Automated Spam Shredder

[Ockie]

That's the thing. You keep saying corn is our best alternative. It isn't. The money we are using to fund ethanol research and synthesis could quite easily go into the research to open an oil reserve the likes of which nobody in Texas could have dreamed of. So far, ethanol's only benefit is that it comes from renewable vegetable matter. Past that, it's a damaging, harmful substance that makes oil seem desirable. We know there are other alternatives, and corn is only popular because it's easy to make. Easy does not mean best, especially when the agricultural lobby has a huge influence over lawmakers (And you thought only the big bad oil people did that!)

Agreed. Neptune also seems to forget that more energy goes into ethanol refining and producing than the energy needed to extract and purify oil. Having factories and farm tractors and who knows what equipment they need polluting so they can give you a "happy" feeling isn't the solution.

It's the same way I view about Hybrids. Not only are they a ton more expensive, but they are not better for the enviroment, sure they get a marginal better MPG... but everyone seems to forget how harmfull battery disposal is to the enviroment and how much energy does it take to produce all those battries and acid... especially the motor, plastic containers for the battery cells, etc.... more energy goes into making that car than the energy it would have polluted if it was a gasoline.

 

[CyberDeus-RagDoll]

Ummmm...you do know that the number of carcinogens produced in a combustion reaction is relative to the temperature and types of materials involved, do you not? Therefore, you can reduce carcinogens by NOT BURNING the materials that produce higher carcinogen counts when you have materials that produce less. Like, for example, not burning ethanol that produces a higher carcinogen count than gasoline. Why is that so hard for you to accept? Baby steps to a healthier world. Trying to get everyone to change all of a sudden is, and always has been, an exercise in futility. Human nature won't have it. Make plans that work within that paradigm, and fucking close greenpeace.org.

And you do know that those carcinogens can be removed from the atmosphere, or prevented from ever entering it at all, but all we'd have to do is try?

My point is that there are other toxins (hydrocarbons, for example) in current fuels that I am more concerned about. If hydrocarbon production goes down 95% and carcinogen production goes up 10%, I'd say it's a fair trade...The net change is that pollution, as a whole, is reduced.

Put yourself in an airtight room for an hour, with a running gasoline based car. Gasoline based. You'll be dead. End of story. Game over.

Put yourself in that same airtight room, with a running 100% veggie oil BIODIESEL. You *might* have a headache. You might need a shower. 40 years from now you might get cancer.

 

[KaosDG]

Regardless of whatever fuel you guys are using, you are definitely driving this thread right into the SoapBox.

 

[Ockie]

Apparently you guys are more concerned about continuing to use oil than finding something better for the environment. Oil or corn, it's still detrimental.

No, we want a silver bullet solution... not a hack job that looks good on the surface but is actually more worse in the long run.

We want something that can be not only efficient in production, but can be efficient in consumption too. Oil is still one of the few resources that uses such a low ratio of energy used to energy produced and thats why it's better.

Also, with just current methods, we can increase fuel efficiency that would beat not only hybrid consumption, but also ethanol values... and be cleaner. Problem is that it's always about politics... and that is what's killing the whole deal.

Oil companies has their hands so deed down politicians pants, and politicians are so blinded, that nothing effective can be done... so they always end up with a half assed solution... either it's all the way or none of the way.

 

[CyberDeus-RagDoll]

Clearing up something from my last post

I am referring to NON carcinogenic hydrocarbons versus carcinogens that are NOT hyrdocarbons..

Obviously, when you reduce hydrocarbons that ARE carcinogenic, BOTH levels reduce.

Oh, and ockie.. the thing about "it takes more energy to make ethanol than the energy we get" is ONLY true about corn-ethanol. Other ethanols (jathropa, cane sugar) are NOT negative return.

 

[Ockie]

Put yourself in that same airtight room, with a running 100% veggie oil BIODIESEL. You *might* have a headache. You might need a shower. 40 years from now you might get cancer.

You will also smell like a greasy big mac burger if you used free oil

 

[GJSNeptune]

That's the thing. You keep saying corn is our best alternative. It isn't.

I keep saying it's our best effort so far, not the best alternative available. I haven't even been recommending we continue to research corn as an alternative fuel. It's the best effort because it's easy and quite cheap to produce, and it works quite well. It's also more promising to be practical for the masses to adopt in place of gasoline.

If you say it's not the best, why not mention what's better? Right now, what is the best, largest-scale, somewhat practical alternative fuel available right now? Don't tell me where funds are better spent.

Agreed. Neptune also seems to forget that more energy goes into ethanol refining and producing than the energy needed to extract and purify oil. Having factories and farm tractors and who knows what equipment they need polluting so they can give you a "happy" feeling isn't the solution.

Again, I'm not advocating ethanol whatsoever.

 

[Ockie]

Regardless of whatever fuel you guys are using, you are definitely driving this thread right into the SoapBox.

