PDA

View Full Version : Oil spill



mathuwm
06-23-2010, 11:00 PM
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9033575&contentId=7061771

a link to BPs' Response maps

this helped me to better visualize what is happening


a horrible situation altogether

Jaxilon
06-23-2010, 11:55 PM
I don't feel comfortable saying what I would like to say about this so I will limit it to the briefest statement I can make.

My feeling is this is way worse than anyone thinks and will forever be one of the greatest catastrophes in man's history and no amount of money can fix it. All that remains is for the domino effect to play out and see just how harsh the fallout is. BP says they will do this or that, politicians say this or that will happen but they are truly incapable of correcting the matter. I also feel that all the oil companies share in this inexcusable destruction because they have suppressed better ideas than oil for a really long time. This flat out comes down to greed and ineptness, stupidity and carelessness.

As long as greed is involved you can't count on people to do the right thing so don't be fooled into thinking it is going to start now.

PS. I will stop myself now because I don't want to stand on this soapbox and I don't want to alienate anyone who honestly believes this is not a huge deal. It doesn't make any difference at this point because what will happen is what will happen. This site is an oasis from reality for me and filled with imagination of what could be. I prefer for it to stay that way because I for one don't need any more reality in my daily life. I think this hole they punched into the ocean floor blowing oil out of control into the environment is absolutely overwhelming.

PS. I stared at this a long time before posting it because I'm just a regular guy and can only go by what I hear and am told. I'm not an expert but I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to kill a whole lot of people. No, I wouldn't be surprised in the least. Man likes to play with stuff he doesn't fully understand and this is another perfect example. I would be happy if my fears come to nothing.

arsheesh
06-24-2010, 12:20 AM
Agreed Mat, Jax. This is just simply a tragic state of affairs, and looks like it is only going to get worse. For those of you who pray, I would encourage you to consider praying about this spill, and for those affected by it.

Diamond
06-24-2010, 03:01 AM
Jaxilon, for what it's worth, I agree with you 110%.

Redrobes
06-24-2010, 08:15 AM
I came across this link a few days back and thought it was a great collection of images.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/event.php?id=43733

Look at the one Apr 21st to see a satellite image of the gulf with the rig on fire and the latest pics are pretty good too.

Ascension
06-24-2010, 08:33 AM
Here in the states, back in 2008, a certain female running for high office coined a phrase..."drill, baby, drill" and it was quite popular amongst her base (which you can probably figure out how I feel about them). Having lost she, and others of her ilk, are trying to use this as an opportunity to blame those who won. That appalls me almost as much as the devastated ecosystem...steam is coming out of my ears cuz I was warning folks I knew (yes I'm a tree-hugger). I had planned a trip to the Tampa (Longboat Key) area in September so I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I can enjoy the beach...if not I'll go to Ft. Lauderdale.

RobA
06-24-2010, 12:04 PM
To keep this mappy, http://www.ifitwasmyhome.com/

lets you "move" the spill to see how large it is vs. any place you pick using goolemaps.

-Rob A>

jfrazierjr
06-24-2010, 12:16 PM
I don't feel comfortable saying what I would like to say about this so I will limit it to the briefest statement I can make.

My feeling is this is way worse than anyone thinks and will forever be one of the greatest catastrophes in man's history and no amount of money can fix it. All that remains is for the domino effect to play out and see just how harsh the fallout is. BP says they will do this or that, politicians say this or that will happen but they are truly incapable of correcting the matter. I also feel that all the oil companies share in this inexcusable destruction because they have suppressed better ideas than oil for a really long time. This flat out comes down to greed and ineptness, stupidity and carelessness.

While I don't disagree with the fact that greed and ineptness is a part of the problem, I would ask what what ideas are better than oil? I honestly want to know, not because I want to start a disagreement.



PS. I will stop myself now because I don't want to stand on this soapbox and I don't want to alienate anyone who honestly believes this is not a huge deal. It doesn't make any difference at this point because what will happen is what will happen. This site is an oasis from reality for me and filled with imagination of what could be. I prefer for it to stay that way because I for one don't need any more reality in my daily life. I think this hole they punched into the ocean floor blowing oil out of control into the environment is absolutely overwhelming.

This is a huge deal both the the environment (which will heal) as well as the livelihood of millions of people, but I disagree that it does not make a difference at this point. It may well make a very big difference in the lifestyles of millions of US citizens via higher energy costs. There are plenty of conspiracy theories and while I won't say that I endorse any specific ones, it would not surprise me one bit if any/all of them are true(well, perhaps not one that says aliens caused the thing to blow up(if there is one)...)

