EI2025 Message Forum / Open Forum / Alternative Energy Options Forum InstantForum.NET v4.1.1EI2025 Message Forumhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/forum@ei2025.orgSun, 23 Apr 2006 04:15:44 GMT20Solar & Bio Hydrogenhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic251-2-1.aspx<DIV>We must not ignore the macro energy equation. <BR>All fossil and nuke fuels ultimately add to the heat load of the biosphere while most of the solar / wind / thermal conversion technologies (except geothermal) recycle solar energy instead of releasing sequestered solar energy. This is the goal and definition of sustainability, not over loading the dynamic equilibrium of the biosphere. </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>The rising curve of increasing efficiency for PV, direct solar to hydrogen, wind and thermal conversion to electricity is most exciting. </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>The point is right now I could pay $20 K for a 12% efficient PV array to end my electric bill, in effect prepaying my electric bill for twenty years. If the nano developments in PV's, or direct thermal/electric or photoelectrochemical direct conversion to H2, can double the current efficiency while cutting the price in half, then we are talking $5,000 to be bill free. <BR>Hydrogen Solar <A href="http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html">http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html</A> sent me their current Tandum Cell numbers @ 10.2% efficiency: $1.50/LB for H2 <BR>And they say that a theoretical efficiency of 35% is possible, and a 22% efficiency is realistically achievable, i.e.,... $0.75/LB of H2 which equals $0.049/KWhr equivalent. From what I understand of the direct solar to hydrogen fabrication technology, it is a much greener process, and cheaper that silicon based PVs. </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>I also found some tech-specs for the suncone, They claim a 50 MW array will produce at $. 046/KWhr !! This is the lowest costs I've seen for solar technology near commercial release. <BR>Sustainable Resources, Inc. - The Suncone Solar Power Generator <BR><A title=http://www.sriglobal.org/suncone_intro.html href="http://www.sriglobal.org/suncone_intro.html">http://www.sriglobal.org/suncone_intro.html</A> <BR></DIV><DIV>And the nano-dot approach to PVs also promises full spectrum conversion efficiencies along with clean production processes. ( UB News Services-solar nano-dots <A title=http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-ex...rticle=75000009 href="http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-ex...rticle=75000009">http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-ex...rticle=75000009</A> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>So I'm thinking in kW not MW. If Bio or Solar , etc., can deliver at these prices, my roof will become my energy factory., and my septic tank will become a bioreactor and I'll actually start using my garbage disposal to help fuel my car </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Another big plus is decentralization. Distributed power networks are inherently more stable than MW based systems. The flywheel technology that Beacon Power has installed for New York and California <A title=http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20060301:MTFH76507_2006-03-01_20-54-57_N01399291&amp;type=comktNews&amp;rpc=44 href="http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20060301:MTFH76507_2006-03-01_20-54-57_N01399291&amp;type=comktNews&amp;rpc=44">http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20060301:MTFH76507_2006-03-01_20-54-57_N01399291&amp;type=comktNews&amp;rpc=44</A> Also contributes to the advantages of both distributed and centralized power sources. All the while adjusting to near perfectly conditioned power, and protecting from threats like this: </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>According to NASA and the National Science Foundation, the next 11-year sunspot cycle could be up to 50 percent stronger than the present one. That cycle will begin in late-2007/early-2008 and peak around 2012. The phenomenon is a big deal because it can disrupt satellites and knock out power grids. The details are in a story by the Los Angeles Times. </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>BIO Hydrogen:<BR><BR>Crag Venter is back from his ocean cruse with the bugs he hopes will make all our fuel:<BR><A href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/26/AR2006022600932.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#065bb1>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/26/AR2006022600932.html</FONT></A> <BR><BR>And this company:<BR><BR><A href="http://www.nanologix.net/index.php" target=_blank><FONT color=#065bb1>http://www.nanologix.net/index.php</FONT></A><BR><BR>"NanoLogix is a nanobiotechnology company that engages in the research, development, and commercialization of technologies for the production of bacteria, disease testing kits, alternative sources of fuel"<BR><BR>The NanoLogix breakthrough came about when the Company’s researchers were tinkering with its proprietary biological-based diagnostic and remediation technologies, noting that one of its patented bacterial culturing methods could produce byproduct gas surprisingly rich in hydrogen. <BR><BR> </DIV><DIV>Welch's is buying the H2 Bug Farts: <BR><A title=http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060313/20060313005750.html?.v=1 href="http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060313/20060313005750.html?.v=1">http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060313/20060313005750.html?.v=1</A> <BR>SHARON, Pa., Mar 13, 2006 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- NanoLogix, Inc. (Pink Sheets:NNLX) announced today that the Company has completed the construction of its first commercial hydrogen bioreactor facility at a Welch's Food plant in North East, Pennsylvania. The company also announced that the facility will begin hydrogen generation from Welch's waste organic matter on or about the first of April 2006. </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Erich J. Knight</DIV>Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:09:57 GMTerichA New Manhattan Project for Clean Energyhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic209-2-1.aspx<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=smalltxt vAlign=top><DIV>Dear Folks: I posted this sumation of research I have done over the past year to your fusion thread, but thought after looking over your forum it should have it's own thread, hope it OK to re-post it.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>A New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Over the past year many luminaries have made clarion calls for a concerted effort to solve the energy crisis. It is a crisis, with 300 million middle class Chinese determined to attain the unsustainable lifestyle we have sold them. Their thirst for oil is growing at 30% a year, and can do nothing but heat the earth and spark political conflict.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>We have been heating the earth since the agricultural revolution with the positive result of providing 10,000 years of warm stability. But since the Industrial revolution we have been pushing the biosphere over the brink. Life forces have done this before -- during the snowball earth period ( <A title=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenian href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryogenian" target=_blank><STRONG><FONT color=#236eb5>Cryogenian Period</FONT></STRONG></A> <IMG title=Wink src="/forum/Skins/Classic/Images/EmotIcons/Wink.gif" align=absMiddle border=0> in the <A title=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoproterozoic href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoproterozoic" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>Neoproterozoic</FONT></A> toward the end of the Precambrian - but that life force was not sentient!