Moon base and knowledge repository plans

[shavedape]

To be honest I'm surprised I even remembered any of that stuff way back in middle school. After all, I had just gone thru puberty and had discovered alcohol and boys and the music of RUSH (not necessarily in that order). Economics wasn't really on my mind, although converting a giant Chianti bottle into a bong was (easy peasy to do btw, just use a diamond drill bit to drill a hole in the base of the bottle then sink a pipe stem into it, fill with water and you're good to go -- don't forget the carb though. -- Oh, and be prepared for it to take like 3 or 4 deep breaths to get the smoke up the 4-foot neck of the bottle before you can inhale it...not that I would know from personal experience mind you, this is all just conjecture on my part...more or less. )

 

[Gatefan1976]

What you're detailing is the complete overhaul of our entire energy infrastructure. Of course there will be resistance to that. Such large, global changes have to happen slowly and they almost never happen by government fiat. That's the mistake we're making, this thinking that we can legislate a new energy source. We can't. As it is solar and wind suck ass as energy producers. I'm talking BTU output. They can't compete against fossil fuels in that regard, they simply can't.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the oil companies per se, I'm just explaining how it is pure and simple. As it is I see zip wrong with using natural gas to power things and for that matter I know that coal processing and burning has gotten light years better than it once was. We're not choking out tons of mercury and other noxious substances that we once were with coal as a power plant energy source. The problem is that the enviro-whackos are too limited in their thinking and they want to legislate ourselves out of existence. They don't give a shit about reality and the fact that coal can crank out the BTU's in much higher numbers and more efficiently than windmills or solar panels can. Will that change? Will solar and wind get so good that they are cost effective? Meh, I doubt it.

Personally I would like to see more done in the way of "artificially" producing natural gas. You can't tell me that we can't "compost" agricultural waste with some super gas producing bacteria and make tons of that shit ourselves. And as for Global Warming, I don't give a shit. Let this mutha burn! I'm sick of the cold. I want it as hot as possible. Mankind is an adaptable species so we'll get by just fine if the oceans rise (they won't). And if the midwest turns into a desert then great! I'll grow some freakin' cacti! Let Canada and Greenland produce our wheat and shit like that.

Now mind you, this could just be the shiraz I had with dinner talking, so think about what I've said because God knows I haven't.

I'm not sure I SHOULD reccomend you wine Shaved

 

[shavedape]

I'm not sure I SHOULD reccomend you wine Shaved

It wasn't Yellowtail btw, it was a cheap Californian.

 

[Gatefan1976]

To be honest I'm surprised I even remembered any of that stuff way back in middle school. After all, I had just gone thru puberty and had discovered alcohol and boys and the music of RUSH (not necessarily in that order). Economics wasn't really on my mind, although converting a giant Chianti bottle into a bong was (easy peasy to do btw, just use a diamond drill bit to drill a hole in the base of the bottle then sink a pipe stem into it, fill with water and you're good to go -- don't forget the carb though. -- Oh, and be prepared for it to take like 3 or 4 deep breaths to get the smoke up the 4-foot neck of the bottle before you can inhale it...not that I would know from personal experience mind you, this is all just conjecture on my part...more or less. )

Ya Know..............

You should have just removed the entire bottom of the bottle, and used the bucket bong as a template, far easier, requires less breaths AND provides a far better hit.

Not that I would know either...........
--- merged: Dec 10, 2012 at 11:41 PM ---

It wasn't Yellowtail btw, it was a cheap Californian.

Cheap streetwalker trash, I'm suprised you remember even making your post

 

[Bluce Ree]

It's not practical, you're just adding another layer of inefficient energy conversion. The other issue is that hydrogen is not naturally occurring. It must be extracted from other compounds using even more energy just for the extraction process for large volumes. Then you have other issues such as transportation of the material and storage issues. Also, hydrogen fuel cells have a pretty low energy yield. You'd need significantly large amounts to generate useful amounts of energy, which means an even larger infrastructure compounding on the transportation and storage issue.

What? Wireless power? Don't know what you're talking about with Tesla.

Few points to address. First, hydrogen outputs about 3x the energy per unit mass of gasoline, so less is required to produce the same amount of power. Second, hydrogen doesn't require transportation. Hydrogen fuel stations can produce hydrogen on site without requiring massive amounts of energy. An electrolysing hydrogen station can be powered with solar cells. This is already a reality:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/11/turkey-20121130.html

Fuel cell cars have almost no moving parts other than an electric motor. When a fuel cell vehicle is parked at home, it can be used to power your home. In fact, it is also possible to install a solar-cell powered hydrogen home station so you can fuel up at home.

 

[Gatefan1976]

On topic, how large a fuel cell would a vehicle require to get the same range as your average IC engine?

 

[Bluce Ree]

On topic, how large a fuel cell would a vehicle require to get the same range as your average IC engine?

Although hydrogen produces 3x the energy of gasoline gram for gram, it's 1/10 as dense (if I'm not mistaken). So, you'd need a larger tank. One of the designs I saw had four motors, one at each of the wheels, eliminating the need for a power train and exhaust pipes, leaving ample space to build a large tank on the underside.

