Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
91 to 104 of 104
Posted By: SteamyTeaElectrons have mass, 9.10938188 × 10^-31 kilograms, so very small.They also move at speed, up to 300,000 kilometers per second in a super conductor, so very fast.So now we are into familiar world of kinetic energy and all is rosy again.
Posted By: pmagowanWhy can't we build power plants to put the carbon back. They could even be used to regulate the grid i.e. All nuclear power stations running at 100% capacity all the time. When we need the entire output it is there, when we don't it powers carbon capture and storage devices. That way any insulation or energy demand reduction would still be worthwhile as every watt saved goes to pumping more CO2 into the disused gass fields.
Posted By: fostertomPosted By: WillInAberdeenDont try to convert low-exergy waste heat back into high-exergy electricity, the 2nd Law wont let you do this efficiently.Why not, in the case that mechanical work doesn't come into it? Some good science writing for everyman needed here!
Posted By: pmagowanways of removing carbon from our atmosphere but most of them require large amounts of energy. This is not a big problem as we know that smashing atoms or fusing them together in a controlled environment produces shed loads
Posted By: pmagowanWe must think long term. The solution is a 'futuristic' nuclear technology (even you can see that, can't you?) and thus we have to look at how we achieve this with the least possible damage to our home. The technology has to be developed, that is a process. If we put all our efforts into a dead end then all we have done is delayed the process and damaged our planet. 'Green' alternatives are not long term alternatives, they are ways of damage reduction while we develop the solution. This is what humans do and what makes us so amazing. We can fix things if we have the will. We need to all get behind it or else the same old thing will happen, essentially unthinking, unplanned, stumbling into the future leaving a trail of destruction in our wake.
Posted By: pmagowanbut if you put the pros and cons on paper
Posted By: JoinerAdwindrum recommended John Michael Greer's "The Long Descent: A User's Guide to the End of the Industrial Age", but apart from me and Adam, no one else seems to have read it. Pity, because it addresses so many of the issues discussed on here, viz how to cope in a world of diminishing resources, an issue at the heart of virtually all other, non-building, discussions." alt="" src="http:///forum114/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/cry.gif" >
© Green Building Press