One thing to remember is that the crude oil was not leaking in the ocean on day 1 or 2, but only after the well sunk did the structure break apart and cause the "oil spill". I highly expect that at the end of it all(even if we the people don't hear it) that the sinking of the rig(and thus the oil leak in the water) was caused by the massive amounts of water pumped into the rig in order to try to contain the blaze which weakened the structure to the point of collapse. This collapse then caused the shaft to break. The real question is: why did the people who were there "fighting" the fire not know enough about the oil rig's structural limits to stop dumping more water onto the darn thing? Just as importantly, why were there no structural engineers yelling "STOP PUTTING WATER ON THE THING!!!"

jfrazierjr
06-24-2010, 12:18 PM
To keep this mappy, http://www.ifitwasmyhome.com/

lets you "move" the spill to see how large it is vs. any place you pick using goolemaps.

-Rob A>

Thats pretty cool RobA.... well.... not so much cool as interesting to see how big the oil spill in terms I can more easily understand in scale....

Gamerprinter
06-24-2010, 01:34 PM
Actually scientists say that the oil is near the surface (of the bottom of the gulf) and that oil leaks naturally into the Gulk - of course not at the levels the current leak is causing, however oil leaking into the gulf is a natural process that has existed long before man ever harnessed the power of oil. Its how we knew to drill there for oil in the first place.

GP

Jaxilon
06-24-2010, 04:41 PM
What's better than oil...

Like I said I'm not an expert but I do know that there have been a lot of motors that have been designed to run on hydrogen, electricity, methane, and who knows what. Often times the oil companies buy up such ideas for millions of dollars and then sit on them. It seems to me only recently that we have seen more and more electric cars, and now the start of hydrogen motors being used. A relative of mine told me about a guy he knew in his home town who came up with one such technology but he wouldn't sell it. He disappeared.

While it's true these technologies were not up to snuff as far as the power you get compared to typical gas powered engines they were certainly stalled in climbing that mountain. Green has only recently become a buzz word and that is everyone's fault not just oil companies so I can't blame them for all that. What I can say is they have done their best to keep a stranglehold on anything that might threaten their golden egg (the sales of oil).

I don't buy into all the conspiracies either but I'm certainly not entirely trusting in the men in power who are playing around with all that money and so on. I also wonder what Oil is for as far as the earth is concerned. Is it like blood to the planet, and if so, how much can we suck out of it before there are serious repercussions? I'm sure a little, even a lot has very little effect however, at some point a line may be crossed that causes real problems.

A lot of why we are still on oil is because there is just so much profit to be made with it. So many things are like this but most of the time folks don't stop to ask themselves if this is right.

And I know oil is used for a lot of other things, plastics and so on for example. No doubt it is highly useful and is in nearly everything we have around around us. Maybe that's ok but then again, maybe it's not ok. Maybe it's not ok at all. Maybe we are killing ourselves because we are too stupid to realize poison for what it is.

Finally, to be honest, I've not spent time really digging into this problem. I'm not aware of what other types of things could be used instead of oil. I'm sure there are experts out there. I'm sure that big business and governments do their best to gag such individuals as well.

GP is probably also correct. In anything there is some level of pollution and the earth can handle a lot obviously, but that doesn't mean we should just keep stabbing the elephant.

Iapetus
06-24-2010, 05:24 PM
To the question of "what can we use besides oil?", there are a lot of options.

One of the problems is that oil is currently the cheapest because we already have the technology and gas stations in place. My family has a Honda Civic that runs on compressed natural gas (CNG for short) and it is fantastic. The biggest problem? There are only 14 gas stations in the entire state of Michigan that have the pumps that can fuel the car. When we bought the car, we couldn't even get it in Michigan - my parents bought it from a dealer in Albany, New York, and he flew out there to pick it up.

Making this somewhat relevant to mapping, before he left I plotted out courses from one fill station to another, as he drove through New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. We didn't do our research well because apparently passes are needed to fuel up in Pennsylvania. Dad had to borrow some. Then, everything hinged on him stopping in Sandusky, Ohio, to fuel up. When he got to the gas station, they said that they don't understand why their station is still on the CNG websites, because they don't have it. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/locator/stations/

...so, my dad had to call my uncle and tow the car to the first CNG pump available in Michigan - in Adrian.