 

[Gatefan1976]

Although hydrogen produces 3x the energy of gasoline gram for gram, it's 1/10 as dense (if I'm not mistaken). So, you'd need a larger tank. One of the designs I saw had four motors, one at each of the wheels, eliminating the need for a power train and exhaust pipes, leaving ample space to build a large tank on the underside.

So roughly a 300 gallon tank?
Thats roughly 8ft long and 2ft wide and deep, that is a big arse tank to replicate on your average car dude.
Of course, that is assuming range is an issue here, I dunno enough about this to comment in anything but a general way.

 

[Bluce Ree]

So roughly a 300 gallon tank?
Thats roughly 8ft long and 2ft wide and deep, that is a big arse tank to replicate on your average car dude.
Of course, that is assuming range is an issue here, I dunno enough about this to comment in anything but a general way.

The average car has a 60L tank. If 600L of hydrogen is the equivalent in mass to 60L of gasoline, only 200L would be required for the same energy output.

 

[Gatefan1976]

The average car has a 60L tank. If 600L of hydrogen is the equivalent in mass to 60L of gasoline, only 200L would be required for the same energy output.

Ahh, you know what a liter is, that makes life easier
What about the stable conversion of said power? Can we make parts that can happily withstand 3 times the power AND use it effectively?

 

[Bluce Ree]

Ahh, you know what a liter is, that makes life easier
What about the stable conversion of said power? Can we make parts that can happily withstand 3 times the power AND use it effectively?

Fuel cell vehicles are nothing like combustion engines. The fuel cell is an energy conversion device that converts hydrogen and oxygen back into water, which produces electrical power. That power drives the electrical motor. It's a completely different technology from the combustion engine, so, almost no moving parts.

 

[shavedape]

Few points to address. First, hydrogen outputs about 3x the energy per unit mass of gasoline, so less is required to produce the same amount of power. Second, hydrogen doesn't require transportation. Hydrogen fuel stations can produce hydrogen on site without requiring massive amounts of energy. An electrolysing hydrogen station can be powered with solar cells. This is already a reality:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2012/11/turkey-20121130.html

Fuel cell cars have almost no moving parts other than an electric motor. When a fuel cell vehicle is parked at home, it can be used to power your home. In fact, it is also possible to install a solar-cell powered hydrogen home station so you can fuel up at home.

This is all fascinating stuff but I have to point out that the vast majority of people wouldn't have a home hydrogen station. That's just not how we're wired. We need others to do for us, more or less. Plus millions of people live in apartment buildings, etc. Quite simply the average person is too willfully ignorant to bother learning how such devices work and what is required in installing and maintaining them. Most people are hard-pressed to pump their own gas and only do so because they have no choice.

Now, I could see, possibly, a company that installs and maintains home hydrogen stations. There would still be need for neighborhood "gas" stations though. And both scenarios of home "distilling" of fuel and also neighborhood "gas" stations portend "Big oil" as running the show. No matter how you slice it the development, production and maintenance of hydrogen fuel is going to be controlled by large corporations.

And yes, a handful of people will be able to do this stuff on their own at home (providing the government lets them) but the vast majority of people are lazy tits that don't want to bother dealing with such things, they just want to get in their car and drive, period. In short, even with a hydrogen fuel-based system it would still be monopolized by "Big oil" companies. I just don't see how it could be otherwise.

Cynical yes, but there is often truth in cynicism, so embrace it my muscle-bound brutha!

 

[Bluce Ree]

This is all fascinating stuff but I have to point out that the vast majority of people wouldn't have a home hydrogen station. That's just not how we're wired. We need others to do for us, more or less. Plus millions of people live in apartment buildings, etc. Quite simply the average person is too willfully ignorant to bother learning how such devices work and what is required in installing and maintaining them. Most people are hard-pressed to pump their own gas and only do so because they have no choice.

Now, I could see, possibly, a company that installs and maintains home hydrogen stations. There would still be need for neighborhood "gas" stations though. And both scenarios of home "distilling" of fuel and also neighborhood "gas" stations portend "Big oil" as running the show. No matter how you slice it the development, production and maintenance of hydrogen fuel is going to be controlled by large corporations.

And yes, a handful of people will be able to do this stuff on their own at home (providing the government lets them) but the vast majority of people are lazy tits that don't want to bother dealing with such things, they just want to get in their car and drive, period. In short, even with a hydrogen fuel-based system it would still be monopolized by "Big oil" companies. I just don't see how it could be otherwise.

Cynical yes, but there is often truth in cynicism, so embrace it my muscle-bound brutha!

Companies that install & maintain home and commercial hydrogen stations = more jobs. All the jobs in the oil industry would fizzle out but new opportunities will be created in a hydrogen-based energy economy. The whiners who cry "but my job ... wahhhhhhhhhhh" are either refusing to understand that new employment opportunities would be created or are simply astroturfing for the conventional energy companies.