</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Thomas Freedman of the New York Times has called for a Manhattan Project for clean energy <A title=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30917F83D5C0C748EDDAF0894DC404482&amp;n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fThomas%20L%20Friedman href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30917F83D5C0C748EDDAF0894DC404482&amp;n=Top%252fOpinion%252fEditorials%2520and%2520Op%252dEd%252fOp%252dEd%252fColumnists%252fThomas%2520L%2520Friedman" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>The New York Times&gt; Search&gt; Abstract</FONT></A>. Richard Smalley, one of the fathers of nanotechnology, has made a similar plea <A title=http://news.uns.purdue.edu/html3month/2004/040902.Smalley.energy.html href="http://news.uns.purdue.edu/html3month/2004/040902.Smalley.energy.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://news.uns.purdue.edu/html3month/2004/040902.Smalley.energy.html</FONT></A>. </DIV><DIV> We are at the cusp in several technologies to fulfilling this clean energy dream. All that we need is the political leadership to shift our fiscal priorities.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>I feel our resources should be focused in three promising technologies:</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>1. Nanotechnology: The exploitation of quantum effects is finally being seen in these new materials. Photovoltaics (PV) are at last going beyond silicon, with many companies promising near-term breakthroughs in efficiencies and lower cost. Even silicon is gaining new efficienies from nano-tech: <A title=http://www.physorg.com/news5831.html href="http://www.physorg.com/news5831.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>Researchers develop technique to use dirty silicon, could pave way for cheaper solar energy</FONT></A> <A title=http://www.physorg.com/news5831.html href="http://www.physorg.com/news5831.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.physorg.com/news5831.html</FONT></A></DIV><DIV>New work on diodes also has great implications for PV, LEDs and micro-electronics <A title=http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/11 href="http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/11" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>Nanotubes make perfect diodes (August 2005) - News - PhysicsWeb</FONT></A> <A title=http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/11 href="http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/11" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/11</FONT></A></DIV><DIV><FONT color=#236eb5><FONT color=#000000>And direct solar to hydrogen, I was told they have hit 10% efficiency and solved mass production problems: Hydrogen Solar home </FONT><A title=http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html href="http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html</FONT></A></FONT><FONT color=#000000> </FONT></DIV><DIV><DIV>And just coming out of the lab, this looks very strong, it brings full spectrum efficiencies to PVs: UB News Services-solar nano-dots <BR><A title=http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-execute.cgi/article-page.html?article=75000009 href="http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-execute.cgi/article-page.html?article=75000009" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.buffalo.edu/news/fast-execute.cgi/article-page.html?article=75000009</FONT></A></DIV><DIV> </DIV></DIV><DIV>1a. Thermionics: The direct conversion of heat to electricity has been at best only 5% efficient. Now with quantum tunneling chips we are talking 80% of carnot efficiency. A good example is the proposed thermionic car design of Borealis. ( <A title=http://www.borealis.gi/press/NEW-GOLDEN-AGE-IBM.Speech.6=04.pdf href="http://www.borealis.gi/press/NEW-GOLDEN-AGE-IBM.Speech.6=04.pdf" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.borealis.gi/press/NEW-GOLDEN-AGE-IBM.Speech.6=04.pdf</FONT></A> <IMG title=Wink src="/forum/Skins/Classic/Images/EmotIcons/Wink.gif" align=absMiddle border=0> . The estimated well-to-wheel efficiency is over 50%. This compares to 13% for internal combustion and 27% for hydrogen fuel cells. This means a car that has a range of 1500 miles on one fill up. Rodney T. Cox, president of Borealis, has told me that he plans to have this car developed within two years. Boeing has already used his Chorus motor drives <A title=http://www.chorusmotors.gi/ href="http://www.chorusmotors.gi/" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.chorusmotors.gi/</FONT></A>. <BR> on the nose gear of it's 767. (Boeing Demonstrates New Technology for Moving Airplanes on the Ground <A title=http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q3/nr_050801a.html href="http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q3/nr_050801a.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q3/nr_050801a.html</FONT></A> <IMG title=Wink src="/forum/Skins/Classic/Images/EmotIcons/Wink.gif" align=absMiddle border=0></DIV><DIV> The Borealis thermocouple power chips <A title=http://www.powerchips.gi/index.shtml href="http://www.powerchips.gi/index.shtml" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.powerchips.gi/index.shtml</FONT></A> (and cool chips) applied to all the waste heat in our economy would make our unsustainable lifestyle more than sustainable.</DIV><DIV>You may find an extensive discussion on thermo electric patents at: Nanalyze Forums - Direct conversion of heat to electricity <A title=http://www.nanalyze.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1006&amp;#2686 href="http://www.nanalyze.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1006&amp;#2686" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.nanalyze.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1006&amp;#2686</FONT></A></DIV><DIV><FONT color=#236eb5></FONT> </DIV><DIV>2. Biotechnology: Since his revolutionary work on the human genome project, Craig Venter has been finding thousands of previously unknown life forms in the sea and air. His goal is to use these creatures to develop the ultimate energy bug to produce hydrogen and or use of their photoreceptor genes for solar energy. <A title=http://www.venterscience.org/ href="http://www.venterscience.org/" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.venterscience.org/</FONT></A> Imagine a bioreactor in your home taking all your waste, adding some solar energy, and your electric and transportation needs are fulfilled.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>3. Fusion: Here I am not talking about the big science ITER project taking thirty years, but the several small alternative plasma fusion efforts and maybe bubble fusion - Is bubble fusion back? (July 2005) - News - PhysicsWeb </DIV><DIV><A title=http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/7/8 href="http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/7/8" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/7/8</FONT></A> <IMG title=Wink src="/forum/Skins/Classic/Images/EmotIcons/Wink.gif" align=absMiddle border=0></DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>On the big science side I do have hopes for the LDX : <A title=http://psfcwww2.psfc.mit.edu/ldx/ href="http://psfcwww2.psfc.mit.edu/ldx/" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://psfcwww2.psfc.mit.edu/ldx/</FONT></A>.<BR></DIV><DIV>.