyDan View Post
If history shows us one thing it is that there are powerful moneyed men who are quite willing to risk public cataclysm and catastrophe in pursuit of, what else, more power and more money. And, moreover, they often think they are somehow entitled to do this and they will persist in their misadventures even in the face of overwhelming scientific and technological evidence from their own staffs. Exxon board members were told by their own people that their tankers were dangerous.
shankar.balan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2008, 10:52   #50
BHPian
 
rakowli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 109
Thanked: 3 Times
Default

Gas 4 Free
Has anybody gone thru this site. It states car engine operating on water alongwith with gasoline. We can also buy it. but how effective it is. the machine for converting water into gas is small and doesn't take space and can be fitted into the front hood. but we need to have someone here to give the information about it. when you try to order online you need to pay $97 but what is it for only the ebook or for entire kit they haven't specified. anybody knows about it.
rakowli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2008, 12:29   #51
Team-BHP Support
 
tsk1979's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: New Delhi
Posts: 22,953
Thanked: 15,641 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyDan View Post
And, you have not addressed the cost and dangers involved in disposing or storing nuclear waste. The "waste" of hydrogen is dystilled water, hardly a problem at all.

You wanted to know my point? I hope that clarifies my point for you.
Nuclear energy is needed today as the alternatives used today are dirtier than nuclear energy. for example burning coal produces more radioactive waste than a nuclear plant.
Of course having Solar/wind/wave/Hyd powering all our energy needs is the best thing. If cold fusion becomes a reality it will be the end of oil conglomerate and the energy crisis, but till then, to feed this worlds increasing demand, nuclear is the best compromise.
tsk1979 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2008, 15:29   #52
BHPian
 
srijit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Trivandrum
Posts: 594
Thanked: 6 Times
Talking

@rakowli, that is not a solution. We are just simply prolonging the end.
@Tanveer, nuclear power might be cleaner than coal, but it still isnt good enough. It has got HUGE downsides when you consider how the waste is being disposed of. Also it requires MASSIVE amounts of energy to refine fissionable material. Everybody conveniently forgets this option when mentioning nucear power.

I think that Indians shouldnt ape western idiocy. We should do what is good for India, not for dubya and co.
srijit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2014, 14:46   #53
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Pune
Posts: 360
Thanked: 115 Times
Default Re: Alternate Fuel / Future Fuel

Although there is no option for Solar Energy into the given poll, this one seems most suitable under this thread rather than starting a new one.

Come across this Solar Roadways thing again when they demonstrated a working prototype as a result of last 5 years hard-work. The idea is simple, replace the tar/cement/asphalt roads with exposure to sunlight with solar panels. What ingenuity they did is make it transparent so that some LED can be placed below the panels to show some road marks, made it heat-able to remove snow/ice in cold weather.

Source:
http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml



To me what is more appreciable to this couple is their commitment to implement their idea, otherwise it's too simple to laugh at and forget.
iSpoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2015, 09:44   #54
Senior - BHPian
 
srishiva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 3,576
Thanked: 816 Times
Default Re: Alternate Fuel / Future Fuel

Writing up on an old thread. Saw today someone generating power with 'protoelectron generation' written on it (shown on TV) The guy is someone from Mandya district in Karnataka.

There was no details that was shown but they just kept saying it does not require any of the known sources. Remembered Ramar Pillai and his tricks while seeing this. Anyone familiar with this? Searched on web and couldn't find anything.
srishiva is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2015, 16:33   #55
Senior - BHPian
 
alpha1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: P00NA
Posts: 1,625
Thanked: 965 Times
Default Re: Alternate Fuel / Future Fuel

Quote:
Originally Posted by srishiva View Post
(shown on TV)

There was no details that was shown but they just kept saying it does not require any of the known sources.
Call me a pessimist cynic, but the coverage by TV which doesn't give any details is usually meant to grab eyeballs only.
"Does not require any known sources" can mean anything or it can also means something very stupid. Does the TV anchor mean to say that the technology is alien gifted?
alpha1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Alternate fuel on a Cedia sukrit7 Technical Stuff 7 15th November 2011 18:37
alternate way to fix neons on zen mclaren1885 Modifications & Accessories 11 17th August 2007 12:39
The Low cost fuel of the future. rahul_intlad Technical Stuff 4 6th October 2006 09:27
Any alternate to the Getz or Swift navin Hatchbacks 48 7th July 2005 01:47
Alternate routes for you to reach faster in Bombay! Gordon Shifting gears 13 31st December 2004 13:22


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 23:57.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks