Author Topic: Great News! (Read 2162 times)

Skydancer · « **Reply #30 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:14:25 AM »

You could be right and I'd have no probs running my bike on some other Vroom Vroom fuel if they could do it.

JB88 · « **Reply #31 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:17:46 AM »

well, its certainly interesting to think that we may actually be breaking the apathy curve on this...though it is fair to note that any changes will be painful as was demonstrated by the invention of the automated phone system.

gonna take some gettiing used to...but any advances in fuel and energy dependence will be a welcome one for me.

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:18:46 AM »

Quote

After a decade of intensive
development, the first commercial-scale waste-to-oil plant based on the Thermal Conversion Process (TCP) of Changing World Technologies is successfully processing up to 270 tons of poultry offal into 300 barrels of oil daily in Carthage, Missouri.

"Unfortunately, while the science works, political technicalities are preventing our company from meeting the demand to expand our U.S. operations," says CWT Chairman & CEO Brian Appel.

Apparently, they are saying that because they don't qualify for a .50-$1 per gallon Federal subsidy they can't compete.

It'll be interesting to see how this goes as oil prices increase.

BTAirsol · « **Reply #33 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:21:13 AM »

How many of you guys drive SUV's? Fill up those tanks and watch how much its going to cost. Sales on SUV's are going to drop. Out here in So. Cal. we might be able to see whats ahead of us on the road with less "sky cabs" in front of us.

storch · « **Reply #34 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:25:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Engine
Isn't it possible to simply extract hydrogen from a water tank through electrolysis as the car drives, and keep the amount of pure hydrogen in the vehicle limited? Sounds like it would be safer to extract the hydrogen as needed, but I'm certainly unfamiliar with the process.

the hydrogen must be forced under pressure through an anode in to a catalyst/cathode in order to create chemical electrical energy which in turn will run an electrical motor. the process is simple and can actually occur naturally in the form of electrolysis between dissimilar metals. all you need is air, water, aluminum and steel as an example and you produce electricity in minute amounts. the weaker metal is consumed (partly how make my living). the process for running an automobile (even a small one) for a useful period of time is where the technology is limited today. If they could produce a personal vehicle that can seat two run at 100-120 kph for an indefinite period it would sell well provided it had cup holders.

john9001 · « **Reply #35 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:26:13 AM »

"" alternatives are not exactly viable""

we have city buses running on CNG down here, i better go tell them it can't be done.

*CNG=compressed natural gas.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #36 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:30:37 AM »

Optimism? Hope? LOL! Those two and a couple of bucks might get you a cup of coffee.

I consider it borderline delusional for anyone to think what they believe to be the right thing to will actually get done. It will only get done if there is a benefit to the politicians. Either more votes, or more money in thier pockets.
You can take all your idealistic wishes and flush them, for all the good they will do. As long the limosines who drive the politicians and rich around have gas, nothing will change.
If anyone jumps on that bandwagon, you can bet there is an alternative reason why they are doing so.

Toad · « **Reply #37 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:32:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skydancer
Toad my bike big displacement or no costs me a lot less to run than my car!

[/b]

Feel the need to change your argument then? I'm not suprised. What you said was:

Quote

Skydancer: a motorcycle is the more fuel efficient vehicle for a lone traveller

Clearly, that is not true for the large displacement bikes.

The rest of your "new" argument doesn't change the fact that a bike is a "reasonable" choice for only a very small, limited segment of the traveling public.

Overall, a car is by FAR the more practical vehicle AND (if one chooses correctly) many cars are by FAR more fuel efficient.

Considering that the fuel efficient cars can carry four instead of just two (at best), the choice is a no-brainer.

Kegger26 · « **Reply #38 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:33:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
that is exactly right. hydrogen is only viable if we first shoot all the lawyers.

I'm down for that. *hands Storch one my Glocks*

storch · « **Reply #39 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:35:34 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by BTAirsol
How many of you guys drive SUV's? Fill up those tanks and watch how much its going to cost. Sales on SUV's are going to drop. Out here in So. Cal. we might be able to see whats ahead of us on the road with less "sky cabs" in front of us.