Hydrogen doesn't automatically mean free power for everyone. For example, there will be those who can afford to install their own conversion electrolysers and there are the masses who will simply keep buying power from their local power company and pumping hydrogen from their local station. Those jobs and businesses would remain. The oil companies would go away or adapt. Either way, the days of making 100000000000000% margins on crude will not be entirely gone because developing nations would still be highly dependent on it until the cost of upgrading their infrastructure becomes manageable for them.

 

[YJ02]

Ahh, you know what a liter is, that makes life easier
What about the stable conversion of said power? Can we make parts that can happily withstand 3 times the power AND use it effectively?

A liter is like what, 3 12 oz cans of coke?
:encouragement:

 

[Overmind One]

On topic, how large a fuel cell would a vehicle require to get the same range as your average IC engine?

Mercedes has these vehicles road testing in California and I have seen several of them:

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/12/driving-a-hydrogen-fuel-cell-mercedes-at-evs26/

The fuel cell takes up the underside of the vehicle to the b-pillar to the rear. The two hydrogen storage units take up the space between the wheels.

 

[YJ02]

Isn't there quite a lot of ppl who say that hydrogen power is unattainable at the rates needed? what is their basis for argument? like gf76, i am a spectator, but i found this article (linked) with their main thesis as this:
"Hydrogen is only a source of energy if it can be taken in its pure form and reacted with another chemical, such as oxygen. But all the hydrogen on Earth, except that in hydrocarbons, has already been oxidized, so none of it is available as fuel. If you want to get plentiful unbound hydrogen, the closest place it can be found is on the surface of the Sun; mining this hydrogen supply would be quite a trick. After the Sun, the next closest source of free hydrogen would be the atmosphere of Jupiter. "

I figure the first ppl to write this stuff would be the oil industry and their minions, however this author attacks the Bush/Cheney admin for backing Hydrogen. Is this misdirection?

here is main article:
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax

 

[Bluce Ree]

Isn't there quite a lot of ppl who say that hydrogen power is unattainable at the rates needed? what is their basis for argument? like gf76, i am a spectator, but i found this article (linked) with their main thesis as this:
"Hydrogen is only a source of energy if it can be taken in its pure form and reacted with another chemical, such as oxygen. But all the hydrogen on Earth, except that in hydrocarbons, has already been oxidized, so none of it is available as fuel. If you want to get plentiful unbound hydrogen, the closest place it can be found is on the surface of the Sun; mining this hydrogen supply would be quite a trick. After the Sun, the next closest source of free hydrogen would be the atmosphere of Jupiter. "

I figure the first ppl to write this stuff would be the oil industry and their minions, however this author attacks the Bush/Cheney admin for backing Hydrogen. Is this misdirection?

here is main article:
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax

Um ... did you read the front page of that website? There are better sources of information than propaganda blogs.

Here's how you separate hydrogen from water:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Separate-Hydrogen-and-Oxygen-from-Water-Through-El/

 

[YJ02]

Um ... did you read the front page of that website? There are better sources of information than propaganda blogs.

Here's how you separate hydrogen from water:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Separate-Hydrogen-and-Oxygen-from-Water-Through-El/

No..I just go to the most popular because that must mean they are correct, right? I mean they can't put anything that isn't true on the internet, right?


So, its propaganda, where is the flaw in the argument, mainly the one saying that all the hydrogen on earth is oxidized..got to mine the sun, etc?

I want to know, not arguing

 

[Bluce Ree]

No..I just go to the most popular because that must mean they are correct, right? I mean they can't put anything that isn't true on the internet, right?


So, its propaganda, where is the flaw in the argument, mainly the one saying that all the hydrogen on earth is oxidized..got to mine the sun, etc?

I want to know, not arguing

I gave you the answer in that link. Read back through this thread. There's plenty of info on acquiring hydrogen in quantity and on the cheap.

 

[Overmind One]

Um ... did you read the front page of that website? There are better sources of information than propaganda blogs.

Here's how you separate hydrogen from water:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Separate-Hydrogen-and-Oxygen-from-Water-Through-El/

LOL @ the propaganda! How easy is it to create hydrogen? Well, take an ordinary D sized battery, attach a wire to both poles of the battery, then put them in an ordinary glass of water. Bubbles will be seen rising from both leads. One is releasing pure hydrogen, the other pure oxygen. Simple. Swap out the battery with a solar cell, and there you have it. This weird scenario where you have plants separating it out using chemicals and complicated processes is just to prime the public for building huge hydrogen producing plants at considerable taxpayer cost. The reality of it eliminates the large corporations. Technically speaking. most single family homes have enough surface area on their roofs to generate significant amounts of hydrogen using solar cells, enough to fuel a vehicle. In addition to that, fuel cells can power the home as well. The reasons for not telling Average Joe this is because profit is eliminated.
--- merged: Dec 11, 2012 at 1:24 PM ---

No..I just go to the most popular because that must mean they are correct, right? I mean they can't put anything that isn't true on the internet, right?


So, its propaganda, where is the flaw in the argument, mainly the one saying that all the hydrogen on earth is oxidized..got to mine the sun, etc?

I want to know, not arguing

Saying that the hydrogen is "oxidized" simply means that it is bound to oxygen. It can easily be liberated using a very small charge. More precisely, it takes 15.89 megajoules per liter of water.