My family is lucky that we live within a half an hour of three different pumps, otherwise we couldn't really own this car. There are pumps available that you can hook up to your own natural gas line at your house... except that they're in such high demand that it's almost impossible to get your hands on one.

I've paid $1.94 per gallon for the past two years whenever I've driven that car. The price has never changed.

So, we have some of the technology, but what we lack is the infrastructure. We also lack the knowledge, which is what T. Boone Pickens has been trying to work on. Right now this Honda Civic can't cross-country because the pumps aren't there. It is also a shame, because the US has a *ton* of natural gas that it can use, and it doesn't have to buy it from anyone.


[/jumps down from soapbox]

cfds
06-26-2010, 03:15 PM
The alternatives for cars are
-Electricty: the problems are capacity of accumulators and infrastructure (the last is easy enough to solve). The real problem that might arise is that (at least in Germany) the electricty producing companies are powerful enough without additionally serving the demand for cars.
-Hydrogenium: the problem is the storage and I don't see a solution in the forseeable future
-"Bio fuel": needs great ares to grow the plants, might help developing countries (no more cheap corn from the US to ruin local farmers) or cause them to completely devastate their natural resources (e.g. rainforest razed to grow sugarcane).

But replacing oil as fuel for cars and heating homes is a small problem, compared to replacing oil as an ingredient in the chemical industry.

jfrazierjr
06-26-2010, 04:09 PM
The alternatives for cars are
-Electricty: the problems are capacity of accumulators and infrastructure (the last is easy enough to solve). The real problem that might arise is that (at least in Germany) the electricty producing companies are powerful enough without additionally serving the demand for cars.
You missed one(at least in the US): lack of power generation. Unfortunately in the US, regulation appears to be heading towards power generation means that cannot meet demand as it stands currently. In addition to battery capacity, you also have to take into account recharge time(and possibly life time vs cost to replace). Even if you could get a battery to hold a charge for 200 miles or more, currently it takes hours to recharge and that just won't fly in cases where people travel across the country for vacation or moving or even for daily business.




-Hydrogenium: the problem is the storage and I don't see a solution in the forseeable future. Umm did you miss type this, or is this something I have never heard about before?



-"Bio fuel": needs great ares to grow the plants, might help developing countries (no more cheap corn from the US to ruin local farmers) or cause them to completely devastate their natural resources (e.g. rainforest razed to grow sugarcane). Yea.. we need to be growing more trees, not less... Also, don't forget reusing existing used fry oil as bio diesel which would solve two problems if you discount the pollution issue(which is still less polluting than gasoline from what I understand).



But replacing oil as fuel for cars and heating homes is a small problem, compared to replacing oil as an ingredient in the chemical industry.
Really? While I know there are thousands of compounds derived from oil, I would never have guessed that oil was used much less for fuel than for other reasons...

Ascension
06-26-2010, 09:43 PM
I think what he's getting at is that plastics are made from petroleums and, while ubiquitous, I don't know which industry uses more. And it may be easier to get our vehicles powered by other things than it is to get our stuff made from different things.

RobA
06-27-2010, 05:39 PM
Hydrogenium is an (antiquated?) term for hydrogen, especially when in a metallic state.

But my understanding is that hydrogen is not a fuel source, only a storage medium. Most hydrogen comes either from reforming oil or natural gas (still a dependency on fossil fuels) or from electrolysis of water, which needs electricity. And every state transformation of energy (source->hydrogen->fuel-cell->electricity->power for a car) adds another transformation, each which introduces losses.

-Rob A>

Redrobes
06-27-2010, 09:39 PM
In addition to battery capacity, you also have to take into account recharge time(and possibly life time vs cost to replace). Even if you could get a battery to hold a charge for 200 miles or more, currently it takes hours to recharge and that just won't fly in cases where people travel across the country for vacation or moving or even for daily business.Well one option there is to go into a garage, hand in your discharged battery + wadge of greenbacks and carry out a charged one. Whilst I would admit there's problems with not having your own personal set of cells its more of a political / social problem than an engineering one. In a much bigger scale this is what the US esp Bill Gates is proposing with mini nuke reactors.

I am also told that there are batteries where if you change the electrolyte for new "charged" electrolyte then you can go again. That's not true for lead acid batteries but if there are ones which have a liquid for both halves of the chemistry then you could drain old and pump in the new like petrol. That's essentially what the hydrogen fuel cell is like. Ok bit different but you get the idea.