</DIV><DIV>There are three companies pursuing hydrogen-boron plasma toroid fusion, Paul Koloc, Prometheus II, Eric Lerner, Focus Fusion and Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems <A title=http://www.electronpowersystems.com/ href="http://www.electronpowersystems.com/" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.electronpowersystems.com/</FONT></A> . A resent DOD review of EPS technology reads as fallows: <BR><BR>"MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's <BR>chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing <BR>that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and <BR>EPS have jointly authored numerous professional papers describing their <BR>work. (Delphi is a $33B company, the spun off Delco Division of General <BR>Motors)." <BR><BR>and <BR><BR>"Cost: no cost data available. The complexity of reliable mini-toroid <BR>formation and acceleration with compact, relatively low-cost equipment <BR>remains to be determined. Yet the fact that the EPS/MIT STTR work this <BR>technology has attracted interest from Delphi is very significant, as the <BR>automotive electronics industry is considered to be extremely demanding of <BR>functionality per dollar and pound (e.g., mil-spec performance at <BR>Wal-Mart-class 'commodity' prices)." <BR><BR>EPS, Electron Power Systems seems the strongest and most advanced, and I love the scalability, They propose applications as varied as home power generation@ .ooo5 cents/KWhr, cars, distributed power, airplanes, space propulsion , power storage and kinetic weapons. <BR><BR>It also provides a theoretic base for ball lighting : Ball Lightning Explained as a Stable Plasma Toroid <A title="http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Ball Lightning Explained.pdf" href="http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Ball%20Lightning%20Explained.pdf" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.electronpowersystems.com/Images/Ball%20Lightning%20Explained.pdf</FONT></A><BR>The theoretics are all there in peer reviewed papers. It does sound to good to be true however with names like MIT, Delphi, STTR grants, NIST grants , etc., popping up all over, I have to keep investigating. <BR><BR>Recent support has also come from one of the top lightning researcher in the world, Joe Dwyer at FIT, when he got his Y-ray and X-ray research published in the May issue of Scientific American, <BR><A title=http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&amp;colID=1&amp;articleID=00032CE5-13B7-1264-8F9683414B7FFE9F href="http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&amp;colID=1&amp;articleID=00032CE5-13B7-1264-8F9683414B7FFE9F" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&amp;colID=1&amp;articleID=00032CE5-13B7-1264-8F9683414B7FFE9F</FONT></A><BR> Dwyer's paper: <BR><A title=http://www.lightning.ece.ufl.edu/PDF/Gammarays.pdf href="http://www.lightning.ece.ufl.edu/PDF/Gammarays.pdf" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://www.lightning.ece.ufl.edu/PDF/Gammarays.pdf</FONT></A><BR><BR>and according to Clint Seward it supports his lightning models and fusion work at Electron Power Systems <BR></DIV><DIV>Clint sent Joe and I his new paper on a lightning charge transport model of cloud to ground lightning (he did not want me to post it to the web yet). Joe was supportive and suggested some other papers to consider and Clint is now in re-write. <BR><BR>It may also explain Elves, blue jets, sprites and red sprites, plasmas that appear above thunder storms. After a little searching, this seemed to have the best hard numbers on the observations of sprites. <BR><BR>Dr. Mark A. Stanley's Dissertation <BR><A title=http://nis-www.lanl.gov/~stanleym/dissertation/main.html href="http://nis-www.lanl.gov/~stanleym/dissertation/main.html" target=_blank><FONT color=#236eb5>http://nis-www.lanl.gov/~stanleym/dissertation/main.html</FONT></A><BR><BR>And may also explain the spiral twist of some fulgurites, hollow fused sand tubes found in sandy ground at lightning strikes. <BR><BR><BR>The learning curve is so steep now, and with the resources of the online community, I'm sure we can rally greater support to solve this paramount problem of our time. I hold no truck with those who argue that big business or government are suppressing these technologies. It is only our complacency and comfort that blind us from pushing our leaders toward clean energy.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2>P.S..........Here's a reply to this post from UncleAl on the macro debate</FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2><A href="http://www.scienceforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=45"/forum/gthttp//wwwscienceforumscom/forumdisplay_f_45_ltA__gt__ltFONT__gt__ltDIV__gt__ltP__gt__ltFONT_lang_0_face_gt__ltTABLE_class_tborder_style.html"BORDER-RIGHT: #d7dce1 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #d7dce1 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #d7dce1 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #d7dce1 1px solid" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt3><DIV><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; LINE-HEIGHT: 120%"><B>The US consumes the equivalent of 1.2 metric tonnes of matter 100% converted into energy each year, E=mc^2.</B><BR><BR>You are all clueless. Sparrow farts run through a gas turbine won't get you 10^20 joules/year. Not now, not ever. Pulling 10^20 joules/year out of wind or waves would monstrously perturb the weather. Where do the energy and raw materials necessary to fabricate and install your New Age hind gut fermentations originate? Who pays for the environmental impact reports and litigations therefrom?<BR><BR>What are the unknown hazards? Can you guarantee absolute safety for 10,000 years? Let's have a uniform set of standards, eginineering and New Age bullshit both. Area necessary to generate 1 GW electrical, theoretical minimum<BR><BR>mi^2<BR>Area, Modality<BR>====================<BR>1000 biomass<BR>300 wind<BR>60 solar<BR>0.3 nuclear<BR><BR>3x10^7 GWhr-thermal/year would need 9 <B>b</B>illion mi^2 of wind collection area. The total surface area of the Earth is 197 <B>m</B>illion mi^2. 24 hrs/day. Looks like yer gonna come up a little short if <B>100%</B> of the Earth were wind generators powering only the US.<BR><BR>Are ya gonna alternatively burn algae to generate 10^20 joules/year? Now you are a factor of 3 even worse - before processing and not counting inputs. THEY LIED TO YOU. They lied to you so poorly it can be dismissed with arithmetic. Where are your minds?</SPAN></DIV><DIV><BR><FONT color=#66be50>--------------------</FONT><BR><SPAN class=smallfont><FONT size=2>Uncle Al <BR></FONT><A href="http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/" target=_blank><FONT color=#660000 size=2>http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/</FONT></A><FONT size=2> <BR>(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)<BR></FONT><A href="http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf" target=_blank><FONT color=#660000 size=2>http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf</FONT></A></SPAN> </DIV></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></FONT></P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Mon, 19 Sep 2005 01:01:10 GMTerichWorld Energy Usage: Statistics?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic249-2-1.aspxI am curious about world energy usage statistics. Does anyone know of any resources where I can find a list of countries along with a breakdown of each country's energy sources. I would like to find out what percentage is oil power, coal power, nuclear power, wind power, solar power, etc.<br><br>I cannot find a resource like that myself and am also looking for any ideas about how we could start one. I realize it would have to be a group project involving a lot of research and dynamic programming abilities.<br><br>Any ideas are appreciated!Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:15:29 GMTdatapencilwhy is hemp seed oil not considered as part of the solution?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic243-2-1.aspxit's (very) renewable<P>you wouldn't have to plug in your car</P><P>can fuel autos and industry for 1/10th the oil used today</P><P>no pollution</P><P>fraction of the cost ($$~wise as well as environmentally)</P><P>WHY NOT?? </P><P>it is a resource that needs to be tapped into its potential (which is way more than whats listed above)Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:44:41 GMTblacksheep7George Bush and the 2006 State of the Unionhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic244-2-1.aspxDo you think George W. is sincere about alternative energies?<br><br>When George W. Bush announced he was going to invest more resources into alternative energies in order to curb America's addiction to oil - I got excited for a split second. <br><br>I wish I could believe he was sincere - but somehow I get the feeling it was just a crowd pleasing "State of the Union" thing for him to say. Any thoughts?Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:22:37 GMTdatapencilUsing waste heathttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic174-2-1.aspx<P>I live in AZ most of the year, and will until my wife retires and then we will move to Utah. </P><P>For now, I save some energy when running the electric dryer by opening a window and letting the dryer suck in 100+ degree outside air, rather than let it suck my 78 degree cooled air from the house. I just shut the laundry room door, and the AC vent that feeds that room. For heavy clothing, like denim jeans and towels, I hang them outside. They get stiff drying that way, but once dry, I run them in the dryer with a small wet load and they come out soft again.