Stupid liberal anti-business rag

[Mikey]

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... d#r=hp-lst

[Dinsdale]

I'll agree with the "stupid" part -- make outlandish claims, provide zero evidence to back it up, save for the equally outlandish claims from trough-slurpers.

So when the planet cools for 14 straight years, shattering every prediction made by the religious cult(legally defined as such in the UK) it's global warming climate-change, and we should all pony up our money to the very wealthy?

[Derron]

Watching the weather channel the other night and they had these 4 talking heads, and one was this young punk ass that started in about how Sandy was a perfect storm that was caused by global warming. He could not provide one bit of scientific data to back up his claims, and the other 2 heads just kind of nodded along with him.

[Dinsdale]

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat itreligiously believe that something old is new again.
-- George Santayana, with help from 88

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Sept ... le_of_1815

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1821_Norfo ... _hurricane

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1893_New_York_hurricane

Interesting... the rate of catastrophic storms seems to have decreased since the SUVs started causing "climate change."

I'm sure some grant whore "scientist" will be along shortly to explain how that fits their theory to a tee.

[Wolfman]

Global warming my ass. The 1950's saw many really bad storms. Among them was Hurricane Hazel in 1954. I was 15 at the time and remember it passing by Syracuse. Canada took a hit from it, including some bad flooding in Toronto. A knowledgeable climate guy on TV last night mentioned to 50's storms as an example of those worse that what we've seen recently. All due to natural fluctuations in ocean temperatures. In the meantime we have to deal with inefficient coolants, crappy light bulbs, and other such nonsense because of loony regulations that some think will alter climate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Hazel

[smackaholic]

Never mind the fact that 60 years ago we had worse storm activity. I am still waiting an explanation for why the fukk a solid lump of ice is called Greenland. Oh, yeah, that's right. it WAS green when they found it a millenium ago.

[Mace]

We had a drought in Iowa this year which is not "normal" over the fertile fields of the midwest and they're talking about it staying dry for 1-2 more years. Not sure how they can forecast the rain 2 years in advance but they are. I'm old enough to have seen droughts here from time to time, and significant spring flooding too....it's just fucking weather. Our drought this year doesn't compare to the Dust Bowl and drought years of the 30's. Of course there wouldn't have been a "Dust Bowl" if they hadn't plowed up all of the buffalo grass in Oklahoma to grow wheat but they couldn't do anything about avoiding the 10 year drought.

I choose not to believe the global warming alarmists but, in all honesty, I don't know if we're contributing to global warming or not, and neither do any of you. It's been so politicized that I tend to think both sides are feeding us a load of shit and only presenting studies and information that support their argument and ignoring any legitimate claims coming from the other side. Do we need to do everything we can to protect our environment? Hell, yes. Do we need to make douchebags like Al Gore filthy rich by buying into his bullshit? Hell, no. But we don't need to ignore any significant and legitimate issues regarding our environment either.

[Moving Sale]

Fossil fuels are a dumb way to make electricity and move cars and stupid fucks like 88, Dimsdale and and Wolftard who can't see that are dumber than any climate change advocate they bash.

[Moving Sale]

That you don't know is the whole point you stupid hillbilly.

[Cuda]

Fossil fuels are a dumb way to make electricity and move cars and stupid fucks like 88, Dimsdale and and Wolftard who can't see that are dumber than any climate change advocate they bash.

What is the smart way to make electricity and move cars?

unicorn farts & rainbows & 19th Century technology

-sin
MovingSale

[Dinsdale]

That you don't know is the whole point you stupid hillbilly.

You don't seem to know either, hence you ducking a direct question.

[ML@Coyote]

Fossil fuels are a dumb way to make electricity and move cars and stupid fucks like 88, Dimsdale and and Wolftard who can't see that are dumber than any climate change advocate they bash.

What is the smart way to make electricity and move cars?

unicorn farts & rainbows & 19th Century technology

-sin
MovingSale

LOL...I was thinking:

[Derron]

That you don't know is the whole point you stupid hillbilly.

Just answer the fucking question dip shit...put up or shut the fuck up.

[Moving Sale]

That you don't know is the whole point you stupid hillbilly.

You don't seem to know either, hence you ducking a direct question.