A lot of the issues surrounding the whole car + oil problem are not engineering ones but infrastructure, social, economic and political. Some of the eng ones are tough cookies cos oil is darned convenient when it works and doesn't leak all over the gulf. But we gotta face it that were going to have to make some changes in the future. If our whole lifestyle wasn't built with such a single source medium infrastructure then it would be less of a change to make now.

Such a big topic and so many options and opinions that its hard to make fresh ground on it all.

cfds
06-28-2010, 05:31 AM
@jfrazierjr: With "greater problem" I meant first of all "finding a replacement will be more difficult". I don't know the exact amounts of oil needed in chemical industry compared to fuel consumption either.

The lack of power generation is a good point and if the administrations in Europe don't pay attention we will have the same problem here soon. Some services should not be in private hands but that is a different topic...

And redrobes has probably hit the key issue: cars are one of the most important symbols of status and as long that doesn't change it will be difficult to get away from oil.

Redrobes
06-28-2010, 08:04 AM
If it were merely status then we could legislate around that problem in no time. In some social circles carrying a gun is an important status symbol but we can legislate and manage without them. Transportation is something that we could cut down on but we cant do without.

tilt
06-28-2010, 09:43 AM
so... answering a little in east and west of the thread (again, keeping it map related with casual references to compass directions) ... electricity poses 2 new problems - a lot of electricity is made from coal plants - thus adding to CO2, and general polution. Also, for now the batteries uses lithium which is rare, even with the huge deposit (worlds biggest) found in Afghanistan there isn't enough to convert all the cars to electricity. So we have to develop new batteries as well.

Biofuel has the added value that you can convert existing engines - the disadvantage is that you use up "field space" where you could grow food. Of course you can make it from some food stuffs by products (like corn stalks and such)... I saw a US company made a "home-sugar-bio-fuel-tank-station"-thingy a year or two ago, that sounded like a great idea.

Hydrogen still takes a lot of energy making, so that has to get better before its usefull.. but its clean in omissions ;) ... so danish scientists (gotta plug my own country here) made a hydrogen pill some years ago - but when stuff like that come out its always... we can have a real-world-prototype-working-thing in 20-30 years.. .s*sigh*

What we really could use are super conducters so we can store harnessed wind and sun and water energy - then we're getting somewhere... :)

Diamond
06-30-2010, 03:38 PM
And redrobes has probably hit the key issue: cars are one of the most important symbols of status and as long that doesn't change it will be difficult to get away from oil.
For me (and I suspect a lot of other Americans), it's not even about status. It's about being able to get from Point A to Point B in a timely manner. I live in the San Francisco Bay area, which has one of the best public transit systems in the US, but even so it's still a nightmare if need to get from, say, my home in San Mateo to a business appointment in Oakland. I'd have to get on a bus to the BART station (about 25 minutes), then take BART across the Bay to Oakland (another 20 minutes or so), then get on another bus (or two or three, with transfers) - another 30 minutes easily. So anywhere from an hour and a half up to possibly two or two and a half hours to travel twenty miles.

Or I could just hop in my car, drive across the bridge, and be at my appointment in half an hour to forty-five minutes, even in rush hour traffic.

I'd gladly get rid of my car in a heartbeat if there was fast, convenient, and inexpensive nation-wide public transit. Speaking of cost, that little ride I just described above? That'd cost about $16 for a round-trip, compared to burning about 2 gallons of gas = $6 (figure 20 miles to a gallon, so two gallons).

whtknt
06-30-2010, 03:51 PM
At risk of going completely south of the topic (map-related), as someone who lives on the Gulf Coast, who works in the marine science industry, and who is watching these events unfold with growing concern, I can understand and agree with Jax's fears. This is bigger than anyone thinks, and much bigger than BP and our government want you to believe and they themselves believe. This will not be going away anytime in the near future, and even the relief wells may not be completely (or even partially successful). In fact, there exists a (truthfully, slim) possibility that things will worsen.

We need alternatives to fossil fuels, and they have to be cheap enough and plentiful enough (or renewable) that they are affordable. And yet, no matter which route you go, there are obstacles.

jfrazierjr
06-30-2010, 03:53 PM
For me (and I suspect a lot of other Americans), it's not even about status. It's about being able to get from Point A to Point B in a timely manner. I live in the San Francisco Bay area, which has one of the best public transit systems in the US, but even so it's still a nightmare if need to get from, say, my home in San Mateo to a business appointment in Oakland. I'd have to get on a bus to the BART station (about 25 minutes), then take BART across the Bay to Oakland (another 20 minutes or so), then get on another bus (or two or three, with transfers) - another 30 minutes easily. So anywhere from an hour and a half up to possibly two or two and a half hours to travel twenty miles.