</P><P>When we move to Utah, I will vent the dryer indoors in the winter time. The moist exhaust will be vented to the basement via a large dust collector bag like the ones used on commercial power saws that collect sawdust. The filtered air then has to run to the other end of the basement and then gets vented back upstairs to return to the dryer. This only works if you have a basement, and only in the winter time when the inside air tends to be too dry anyway. And you won't want to do too many loads on the same day, stretch your washing/drying throughout the week. If you start getting moisture condensing on the inside of your windows, you are doing too much laundry on the same day. A humidity gauge installed near the dryer will help you decide when you need to stop for the day.</P>Sat, 27 Aug 2005 11:22:42 GMTBill55AZNo Filling Station for Ethanol In Los Angeles???http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic236-2-1.aspxI went to the auto show this weekend and was happy to see that GM is now coming out with their flexible fuel vehicles and was interested in buying one. Ford has been doing this for years but Ford's have traditionally been the most unreliable cars I've ever owned so they were just out.</P><P>I went on the GM website and clicked the link to find nearby filling stations and was shocked to see that there was only 1 filling station in the state of California that was open to the public for the purchase of E85!!!</P><P>There were two stations in Berkeley (both for company vehicles of the lawrence livermore lab), one at Vandenberg, AFB (only for govt. vehicles and not even available to the servicemen/women for purchase) and finally, one in San Diego that will serve the public.</P><P>Does anybody know what the hell is up with that? California is known for being the most environmentally friendly state in the U.S. and we only have 1 station for the most populated state in the Country? Unaccepable!!! </P><P>For the record, Arizona and Nevada are bothe kicking CA's butt with 3 stations each. Can someone explain that logic to me?<img align="absmiddle" src="/forum/Skins/Classic/Images/EmotIcons/Discuss.gif" border="0" title="Discuss">Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:27:20 GMTfivehundoHydrogen Olympicshttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic240-2-1.aspx<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>hi guys <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>I've found this really interesting video podcast's feed about hydrogen as energy source and related Hydrogen Olympics:<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000> <o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>apple:<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><A href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=115485761&amp;s=143450" target=_blank><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3>http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=115485761&amp;s=143450</FONT></SPAN></A></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000> <o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>xml:<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><A href="http://www.gommunity.com/podcast/torino/podcast.xml" target=_blank><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3>http://www.gommunity.com/podcast/torino/podcast.xml</FONT></SPAN></A><A href="http://www.gommunity.com/gps/torino_winter_games_1_11.zip" target=_blank></A></SPAN><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN lang=EN-GB style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000> <o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>cheers</FONT></FONT></SPAN></P><P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT size=3><FONT color=#000000>Antonio<o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></SPAN>Wed, 08 Feb 2006 09:12:10 GMTdesertxWhy don't we build Nuke plants, use clean coal, drill for oil off of CA?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic228-2-1.aspxAlso, if we take the oldest most polluting cars off the roads, that coincidently are driven by illegal aliens, we would dramatically lower pollution, and have useable energy sources almost immediately.</P><P>Waiting for Americans to conserve, and conduct meaningful R &amp; D that will result in a clean source of fuel that can actually power enough of the US economy within 20 years isn't a reasonable expectation.</P><P>We have access to much cleaner technology now...we need to use it.Thu, 29 Dec 2005 13:44:36 GMTwhiteyholmesWho cares if we live well as long as we have cheap energy?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic230-2-1.aspxI hear tons of talk about spending gazillions of dollars researching "new and better" technologies to produce energy. You know what makes me sick? POLLUTION! Here we live with more than all the technology freely at hand to create a pollutionless powered world yet we simply REFUSE to do so! Why is this nation [and many other "civilized" nations] so pompous, arrogant, and SELF BLINDING to their own demise, while THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES are beating us in the energy race because they have wizened up to the practical needs of their economies and have begin incinerating their waste for electricity? We have SO MUCH WASTE right ow that it would take fifty years to incinerate it if you had a facility at every waste and refuse deposit site in America! ESPECIALLY seeing as you'd STILL ave an ever INCREASING stream of waste coming to those same dump sites all the time, WHILE you were busy digging up the BURIED waste, who knows if you could even HOPE of running out? I'm busy not just CHATTING about energy, I'm DOING something about it! I, all by my little FEMALE lonesome and creating the world's first and only TRUE ZERO emissions waste to energy power generation facility, and while people come here to talk, and shoot the breeze and theorize and while away their time using all these easily convenient forms of energy they have already there in front of them, I'll be out in the field making my vision into a reality for the whole world to see and ponder in amazement at! So, if you're REALLY wanting energy independence, BACK ME in MY energy generation efforts and we WILL become energy independent! Delicious Vodka DeBlair, Bellstar Research Laboratories.Tue, 03 Jan 2006 03:37:59 GMTDeliciousWhy are we blind to waste?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic226-2-1.aspx<FONT face="Arial Black">Well here we are, year 2006 making a stinking toxic dump out of our environment and yet nobody seems to smell the stink of raw untapped energy going to waste!</FONT><P>Such a shame too... Uncounted TRILLIONS of TERRAWATTS of energy get buried every year using fossil fuels and creating environmental toxifcation.</P><P>SOME countries in THIRD WORLD NATIONS are already way far ahead of us in both managing their wastes and their energy needs by co-generation.</P><P>"But that still requires coal, oil or natural gas" some of you may protest..</P><P>IT DOES NOT. I reply soundly with authority. I, al by myself have begun, AS A CHILD research into waste incineration taking into account every possible factor, financial, economic, political, and practical.</P><P>I have an executive summary of my proposed ZERO EMISSIONS waste to energy power generation facility, which I was invited by Califorina's 6th congressional distric representative Lynn Woolsey to discuss in a provate meeting.</P><P>The results of that meeting are that she and I are now on the same level of persuit of this project which s widespread and far reaching in our goals for a cleaner, stronger and more energy independant nation.