Go suck a tail pipe you syphilitic weasel.

ML,
Try looking forward you senile old fuck.

Duhron,
You are an inbred fuck. You really take your face out in public?

[Cuda]

if that's the best you've got, you can go sit down now, tiny.

[Moving Sale]

I, specifically, wasn't talking to you you fat vapid fuckstick.

[Dinsdale]

Still nothing?

Why are you so afraid to answer the question?

[H4ever]

Hydrogen fuel cells anyone? Hydrogen is the most plentiful element on earth. Don't think big oil is kosher with it, though....and for good reason.

[Moving Sale]

Still nothing?

Why are you so afraid to answer the question?

Afraid to tell us why oil and coal are so great? Since you piped in first and all.

[Dinsdale]

Hydrogen fuel cells anyone? Hydrogen is the most plentiful element on earth. Don't think big oil is kosher with it, though....and for good reason.

Moron #1 steps up to the plate. Although props for at least trying, which is more than MS is willing to do.

But since you brought up this "exciting new technology" (originally patented over 100 years ago)...


where you planning on getting the hydrogen to fill them?

Any sort of electrolysis is so ridiculously inefficient, it's a non-starter. Absolute joke. Unless of course you can get a democrat controlled congress to repeal the First Law Of Thermodynamics.

So, I guess that brings us to the other option, which is to extract hydrogen from natural gas. By doing so, you reduce the efficiency of the gas/energy potential by ~85%. Again, unless you can get some laws of physics repealed... they are indeed "laws," and not "suggestions"... you done picked another loser. Although Big Oil, despite your ignorance on the subject, would absolutely love it (W giving Big Oil subsidies to manufacture worthless fuel cells, anyone?)... since they control the supply of it... dumbass.


Any other great ideas... that might actually work?

[Dinsdale]

Hydrogen is the most plentiful element on earth.

And BTW -- as if your unilateral repeal of the Laws Of Thermodynamics wasn't enough to make any of your inept science teachers cringe/roll in their graves, this bit of stupidity should finish the job.

You truly are a moron.

[Dinsdale]

Still nothing?

Why are you so afraid to answer the question?

Afraid to tell us why oil and coal are so great? Since you piped in first and all.

Link me up where I said they were?

Or are you just going to keep answering a very basic, direct question with questions in an attempt to sidestep the issue YOU brought up, and obviously can't back up?

[H4ever]

Hydrogen fuel cells anyone? Hydrogen is the most plentiful element on earth. Don't think big oil is kosher with it, though....and for good reason.

Moron #1 steps up to the plate. Although props for at least trying, which is more than MS is willing to do.

But since you brought up this "exciting new technology" (originally patented over 100 years ago)...


where you planning on getting the hydrogen to fill them?

Any sort of electrolysis is so ridiculously inefficient, it's a non-starter. Absolute joke. Unless of course you can get a democrat controlled congress to repeal the First Law Of Thermodynamics.

So, I guess that brings us to the other option, which is to extract hydrogen from natural gas. By doing so, you reduce the efficiency of the gas/energy potential by ~85%. Again, unless you can get some laws of physics repealed... they are indeed "laws," and not "suggestions"... you done picked another loser. Although Big Oil, despite your ignorance on the subject, would absolutely love it (W giving Big Oil subsidies to manufacture worthless fuel cells, anyone?)... since they control the supply of it... dumbass.


Any other great ideas... that might actually work?

Gee, I dunno....maybe develop technology to harvest hydrogen from the atmosphere? Of course...big oil couldn't monopolize that now could they? Someday you may grasp the concept of how rich men suppress shit that threatens their money and control (plutocrats)

How about the potential of geothermal heat? Dig two shafts and pour water down one and let the rising, heated water in the other turn turbines to produce electricity.
You could build a nuclear power plant within every square mile of land on planet Earth and never scratch the surface of the energy to be had via geothermal heat.

But that shit's too clean and efficient and hard to monopolize and justify huge profits.... fuck that! says the plutocrats in unison!

[Mace]

Going geothermal, while it won't eliminate the need for electricity or develop new ways to produce it, will drastically reduce the amount used in the household. Plus there are tax credits and rebates to help reduce the cost to the individual and, in my particular case, pays for over half of the cost.....not to mention reducing my monthly electric bill by half.