Or I could just hop in my car, drive across the bridge, and be at my appointment in half an hour to forty-five minutes, even in rush hour traffic.

I'd gladly get rid of my car in a heartbeat if there was fast, convenient, and inexpensive nation-wide public transit. Speaking of cost, that little ride I just described above? That'd cost about $16 for a round-trip, compared to burning about 2 gallons of gas = $6 (figure 20 miles to a gallon, so two gallons).

And you pretty much nailed the reasons I dislike public transit:


loads of extra time involved in most cases(in the US anyway)
cost(unless you use transit a lot AND they have an unlimited montly pass paid for up front)
Just plain PITA with transfers
ease of use....Just how much of a PITA would it be to bring home 5 sheets of 4x8 plywood on a bus/train compared to your own minivan/truck/SUV


For the first issue, some of that might be solvable for "some" people by having access to a laptop and high speed internet along the entire route(ie, those who commute to work and work in some type of business where they utilize PC's often for their job.) Of course, I expect that this still precludes most people who have to travel in transit systems who cannot utilize technology due to the constraint's of their job type.


When my car was broken for several months, I used public transit and as noted, spent almost 2 hours(one transfer 1 hour 50 minutes avg time per trip) to make a 25 minute trip via car. While I did have a laptop, my job at the time would have required a high speed internet connection in order to allow me to do my work, and what just not available to me, so that was 1.5 hours (each way) wasted every day.

tilt
06-30-2010, 04:22 PM
and public transit problems are not only in the US - I'm guessing most of the world has the same. In Denmark/Sweden they are expensive, they take long - they are crowded. Where we live it would take us min. 2 hours to get to work with public transit or 1 hour with the car. With 2 small kids, 4 hours transit a day is just not doable, so we use the cars. Sometimes I work at home though and thus save some money. Here the petrol is expensive to unfortunatly 1 liter is at the moment about 10,50 DKK almost $2, 3,8 liter to the gallon so thats about $7 a gallon. Cars are expensive to in Denmark (but not Sweden - yeah!) but people buy them anyway cause a lot can't do without them and hold a job.
That being said Denmark and Sweden has taken great steps to try to get as much power as possible from wind and water (and the little sun we get) and we have a high percentage of energy from that - still far from 100% though, but working in the right direction... which leads us back to super conductors so we can store that energy :)

cfds
07-01-2010, 07:39 AM
Perhaps I overstated the point 'status symbol'. Public transport is a problem everywhere mainly because it cannot be run with profit. In Germany the railroad company tries to compete against planes on long distances and tries to get rid of the regional lines with the obvious results.
But I still think the world would be helped if people would not use a SUV or another 500 hp car to get to work. If you don't have to haul bulky material a small car with 50 hp usually works as well but demanding to use a 'small' car amounts to castration, at least in Germany...

Redrobes
07-01-2010, 08:00 AM
I would be quite happy to ride a bike on a cycle track to work because if you hit another bike then its gonna hurt but its unlikely to be serious. If, however, I take a moped, smart car, or mini and go to work on the roads (especially motorways, interstate etc) then its full of articulated lorries.

I would also be quite happy to have a touring type car or pickup and a smart car / mini and choose the one most suitable for the journey. Pop around to the local shops in the mini, Prius etc but at least in the UK you have to have car insurance per car instead of getting a single set of cover for the most valuable one which includes all your other cars - since you can only drive one at a time.

Since you need a car to cover your most common and most demanding type of transport then you have to have that touring car or pickup / van if your in a trade and use it when shopping. This is a government or social issue not an engineering one. We could create a car which has a variable amount of engine size - perhaps like a train where there is a carriage which can be attached which is powered so that you have a front section like a mini and an extra back section when needed. But its all a non starter because of the legislation.

I would still say that most of the issues surrounding lower fuel consumption are all about the legal framework in which you are allowed to design a car for the road. Not sure what its like in other countries but for the UK, the governments solutions to tackling these issues has been the usual tax hike for bigger cars, there, job done.

Jaxilon
07-03-2010, 02:41 AM
Well they are coming up with some better looking alternate fuel cars. Check this Electric Raceabout pushing 60 mph in less than five seconds on its way to a top speed of 125 mph (http://www.thecoolist.com/electric-raceabout-electric-sports-car/) and at least they are getting around to looking better.