I drive about 200 miles per day in my toyota tacoma. that equates to a fill'r up daily for all practical purposes. a typical fill up for me is 12 gals roughly $30.00 a day. an SUV fill up has to be about $70.00 per tank now. with roughly the same autonomy as I enjoy. makes you think twice. still the economy is booming there's lots of money on the streets here so, ehhh who cares, for now.

Toad · « **Reply #40 on:** April 08, 2005, 11:48:38 AM »

Oh, and before you start thinking you're the only one with 'cycle experience, I currently own 50% of this one

and, in my youth, started with a Yamaha 100, sold it and moved up to a Bridgestone 200cc street/off road, sold that for a 350 Honda, sold that for a 650 BSA Lightning, added a 125cc Kawasaki motocrosser and later sold the Lightning for a Kawasaki Mach III. Sold both Kaws when I went to pilot training.

The Sabre was just a whim; threw in half on it when my son wanted to buy it. I ride when I feel like it... because, after all, it's just not that practical for daily transportation needs but it's a fun recreational vehicle.

As just about everyone realizes.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #41 on:** April 08, 2005, 12:26:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BTAirsol
How many of you guys drive SUV's? Fill up those tanks and watch how much its going to cost. Sales on SUV's are going to drop. Out here in So. Cal. we might be able to see whats ahead of us on the road with less "sky cabs" in front of us.

2004 Ford Explorer, Amsoil treatment, and a K&N, I'm averaging about 26mpg on the highway which is 11 points higher than the "EPA avg.".

Motorcyles are NOT the answer. Come to Michigan, it snows 4 months out of the year and, you won't get 1 mile on one. Shove your crotch rocket Triumph where the sun doesn't shine, it is NOT the answer for "Public Mass Transportation. Get off your high horse already. Al Gore said "that the Internal Combustion Engine" was the worst invention. I find it funny he rode in Airliners. Why? Hypocrasy. Now go get your shine box!

For those of you arguing about Hydrogen, do any of you remember the Hindenburg footage? (Skuzzy, Rolex and Toad. It is directed at the two amigos that post each others egos on my ignore list).

Masherbrum · « **Reply #42 on:** April 08, 2005, 12:27:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Oh, and before you start thinking you're the only one with 'cycle experience, I currently own 50% of this one

and, in my youth, started with a Yamaha 100, sold it and moved up to a Bridgestone 200cc street/off road, sold that for a 350 Honda, sold that for a 650 BSA Lightning, added a 125cc Kawasaki motocrosser and later sold the Lightning for a Kawasaki Mach III. Sold both Kaws when I went to pilot training.

The Sabre was just a whim; threw in half on it when my son wanted to buy it. I ride when I feel like it... because, after all, it's just not that practical for daily transportation needs but it's a fun recreational vehicle.

As just about everyone realizes.

Nice.

indy007 · « **Reply #43 on:** April 08, 2005, 12:31:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
I drive about 200 miles per day in my toyota tacoma. that equates to a fill'r up daily for all practical purposes. a typical fill up for me is 12 gals roughly $30.00 a day. an SUV fill up has to be about $70.00 per tank now. with roughly the same autonomy as I enjoy. makes you think twice. still the economy is booming there's lots of money on the streets here so, ehhh who cares, for now.

Not quite. My 4Runner is the exact same platform as your Tacoma. I fill up about 13.5 gallons weekly, costs me about $28 on average. People tend to just label SUV's as gas guzzlers, when most are not. I drove a Sequioa for a few weeks, and it wasn't that bad. Cost me about $40/week for a much bigger vehicle with a V8. You really gotta get to the H2s or Excursions for it to become a gas guzzler, and those are the minority on the road... or those monstrous dualies driven by little guys that are staring out through the steering wheel... those crack me up

Elfie · « **Reply #44 on:** April 08, 2005, 12:34:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Apparently, they are saying that because they don't qualify for a .50-$1 per gallon Federal subsidy they can't compete.

It'll be interesting to see how this goes as oil prices increase.

Toad can you post a link for that?