Wind power is big in Iowa (maybe you assholes can see them from the plane when you fly over) and could help if they can make it more cost effective as a source.

Solar power is another source. Never had solar panels at my home but who says I won't in the future. I have a neighbor with solar panels on his roof that have been there for at least a couple of decades but haven't talked to him about it.

[Dinsdale]

Gee, I dunno....maybe develop technology to harvest hydrogen from the atmosphere?

Great GooglyMoogly... you make LTS look like he actually understands science.

Let's try this again...

The laws of physics

Once again -- they're "laws," not "suggestions."

No amount of wishing, sprinking of fairy dust, or hatred for Big Oil can change them... not even your beloved democrats taking all 535 seats.

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

"You People" are funny -- you moan about a trace of CO2 being added to the atmosphere, yet have no problem putting the entire earth's crust at risk... that would sure stick it to Big Oil, right?

You'd need a brain transplant to elevate yourself to "moron," you jawdropping cretin.

[Dinsdale]

Going geothermal, while it won't eliminate the need for electricity or develop new ways to produce it, will drastically reduce the amount used in the household.

For clarification, these small-scale geothermal setups, while not a big producer, aren't quite the "loser" as arge-scale projects, and they were not what I was refering to.

But without some sort of financial incentive, at present the ROI is pretty lame.

[Mace]

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

Yes, Dins, I know it's already in use (I'm using it myself) but what "risks" are you referring to?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Chevron is the world's largest producer of geothermal energy:

http://www.chevron.com/deliveringenergy/geothermal/

...steam...

[H4ever]

Gee, I dunno....maybe develop technology to harvest hydrogen from the atmosphere?

Great GooglyMoogly... you make LTS look like he actually understands science.

Let's try this again...

The laws of physics

Once again -- they're "laws," not "suggestions."

No amount of wishing, sprinking of fairy dust, or hatred for Big Oil can change them... not even your beloved democrats taking all 535 seats.

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

"You People" are funny -- you moan about a trace of CO2 being added to the atmosphere, yet have no problem putting the entire earth's crust at risk... that would sure stick it to Big Oil, right?

You'd need a brain transplant to elevate yourself to "moron," you jawdropping cretin.

Hey Dins....go eat a dick will ya? Your wanna-be Mvscal act is more patronizing than Shit Romney at a Koch brothers family get together. That said...I don't google shit religiously like you do on every topic. Most of what I put on here is just bits and pieces of knowledge I've acquired over the years and no...I don't polish up on it before I post because I just don't GARA what any of you think. I don't pretend to be some fucking expert in every scientific, politcal, and sports arena unlike others in here (half the bitches up in here).

Are we clear? good....carry on with cock -munching I ordered you to.

[smackaholic]

Gee, I dunno....maybe develop technology to harvest hydrogen from the atmosphere?

Great GooglyMoogly... you make LTS look like he actually understands science.

Let's try this again...

The laws of physics

Once again -- they're "laws," not "suggestions."

No amount of wishing, sprinking of fairy dust, or hatred for Big Oil can change them... not even your beloved democrats taking all 535 seats.

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

"You People" are funny -- you moan about a trace of CO2 being added to the atmosphere, yet have no problem putting the entire earth's crust at risk... that would sure stick it to Big Oil, right?

You'd need a brain transplant to elevate yourself to "moron," you jawdropping cretin.

First off, rack any and all Frank Zappa quotes.

Second, there has not yet been a facepalm worthy of this level of dumbfukkery.

I used to wonder the same thing when I was a kid.

Water = hydrogen and oxygen

Hydrogen burns like a mofo.

Let's just run our ICEs on water. You got the fuel and the oxidizer all in one package. Fukkk big oil and their lawyers cockblocking water carburetor technology!!!!

Then I took this neato class in high school. They call it chemistry. They explained these things called molecules and how molocules are glued together real good and it takes a buncha energy and stuff to smash them apart. And it's prolly better that way or else somebody would drop his cigarette but into the ocean and we'd all go up in one fiery ball.

[Mikey]

Going geothermal, while it won't eliminate the need for electricity or develop new ways to produce it, will drastically reduce the amount used in the household.