Pun intended?

Oh, and ockie.. the thing about "it takes more energy to make ethanol than the energy we get" is ONLY true about corn-ethanol. Other ethanols (jathropa, cane sugar) are NOT negative return.

I was speaking mainly from corn based oils as that is really the major focus of alternative fuels and the most spoken about here.

 

[Ockie]

If you say it's not the best, why not mention what's better? Right now, what is the best, largest-scale, somewhat practical alternative fuel available right now? Don't tell me where funds are better spent.

Nuclear & Coal, both of which has a heavy opposition due to political agendas.

 

[GJSNeptune]

Nuclear & Coal, both of which has a heavy opposition due to political agendas.

Fair enough, but if corn isn't as hushed, it becomes a bit more practical.


I say we figure out how to fuel cars with internet spam. NICs on cars, 'eh?

 

[Ockie]

I say we figure out how to fuel cars with internet spam. NICs on cars, 'eh?

I sure hope it's wireless, otherwise we'd really be limited!

 

[CyberDeus-RagDoll]

You will also smell like a greasy big mac burger if you used free oil

My car smells like catfish, hushpuppies, & fried clams. Where do I get most of my fuel from?

That smell is actually much more preferable than diesel or gas exhaust. I'd rather smell like a hamburger than a mechanic.

 

[GJSNeptune]

My car smells like catfish, hushpuppies, & fried clams. Where do I get most of my fuel from?

That smell is actually much more preferable than diesel or gas exhaust. I'd rather smell like a hamburger than a mechanic.

I love that gas smell while at the pump. After college, I realized how awful it is to smell like fried food. Sure, french fries smell pretty good, but having it completely absorbed into your clothing is really gross.

Ugh, I hate seafood. Swordfish is tasty though.

 

[Aelfgeft]

Fair enough, but if corn isn't as hushed, it becomes a bit more practical.


I say we figure out how to fuel cars with internet spam. NICs on cars, 'eh?

I want this bad boy installed in my 25MPG SUV:

That's right, by the way. I drive one of the most fuel-efficient SUVs on the road that doesn't have a hybrid engine. Why? Because in Wisconsin winter, it's very difficult to get to work without it.

 

[KaosDG]

I want this bad boy installed in my 25MPG SUV:

That's right, by the way. I drive one of the most fuel-efficient SUVs on the road that doesn't have a hybrid engine. Why? Because in Wisconsin winter, it's very difficult to get to work without it.

Wow...

that looks REALLLY similar to a case mod i did WAAAAY back in the day...

 

[PaHick]

Couple questions for you:

How old do you think the trees are that they use? (I'll give you a hint, some trees grow faster than others, and therefore work better for mass-production)

Different plots, different ages. All depends on the soil composition, end of lease, short pulp fibre/long pulp fibre....etc. Too many variables to give you an exact answer on age. Remember, trees arent the only source of pulp.

Is it possible to stagger the planting of trees so you constantly have a steady stream of trees coming into 'prime'?

They do this on certain tracts where you have enough acreage to use such a method. On local tracts this just isnt possible on ac♥♥♥♥ of size. But with local tracts you usually do not worry about staggering, because different tracts=different acquisition times=different plat times. There are always trees/plants in prime. Doesnt mean we dont use more than we can replace.

Besides this guy wont even put a dent into the supply of paper.

And your right. As an individual he cannot come close to putting an end to the supply of paper. My whole point was , the ratio of trees/plants used to trees/plants planted is way out of proportion these days. I worked in the industry for over 15 years. And in that time frame, US paper companies made the slow but steady move to other countries for their source for pulp. Financial reason played a part, but volume of pulp was the number one reason. We just cannot replace it fast enough in the US. First it was the steady switch from hardwoods to softwoods,then to other countries, and in the last 25 years to combination softwoods/plants. Btw, our company never replaced the hardwoods with hardwoods when we left a tract. Essentially leaving a low percentage of food for the animal population. I can go on and on, but thats not what this thread was about. Sorry for the threadjack. But it really isnt as simple as you make it to be.

 

[Diablo2K]

Theres this guy down the streat, he bought an Electric car to drive back and forth to work after hearing about all this Carbon footprint stuff. i am talking to him one day and he says how it produces no harmful emmissions, i look at him and point to the nearby Coal Burning power plant and say, And where does the electricity come from?

point is, is that there is no perfectly clean energy source, NONE. there is no energy source that will last forever, NONE. Best we can do is not to abuse what little we have and use it wisely, no one needs a Hummer to drive around in the city, no one needs that 500 Horsepower car that can do over 200 MPH when the speed limit is only 75. but we all must have our toys, its just that some toys are better for the enviroment than others.

 

[LoneWolf]

Since it can't somehow electronically retrieve and shred the spammers themselves, I too fail to see the point.