</P><P>If you would like to learn more, or if you would like to just say Hi and drop me a line of moral support, feel free to write to me at Delicious Vodka DeBlair, 13208 Roselle Ave, Hawthorne, CA 90250 and I will reply to all letters asap either your preference, land post or e-mail. You can also e-mail me via this address: <A href="mailto:vossua@yahoo.com">vossua@yahoo.com</A> and either way, I can send you a copy of my executive summary as well as other relevant information on my proposed methods of reaching this state we are calling energy independance. </P><P>If you have doubts to the financial availability of funds for this proposed project, feel free to ask and I will show you both the rescources I have found within the government as well as in the provate sector of venture capital. There has never been a better time for us to break free from the sticky grip of the Asphalt kings of te world and their strnglehold on our economy through the sales or refusal to sell oil.</P><P>A SERIOUS freedom fighter, Delicious Vodka DeBlairTue, 20 Dec 2005 06:10:22 GMTDeliciousFusion is the keyhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic23-2-1.aspx<P>I am new to the ei2025 forum, but keenly interested in its mission. I have read through some of the posts and would like to offer my own opinion. Just for background information, I am an international political economy major at Occidental College in Los Angeles, CA.</P><P>Currently, I am research assistant for California Representative Sam Blakeslee. Just recently I was assigned to do basic resarch for AB 1128 which called for the California Energy Commission to set a target of 33% of electricity production to be renewable (in California) by 2020.</P><P>Through this research I was able to get a decent grasp of many of the different technologies. I am not an engineer and I don't profess to be one. However, I am a politician. My experience has been that the only way to advance renewable technologies is a symbiotic relationship between the two groups which can only be successful with a high degree of mutual understanding. To that end, I am eager to get feedback from anyone with a technical back ground on any of my comments.</P><P>Returning to my original point, AB 1128 explored a number of alternative options (i.e. geothermal, solar, wind, hydro, and biomass). However, the problem was not so much that these technologies don't function, but that the resources needed are simply infeasible at the macroeconomic level.</P><P>However, a particular option was not explored which is nuclear fusion. It is an option that I have found to be very interesting. Like I mentioned earlier, I don't understand all of the technical aspects, so the primary purpose of my post is to solicit feed back on the issue.</P><P>Obviously, California is in neither the financial or legal position to initiate a crash program to develop fusion as an electricity source. However, as I understand the situation, should we ever wish as a nation to restructure our energy base to hydrogren, the production of affordable electricity an a massive scale is absolutely critical. It is my opinion that fusion eletricity production is the key to achieving this end and should be incorporated in any proposal that seeks to bring about the use of hydrogen as an energy source.</P><P>I hope to hear from anyone with opinions on my proposition. Being a college student I feel I have both an extraordinary opportunity to witness the introduction of renewable energy and the responsibility to ensure its political implementation. Thank you.</P>Sat, 25 Jun 2005 18:21:53 GMTjarmijoBig Wheels... keep on...http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic70-2-1.aspxI know that culturally the bigger the wheels the cooler you are, so this also helps the idea of increasing the diameter of the vehicle wheel even more...<br><br>the larger the wheel is the better it seems to be, The wheels roll over obstacles faster and smoother. Bigger wheels make obstacles smaller by creating a lower angle of attack. In mud and sand. The larger wheel size also creates a longer contact patch which results in improved traction. The large diameter wheels give speed and stability while allowing for more surface area covered making it more efficient. Miles drift by effortlessly as the vehicle cruises smoothly over the most difficult terrain.<br><br>Also, for the initail excelleration... one may design an orbital motor to reduce the needed torque to start the larger wheel...<br><br>Perpetually positive, Oxygon.<br><br>P.S. - The larger and perhaps thinner wheels would allow the interior space to increase...Wed, 13 Jul 2005 19:37:50 GMTOxygonReplace your INIFICIENT Incandescent bulbs with Compact Fluorescent bulbs!http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic26-2-1.aspxThe simpliest way to save energy.... CUTS 2/3 OFF YOUR LIGHTING COST!Tue, 05 Jul 2005 03:40:27 GMTBongNpinoyReduce summer fuel consumption 20%http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic100-2-1.aspx<p>If you drive a car, disconnect the A/C compressor to save 20% during summer driving and 5-10% during winter. The refrigeration system used to cool the interior of the car could easily cool a 2000 square foot home! Scroll to the following EPA report to see several other ways you can reduce fuel consumption right now!</p><br><br><pre><br><br><b><br><br>Effect Conditions Average Fuel Maximum Fuel<br><br> Economy Economy<br><br> Reduction Reduction<br><br></b><br><br>Temperature* 20F vs 77F 5.3% 13%<br><br><br><br>Head Wind 20 mph 2.3% 6%<br><br><br><br>Hills/Mountains 7% road grade 1.9% 25%<br><br><br><br>Poor road Gravel, curves, 4.3% 50%<br><br>conditions* slush, snow, etc.<br><br><br><br><br><br>Traffic 20 vs 27 mph 10.6% 15%<br><br>Congestion average speed<br><br><br><br>Highway speed 70 vs 55 mph N/A 25%<br><br><br><br>Acceleration "Hard" vs "Easy" 11.8% 20%<br><br>Rate<br><br><br><br>Wheel 1/2 inch <1% 10%<br><br>Alignment<br><br><br><br>Tire Type non-radial <1% 4%<br><br> vs radial<br><br><br><br>Tire Pressure* 15 psi vs 3.3% 6%<br><br> 26 psi<br><br><br><br>Air Conditioning Extreme Heat 21% N/A<br><br><br><br>Defroster* Extreme Use Analogous to A/C on some vehicle<br><br><br><br>Idling/Warmup* Winter vs Variable 20%<br><br> Summer with Driver<br><br><br><br>Windows Open vs Closed Unknown but likely small<br><br><br><br></pre><br> <br> <h4> Source: </h4><br><br> The Office of Mobile Sources is the national center for research and <br> policy on air pollution from highway and off-highway motor vehicles <br> and equipment. You can write to them at the EPA National Vehicle and <br> Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. <br> Phone number is (734) 214-4333. <p>Webpage: http://www.epa.gov/orcdizux/rfgecon.htm</p>Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:40:36 GMTTimCSolar collectors for home heating.http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic55-2-1.aspx<P>Greetings all:</P><P>To all the engineers, builders and technicians out there, look into building a simple solar collector for home heating. Here's some of the things I've uncovered so far:</P><P>Thurmalox, A special black paint made especially for solar collectors.</P><P>Low Iron Tempered glass, allows in a maximum amount of solar energy while trapping the longer wave IR from the collecter.</P><P>Solar angle calculator (GOOGLE IT!): I will share my reasoning here: The average daily temprature lags the solar angle by 2 to 3 weeks. The change in solar angle is slowest near the solsist<EM>, </EM>therefore the collector angle should be about 5 degrees above the solar minimum solar angle (Dec21 2005) which at my latitude is 27<SUP>o</SUP>.</P><P> </P><P>Other than that I am going to concentrate on makeing my 5 foot by 25 foot collector as light as possible using sheet metal and light gage metal structural elements. The face is going to be triple glazed with the outer glaze being some type of plastic to protect the glass from breakage.</P><P>The collector is going to be a forced air type with baffles to increase length of air travel and turblance. (see a simple drawing below).</P><P>I hope this inspires some of you to do the same and please, share your discoveries and insights!<IMG alt="" hspace=0 src="C:\Documents and Settings\Dan A. Richeson\Desktop\solar collector.JPG" align=bottom border=0></P>Fri, 08 Jul 2005 22:49:42 GMTNuttsAndBoltsAlternative energy optionshttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic2-2-1.aspxThis forum is for discussion of alternative energy possibilities and realities. If you have ideas, suggestions or practical experiences that you'd like to share, please post these here.Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:09:52 GMTChrisWFocus on Wind Powerhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic115-2-1.aspx<P>Wind power is the fastest growing alternative to fossil-fuel electricity production. It deserves its own discussion area.