For clarification, these small-scale geothermal setups, while not a big producer, aren't quite the "loser" as arge-scale projects, and they were not what I was refering to.

But without some sort of financial incentive, at present the ROI is pretty lame.

For clarification, there is more than one kind of "geothermal," which apparently most of you don't realize. Geothermal wells, whether natural or man made, use the high temperatures found in really deep holes to make steam or hot water from which you can generate electricity.

I imagine what Mace is talking about is a geothermal (or ground source) heat pump, which is a completely different animal. You bury a bunch of pipes in the ground, either horizontally (maybe 10 feet deep) or vertically (down to a couple hundred feet) and use the relative stable ground temperature as a heat sink (in the summer) or heat source (in the winter) to increase the efficiency of your otherwise pretty conventional vapor compression cycle system (i.e. air conditioner / heat pump).

Carry on.

[smackaholic]

Gee, I dunno....maybe develop technology to harvest hydrogen from the atmosphere?

Great GooglyMoogly... you make LTS look like he actually understands science.

Let's try this again...

The laws of physics

Once again -- they're "laws," not "suggestions."

No amount of wishing, sprinking of fairy dust, or hatred for Big Oil can change them... not even your beloved democrats taking all 535 seats.

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

"You People" are funny -- you moan about a trace of CO2 being added to the atmosphere, yet have no problem putting the entire earth's crust at risk... that would sure stick it to Big Oil, right?

You'd need a brain transplant to elevate yourself to "moron," you jawdropping cretin.

Hey Dins....go eat a dick will ya? Your wanna-be Mvscal act is more patronizing than Shit Romney at a Koch brothers family get together. That said...I don't google shit religiously like you do on every topic. Most of what I put on here is just bits and pieces of knowledge I've acquired over the years and no...I don't polish up on it before I post because I just don't GARA what any of you think. I don't pretend to be some fucking expert in every scientific, politcal, and sports arena unlike others in here (half the bitches up in here).

Are we clear? good....carry on with cock -munching I ordered you to.

dude, you don't need to be mikey smart to know this stuff. I stumbled through high school chem to understand this stuff.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Those cars are not available today because American car buyers...

...are fat.

[Dinsdale]

Then I took this neato class in high school. They call it chemistry.

What's that?

Sin,
H4ever


And no, Retarded4ever, I don't need to google the shit they teach you in the first day of a junior high science class.

They explained these things called molecules and how molocules are glued together real good and it takes a buncha energy and stuff to smash them apart. And it's prolly better that way or else somebody would drop his cigarette but into the ocean and we'd all go up in one fiery ball.

Funny -- had this same conversation 2 days ago. If there was more energy in a water moecule than it takes to break the bond, water would burn... duh. Last I checked, it didnt (although Cleveland and London might try and argue this).

[Trampis]

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

Yes, Dins, I know it's already in use (I'm using it myself) but what "risks" are you referring to?

Probably EGS, Enhanced Geothermal Systems. Some have said it may create earthquicks. Dig the really deep well, break the hot rocks apart down there and inject water to then extract back out to make steam to run aturbine. Its the fracking of the rocks that makes it different from "normal" geothermal mass production

[Mace]

I imagine what Mace is talking about is a geothermal (or ground source) heat pump, which is a completely different animal. You bury a bunch of pipes in the ground, either horizontally (maybe 10 feet deep) or vertically (down to a couple hundred feet) and use the relative stable ground temperature as a heat sink (in the summer) or heat source (in the winter) to increase the efficiency of your otherwise pretty conventional vapor compression cycle system (i.e. air conditioner / heat pump).

Carry on.

Exactly, Mikey. I was talking about geothermal heating and cooling of a household (mine included). It drastically reduces the amount of electricity used in each home. I was previously paying $1800 a year for electricity and now it's less than $900/yr. My point was/is that if more homes were using geothermal heating/cooling we would reduce the amount of electricity needed in the country....one household at a time.

[Dinsdale]

As far as geothermal... nice idea. You think maybe... just maybe, that's why it's already in use? Although the actual risks involved make anything fossil fuel imposes look like chump change.