Oh, and btw, there are some really cool architectural ideas and abandoned locations around the world that are worth checking out on that site.

tilt
07-03-2010, 03:23 AM
http://www.labconfidential.dk/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/080118_karma.jpg Danish Hybrid car ... but then we're back to a limited source of lithium... *sigh*... its a loose - loose situation ... gotta invent some more stuff :)
btw - there is a company (in germany?) that has designed a "automatic-car-battery-changing-station", where you drive in and machines changes the battery while your in the car :)

Jaxilon
07-03-2010, 04:22 PM
I don't know, there are lots of ideas out there but I think the bottom line is that people are just not going to give up what they want until maybe when they see themselves and their loved ones gasping for breath. Clearly something should have been done decades ago.

Wannabehero
07-06-2010, 05:45 PM
While I don't disagree with the fact that greed and ineptness is a part of the problem, I would ask what what ideas are better than oil? I honestly want to know, not because I want to start a disagreement.

One idea that has merit, but requires further development, is algae of all things. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae_fuel)

Just for clarification, Algal fuels are a category of biofuels that are derived from algae (yay pond scum!). They have advantages in that they don't compete with food crops for land-mass or with human populations for water sources, algae fuels are a net-zero CO2 factor, and algal farms have the potential to be incredibly space-dense (don't take up much area) and far more efficient than traditional foodstock sources (such as soy, corn, or sugarcane). And just for some extra icing on the cake, the bi-products of algal farming are supremely suited as plant fertilizer and animal feedstock.

The real issues faced by this technology (and pretty much every green power technology) is infrastructure and technology readiness, which equate to big expenses that only recently have people begun to consider worthwhile.

Redrobes
07-06-2010, 06:14 PM
A couple of other wikipedia entries worth looking at are compressed air powered cars. Tho they have a lower efficiency than internal combustion cars and its true that if the compressor to make the compressed air is run off of a coal fired power station then sure its not green but they can be run from solar and air is abundant and relatively easy to store compressed so there is no reason why a lot of people could not get tanks of compressed air slowly filling from solar even in low light countries. The engine is zero pollution, in fact its usually negatively polluting cos it filters the air going in and spits out very cold and cleaner air out the back.

Another list worth having a look at is energy densities and its quite a shocker so see where the carbon and non carbon based energy storage mediums fit in on the scale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_car
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Algae is a superb storage of nitrogen and makes for good fertilizer and can be burnt. The main issues with that is growing it. It does great out in the sea but collecting it would then require a lot of energy. Maybe people will find a way tho. In a sense, algae is not so different from growing trees, chopping into firewood and burning them again. Id say thats better than oil tho much less convenient. Ultimately, both algae and trees are solar energy storage devices. I just wonder whether we can do better than that.

ExMachina
07-06-2010, 11:16 PM
It's my understanding that those crazy Ruskies use contained nuclear detonations to stop spills like this one...might as well put our massive nuclear arsenal to work. I''m just glad it hasn't traveled up the Eastern Seaboard like they though it might, I wouldn't my beloved, picturesque shores here in Jersey to be ruined.

Jaxilon
07-07-2010, 02:37 AM
Hey I think those cars that blow ice cold air out the back should be mandatory here in Arizona because it's too freakin HOT!!!

tilt
07-07-2010, 05:33 AM
I think we should have antimatter cars then - in addition to being very energy dense - it would just be plain cool ;)

RobA
07-07-2010, 10:53 AM
Thew big issue is planning and infrastructure. If I could do 99% of what I need to do within walking distance than I wouldn't have a car.

Automobiles (and other forms of I/C transport) are symptoms of a greater issue.

Plus the world needs more monorails. Monorails are cool. Pneumatic subways are cooler (http://www.google.ca/images?q=pneumatic+subway) (phoomp!). Too bad they never caught on.

-Rob A>

Diamond
07-07-2010, 03:01 PM
The world definitely needs more monorails. To me, that seems an ideal solution for mass transit problems: the footprint is relatively small, for one thing - you don't have to lay down actual track, thus taking up valuable real estate. It's also much harder to commit suicide by jumping in front of a monorail train, so that would phase out one of the most annoying problems (from a commuter's perspective) of SF's CalTrain system.

mathuwm
07-10-2010, 07:33 PM
Fusion power will be what finally cures us of our world wide addiction to fossil fuels.
I propose a world wide Manhattan project to develop this technology

If mankind was motivated enough we could overcome the remaining difficulties


Maybe the time is right to get the monkey off our back



A link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_machine

tilt
07-12-2010, 04:00 AM
thats one cool machine :)