</P>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:26:47 GMTMr. Philscarecrows on windmills?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic144-2-1.aspxhey, this might be a crazy idea but I can't tell if it's good or bad,<br>so what if we put scarecrows on some wind power plants to scare birds away? Then we would solve the windmill bird problem right?Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:41:51 GMTEric EliasonJet stream windmillshttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic149-2-1.aspxNow a San Diego based company called Sky Windpower, is working on Flying Electric Generators.<br><br>It's like two propellers on a tether. Electricity gets them up in the jet stream and then they stay floating and adjust to wind and collect electricity.<br><br>600 of them might produce 20 megawatts each and the company needs $4 million to float the idea.<br><br>The idea was in Popular Science.Wed, 17 Aug 2005 20:43:51 GMTEric EliasonHydrogen Hype - GET OVER IT!http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic82-2-1.aspxHydrogen as a Fuel for Automobiles<br><br><br>On first glance, hydrogen seems to be the ideal fuel for automobiles<br>and other vehicles. It doesn't seem like o­ne could get any cleaner<br>burning, since hydrogen burns (oxidizes) to form simply water vapor.<br>No pollution! What a seeming advancement over our current internal<br>combustion engines that put thousands of tons of pollutants into<br>the Earth's atmosphere, as well as giving off massive amounts of heat<br>that contribute to global warming, and many other environmental problems.<br><br><br><br>Hydrogen (H2) plus Oxygen (O) makes H2O, water,<br>or actually, water vapor, at higher temperatures. And Hydrogen is<br>actually capable of nearly meeting those high expectations.<br><br><br>Environmental Impact<br><br><br>There are a couple minor environmental issues. Our Earth's atmosphere is<br>not pure Oxygen, but it is a mixture of gases, with around 4/5 of it being<br>Nitrogen and around 1/5 being Oxygen, and a lot of other gases in small<br>amounts. When Hydrogen (or any other fuel) burns in our atmosphere,<br>a lot of heat is generated (which is sort of the whole point!)<br>When the Nitrogen in the air, it also can oxidize. It can combine<br>with the nearby Oxygen atoms in a variety of ways, such as<br>NO2, NO3, N2O5, and many<br>others. These new compounds are collectively referred to as<br>NOx, and they generally are considered to cause an<br>assortment of health problems in people and other living things.<br><br><br><br>In addition to NOx production, if the device in which the<br>burning occurs has any lubricants, like oil, there are also<br>oxidation products of the Carbon in them, which can contain CO,<br>carbon monoxide. When Hydrogen is burned in a decently designed<br>device, these environmental problems are fairly minor and they<br>are rarely considered to be any great danger.<br><br><br>Logistics<br><br><br>Hydrogen does have some more significant drawbacks. o­ne of the most<br>difficult to deal with is that it is such a light gas! A pound<br>of Hydrogen contains around 61,000 Btus of latent energy in it,<br>which seems like a lot! For comparison, a pound of regular<br>gasoline o­nly contains around 20,500 Btus in it! Sounds good!<br><br><br><br>However, a pound of Hydrogen is HUGE! At standard atmospheric<br>pressure and temperature, it takes up around 190 cubic feet of space.<br>In contrast, that pound of gasoline o­nly takes up about 1/50 of a<br>cubic foot.<br><br><br><br>We can say this same thing in terms of "gallons". A gallon<br>of gasoline contains around 6 pounds, or 125,000 Btus of energy in it.<br>A gallon of hydrogen (gas) o­nly contains around 40 Btus in it. Quite<br>a difference! Instead of a two cubic foot gasoline tank (15 gallons)<br>in your car, you would need a tank more than 3,000 times bigger, over<br>6,000 cubic feet, for the equivalent Hydrogen! That's a little more<br>than TWO standard semi trailers (8'wide x 8'high x 45' long or 2900<br>cubic feet each). Pretty big gas tank!<br><br><br><br>Well, that is obviously not going to happen! So, the many o­ngoing<br>explorations into using Hydrogen as a fuel always involve carrying<br>COMPRESSED Hydrogen in very thick, heavy tanks. If you have ever<br>seen the kinds of tanks used for the Oxygen for a worker's<br>oxyacetylene cutting torch, that's the kind. Such tanks can hold<br>Hydrogen at around 100 times atmospheric pressure, or 1500 PSI,<br>an extremely high pressure.<br><br><br><br>Well, at 100 times atmospheric pressure, the Ideal Gas Law tells us<br>that the Hydrogen would now o­nly take up 2900/100 or 29 cubic feet.<br>That works out to around 60 of those high pressure storage tanks<br>(to match the effective capacity of the 15 gallon gasoline tank.).<br>Each tank is very massive to withstand the very high pressure, and<br>each weighs nearly 100 pounds empty. (And around 1/4 pound more<br>when filled with Hydrogen!) So the normal American car which<br>presently weighs around 2800 pounds would have around an extra<br>6,000 pounds added, so the vehicle would now weigh more than<br>three times as much as current cars! (This tremendously affects<br>acceleration and other performance, and it would be like that car<br>pulling a huge 6,000 pound trailer behind it.<br><br><br>Safety Considerations<br><br><br>There are obvious safety considerations in trying to drive a<br>9,000 pound vehicle down the road. Handling and stopping would<br>be very seriously affected. But there is a bigger concern.<br><br><br><br>Those 60 very high pressure tanks present another complication.<br>If industrial workers ignore proper safety rules when working with a high<br>pressure Oxygen tank, it could fall over. As the hundred pound<br>tank falls over, it quickly develops a lot of momentum. If there<br>should happen to be something in the way o­n the floor, where the<br>neck and valve of the tank hit it, the neck and/or valve tends<br>to just snap off. Suddenly, 1500 PSI of compressed gas has an<br>easy way out, and it all goes out almost immediately. Isaac<br>Newton told us about the Law of Action and equal Reaction. The<br>hundred pound body of the tank then zooms off at extremely high<br>speed in the other direction. There have been many industrial accidents<br>where such Oxygen tanks flew many hundreds of feet through the air<br>and passed completely through many concrete walls.<br><br><br><br>Most suppliers of industrial Oxygen display photographs of<br>vehicles where o­nE such Oxygen tank had not been strapped down<br>properly and the neck wound up snapping off. Usually, the vehicles<br>shown in those pictures are hard to tell as being vehicles, except<br>for maybe a tire somewhere in the picture.<br><br><br><br>Get the point? Imagine having 60 such tanks in a car. Either o­ne<br>vibrates loose from its clamps, or the guy who last replaced them<br>didn't strap them all down properly, or an accident occurs where<br>you hit another vehicle or a tree. If even o­ne of those tanks<br>ruptures, bad things would result. And have you ever even seen<br>what happens to any car when a semi hits it?<br><br><br><br>Notice that this issue is not actually related to any hazard of Hydrogen<br>itself, but rather the fact that it would have to be stored at<br>extremely high pressures due to its very low density. Whether it was<br>a high-pressure Oxygen tank or a high-pressure Hydrogen tank,<br>this danger is virtually the same, and is entirely due to the<br>pressure that the gas is compressed to.<br><br><br><br>Because of this extraordinary safety hazard, which is o­nly due to the<br>very high pressures involved and really has nothing to do with the<br>Hydrogen itself, there is no imaginable way that the US Government<br>would ever allow such vehicles to be licensed. It would conceivably<br>be safer to drive a dynamite truck!