Yes, Dins, I know it's already in use (I'm using it myself) but what "risks" are you referring to?

I asn't refering to the type of in-home system you're using. Those are "free energy," although in many climates (like here), there isn't the differential in soil-to-air temperature to make it worthwhile.

The risks I refer to are with large-scale geothermal plants. The problem being that places that can produce enough heat to make a large scale geotherm setup work, work because they have magma not far far beneath. You start heating/cooling the bedrock around it unevenly, and it will cause earthquakes. The city of Klamath Falls, OR uses geothermal wells to heat government buildings, and some nearby buildings, as well as running the heated water under the downtown sidewalks and a few bridges (very cold and snowy there in winter). They also have geologists watching that shit like a hawk, as they know the risk of etting "greedy" with the process... they're also prone to nasty earthquakes (as are just about every "geothermal zone," or whatever they call those areas... there's a name for it).


So, maybe not quite the Holy Grail of alternative energy, but carefully used it's certaily worthwhile.

[Mikey]

First off, rack any and all Frank Zappa quotes.

Second, there has not yet been a facepalm worthy of this level of dumbfukkery.

I used to wonder the same thing when I was a kid.

Water = hydrogen and oxygen

Hydrogen burns like a mofo.

Let's just run our ICEs on water. You got the fuel and the oxidizer all in one package. Fukkk big oil and their lawyers cockblocking water carburetor technology!!!!

Then I took this neato class in high school. They call it chemistry. They explained these things called molecules and how molocules are glued together real good and it takes a buncha energy and stuff to smash them apart. And it's prolly better that way or else somebody would drop his cigarette but into the ocean and we'd all go up in one fiery ball.

Amazing. Fat New Englander :P actually gets it, at least to a certain degree.

Hydrogen is not really a fuel but a medium for energy storage. You can make hydrogen in two ways (maybe there are others but these are the only two feasible ones right now) -
1) Reform it from natural gas, in which case natural gas is the fuel
2) Make it from water (using something called hydrolysis for you high school chemistry majors). This takes a bunch of electricity, and the fuel is whatever you use to make the electricity.

So, why would anybody make hydrogen, seeing as how you lose energy going from either natural gas or electricity to hydrogen?

A couple of reasons.
1) Most fuel cells run on hydrogen. Even most so-called "natural gas" fuel cells have a reformer on board as part of the system, because the fuel cells themselves require hydrogen.
2) If we ever develop a hydrogen infrastructure (and this is already happening in some places though it's arguable whether it will ever be be widespread) we will need to get the hydrogen from somewhere. Reforming hydrogen from natural gas uses up natural gas and also still creates carbon dioxide. One idea is to build massive photovoltaic plants offshore to make hydrogen. and transport it by ship or pipeline. You then use fuel cells to make electricity and water.

Fuel cells are still very expensive, but I wouldn't say that they're unreliable. The stacks do have to be replaced periodically, but one manufacturer of large stationary fuel cells now has a 10 year stack life. I have my doubts whether there will ever be an affordable fuel cell car on the market but they are already being used for power generation - onsite power, peaking and grid backup.

I inspected a 1.11 MW fuel cell plant just a couple of weeks ago that runs on pipeline hydrogen.

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/l ... 5651.story

A pretty impressive setup. They can also modify it in the future to recover heat generated by the fuel cell to heat their pool or fitness center.

Hydrogen does have its drawbacks. It's colorless, odorless and pretty much undetectable without special sensors. They can't mix mercaptan (the stuff that makes natural gas smell) in with it because it would foul the fuel cell. Anybody going into the enclosure pretty much has to leave any electronic devices (like cell phones) outside unless you have a hydrogen monitor on you.

[Dinsdale]

Make it from water (using something called hydrolysis for you high school chemistry majors).

Wanna back up and take another run at that one, Mikey Nye, Science Guy?

Although I'm sure H4ever bought it.

Us high-school chemistry majors sure didn't.

[Mikey]

Make it from water (using something called hydrolysis for you high school chemistry majors).

Wanna back up and take another run at that one, Mikey Nye, Science Guy?

Although I'm sure H4ever bought it.

Us high-school chemistry majors sure didn't.

Sorry...electrolysis. Care to dispute any of the rest of my post?