<br><br><br>Cost Considerations<br><br><br>It would be wonderful if massive amounts of compressed Hydrogen<br>were easily available. In that case, except for the safety and size<br>considerations just discussed, Hydrogen would be a nearly ideal fuel<br>for vehicles. However, no compressed gas of any kind exists naturally<br>and so mechanical compression is required. An air compressor that<br>can commonly be bought for $300 can compress air to around 100 PSI,<br>around seven times natural atmospheric pressure. However, compressors<br>that are capable of 1500 psi or 100 times atmospheric pressure are<br>very large, very complex, and VERY expensive. In addition, every pipe<br>and every fitting used must also be able to safely withstand such<br>pressures. (Normal pipes would just burst.) In addition, whoever<br>operated such a compressor would have to be very extensively trained,<br>to keep all of its parts from bursting from the pressure and killing<br>someone. The point: People are not ever likely to have their own<br>Hydrogen compressors, and so they would certainly always have to buy<br>the Hydrogen from some large corporation. Logically, it figures that<br>that corporation will be the very same o­nes that now own all the<br>oil and gasoline companies!<br><br><br><br>However, even if there was some way to do all that compression, it<br>takes a good amount of electricity for the compressor motor to<br>drive the compressor. A significant cost would be involved for<br>that compression, even if you somehow had your own compressor.<br><br><br><br>In addition, free Hydrogen does not exist. All of the Hydrogen that<br>might be collected is now in various compounds. The simplest to deal with<br>is water. If you had Chemistry in High School, then you hooked up some<br>electricity to an apparatus that contained water, and you saw little<br>bubbles of Hydrogen form in o­ne upside down test tube and Oxygen form in<br>the other. That is called Electrolysis, or the Dissociation of water.<br>It is obviously pretty easy to do.<br><br><br><br>But those are just little bubbles of Hydrogen that you collect. Remember<br>that you are going to need an amount of Hydrogen that would more than<br>fill two semi trailers, to just equal o­ne tank of gasoline! It is<br>possible to calculate the amount of electricity needed for that, but<br>you must get the idea that it is a LOT of electricity! So, you get<br>to pay your electric company for that, too.<br><br><br><br>So, you would wind up paying for the electricity to Dissociate the water<br>in the first place, plus the cost of the electricity needed for the<br>extreme compression. Of course, all of this would be after you bought<br>the necessary equipment!<br><br><br><br>An alternative, of course, would be to buy (rent actually) tanks of<br>industrial Hydrogen that is already compressed. Current prices for<br>Industrial Hydrogen (the lowest purity available) are around $42 for<br>a large, very high pressure tank which contains 197 standard cubic<br>feet of Hydrogen, plus a monthly rental fee for the tank. The 2900<br>cubic feet that we had earlier determined were equal to o­ne 15<br>gallon tank of gasoline, would therefore be around 15 of these tanks,<br>which would cost around $630 for the compressed Hydrogen plus<br>the monthly rental of around $150 for the tanks themselves.<br><br><br><br>We complain today at paying $2 per gallon for gasoline, which would be<br>$30 for our 15 gallon tank. How many people would be willing to<br>pay $630 and more for the same trip?<br><br><br>Flame Speed<br><br><br>Even if all the other hurdles are overcome regarding using Hydrogen<br>as a fuel, it seems to have yet another disadvantage, o­ne that it<br>shares with most other gaseous fuels: the speed at which a flame<br>front travels is rather slow for the purposes of conventional engines.<br>With an ideal Hydrogen-air mixture, a flame front can travel at<br>around 8 feet/second. For comparison, a gasoline-air mixture<br>creates a flame front speed that ranges from around 70 feet/second<br>up to around 170 feet/second in normal engines.<br><br><br><br>Consider the inside of an engine cylinder in a normal car engine<br>traveling down the highway. The engine may be rotating at 2,000 rpm,<br>or 33 revolutions per second. The piston must therefore move upward<br>and downward 33 times every second, and its speed in the middle of<br>its stroke is around 45 feet/second. If a fuel burning in the cylinder<br>is to actually push down o­n the piston, in order to do actual work<br>in propelling the vehicle, the fuel-air mixture needs to burn at a<br>speed faster than the piston is moving! Otherwise, the slow-burning<br>mixture would actually act to SLOW DOWN the piston! It would not o­nly not<br>do productive work, but it would require work FROM the piston.<br><br><br><br>The fact that a Hydrogen-air mixture has a flame-front speed of around<br>1/10 that of a gasoline-air mixture seems to indicate that o­nly a<br>very slowly moving mechanism could be used. That might be possible,<br>but it suggests that yet another hurdle might lie in front of<br>Hydrogen ever becoming a common motor fuel.<br><br><br><br>Conclusion<br><br><br>Yes, fuel cells, which are effective mechanisms for converting<br>Hydrogen and Oxygen into water vapor and releasing a lot of energy,<br>certainly seem to be fascinating potential sources of energy<br>for vehicles. However, it certainly seems that sufficient Hydrogen<br>cannot be stored in a car for any length of trip without compressing<br>it to extremely high pressures. THAT fact causes both cost and safety<br>considerations which seem to make practical use of Hydrogen remain a<br>fascinating dream which will probably never become reality.<br><br><br><br>Yes, Hydrogen can be demonstrated in experimental vehicles,<br>and they can have impressive acceleration and speed. But that's with<br>a rather small Hydrogen tank aboard. If you ever see an impressive<br>demonstration like that of a Hydrogen powered vehicle, make sure to<br>ask how long that vehicle could continue to perform like that. The answer<br>is certain to be no more than a few minutes at most. So, as a<br>demonstration, Hydrogen can seem quite impressive, because it is!<br>But in actual practical applications, the details probably make it<br>never to be usable in our vehicles.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>This page is at:<br><br>http://mb-soft.com/public2/hydrogen.htm<br><br><br><br>This presentation was first placed o­n the Internet in August 2003.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Link to the Index of these Public Service Pages<br><br><br>( http://mb-soft.com/public/index.html )<br><br><br><br><br>E-mail to: Public@mb-soft.com<br><br><br>C Johnson, BA Physics, Univ of Chicago<br><br><br>Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:50:49 GMTTimCGood old fashioned nuclear powerhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic93-2-1.aspx<P>Have we all forgotten about nuclear power? The cleanest and most economical power source available. Get over your fears and start to look past 20 years of ignorance. OOOHHHH nuclear power, every time I mention it people scatter with fear. The technology of today has vastly improved the safety and management of nuclear power. We should all be looking to the US Navy for its 50 years of experience operating more nulcear reactors than any other organization in the world...and doing it without a single major nuclear accident. If we want to keep spewing radioactive waste into the air from the comsumption of soft coal and not say a word about that...go right ahead! WAKE UP! Ignorance is not the answer, do your own research and you will find that nuclear energy is what will save this country from the energy crisis of 2015. </P><P>Matthew Mills</P>Wed, 20 Jul 2005 11:27:29 GMTMatthewFGBHemp Oilhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic132-2-1.aspx<P>Many countries have legalized, or never banned commercial hemp (not marijuana). Hemp oil is renewable. Saudi crude is not. There is a new biodiesel fuel coming out which is made up of gasoline and soybean oil 80/20 mixture. Hemp oil has more bang for the buck in terms of BTUs. One problem. The Neo-Cons like crude. Forget ethanol. It is an alcohol and is inferior to naturally grown oils. You could save the American farmer and severly reduce or totally eliminate our dependency on crude oil, foreign or domestic. Why its enough to chap a sheik's ass. </P><P>Wind is also renewable. Those are my two choices, and i am a petroleum engineer. Crude oil is becoming our economic heroin. And China is well on their way to becoming a bigger junkie than we EVER dreamed of being. When they come looking for their fix, they will have nostrils flared, nukes in hand and will demand repayment of the loans we are floating from them. </P><P>Yeah u keep stayin that course W.</P>Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:03:36 GMTdalilamerMillion Solar Roofs Bill gets voted on next week in Californiahttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic154-2-1.aspx<P>The Million Solar Roofs Bill gets voted on in the California Assembly Appropriations Committee on Wednesday 8/24. With any luck, it moves out of committee and (just maybe) it wins enough votes to become legislation. Our government is talking seriously about encouraging solar energy. If your a Californian, and you agree with the legislation, now is the time for you to write, fax, call and visit your state assemblyperson and state senator and tell them how excited you are about implementing solar power and how equally serious you are about supporting politicians who support renewable energy.</P><P>If your not a Californian, now might be a good time to write your state electorate and point out the Million Solar Roofs initiative.</P><P> </P>Sat, 20 Aug 2005 00:25:43 GMTreDeuceSolar Energy - Multiple Useshttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic103-2-1.aspxI'm a big advocate of using solar power as much as possible.<br><br>I live along a tract of land owned by the local power company for the really BIG powerlines that run long distances. I look out on this largely empty bit of land and think that if the power company were to place solar energy collectors along these power lines, we would have a lot more energy with a lot less damage to the environment than, say, a new dam would cause.<br><br>I'm also intrigued by the solar shingles offered by several companies that provide solar power with very little eyesore:<br> - Residential Systems: <a target=_blank href="http://www.smartroofsolar.com/shingle.html">http://www.smartroofsolar.com/shingle.html</A><br> - Commercial Systems: <a target=_blank href="http://www.uni-solar.com/bipv_comm.html">http://www.uni-solar.com/bipv_comm.html</A><br> - Oakland U Demonstration Project: <a target=_blank href="http://www.oakland.edu/energy/solar.htm">http://www.oakland.edu/energy/solar.htm</A><br><br>Imagine the extra power production if railroads placed solar power collectors along their tracks...<br><br>Using Less Power:<br> - Green roofs reduce energy usage<br> - Flourescent and LED lights do, too<br> - Home automation including light timers, lighting motion sensors, automated blinds, decrease energy usage and increase security and convenience.<br><br>The way I figure it, more efficient use of the electricity production that we currently have and production of additional electricity by renewable means can GREATLY reduce our foriegn energy dependence.Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:23:01 GMTBillDon't try to boil the oceanhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic124-2-1.aspxAfter reading most of the posts here, I decided it was time to chime in with my $.02. I find it fascinating that so many are willing to jump right in with recommendations or advocacy for a specific technology (eg the solution domain) without first exploring the problem domain. By that I mean, the expressed goals of this sites founders of being energy independent by 2025. <br><br>Typically when faced with a daunting challenge, (often referred to as boiling the ocean), engineers will try to decompose the problem and then classify the challenges in terms of effort and available resources (or available technology). Then they will develop a strategic plan that addresses those challenges in order of difficulty. This is sometimes called “going after low hanging fruit” first while simultaneously working to solve and deliver solutions to those challenges judged as being “most difficult”.<br><br>That being said, I think everyone is aware that there are numerous emerging technologies that offer energy generation. Those of course are:<br><br>Solar<br>Wind<br>Hydrogen/Fuel Cells<br>Bioenergy<br>Geothermal<br>Hydopower<br>Ocean<br><br>Unfortunately, each of these has limitations either in terms of manufacturing by-products, energy production efficiency, cost, etc. Furthermore, none of these alone will be sufficient to address the stated goal of being energy independent by 2025. <br><br>So, perhaps some discussion about which technology is best suited to address a specific problem would be a bit more beneficial in the short term. Point in case, the use of our automobiles. Providing a viable automobile that does not depend on some form of fossil fuel will be the hardest problem to solve and the one that will face the most resistance. So why try to address that first ? Perhaps some of the easier problems like basic electricity generation, heating, cooling, public transportation, remote/backup power, consumer electronics, etc would be a more reasonable place to start. For every grid attached power sink or manufactured energy device, one of the above technologies could be employed as a solution given the appropriate consideration to its location, use, and cost.<br><br>The key is to focus on small achievable goals (or targets if you prefer) that alone may seem insignificant but collectively will make a difference. My point being one of classic engineering paradigm, don't try to boil the ocean. <br><br>1)Let's look for opportunities to convert existing “devices” or “machines” to utilize energy from one of the above mentioned technologies provided of course that technology is a good fit for the application.<br><br>2)Let's invest in companies that are already producing the above technologies.<br><br>3)Let's establish our own companies to fill voids and offer products that have an attractive energy savings to the consumers.<br><br>Sure it sounds simple...but to quote an old blues legend...."just because it sounds simple...don't mean its easy".<br><br>MZr7<br><br><br>Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:56:35 GMTMazeRat7Fossil fuels are not the problemhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic104-2-1.aspxGluttony is. The simple fact is that fossil fuels are an excellent source of concentrated energy both in liquid and solid form.<br><br>Consider that a very small amount of gasoline can power a machine able to move many tons over many miles and we begin to appreciate how potent a source of energy it really is! The liquid fuel distribution system is well developed and very easy to use, and vast reserves are located right here in North America.<br><br>Consider the trainloads of coal hauled daily from the bowels of our planet to fuel electricity generation on such a massive scale that we turn night into day in our homes, businesses, streets and ballparks. Again, the distribution system for this energy source is well developed and there are billions of tons stored right here on our own continent.<br><br>Fossil fuels are not evil. Gluttony on the other hand is, and gluttony is the real energy problem at hand. We simply use too much energy. 60% of gross energy is wasted directly in the processing and delivery. Of the 40% actually used for heat and transportation, dramatic savings of 25%-50% are easily demonstrated with no sacrifice in quality of life, in fact a strong argument is made that overall quality of life improves as conservation is merged into our daily living.<br><br>The proposal to include biofuels consumption has become popular, and for a few years I actively promoted the idea. I still do support the use of biofuels and view them as a key portion of a sane energy policy; however, I have come to the conclusion that simply substituting biofuels for petroleum at current consumption levels will be a LARGER ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM than staying the course until fossil fuels become scarcer. In other words, if we allow consumption to continue unchecked, soon the resource will be depleted enough, and our air water unsafe enough, to mandate conservation due to market and life forces. The wealthy will always have access, the poor will not. The wealthy will still need to move their workers around, so they will take the most economical route and build mass transit for them with some of the taxes they extract as a matter of good business.<br><br>To use biofuels now will only delay the inevitable, while actually increasing the damage by fueling the destructive fossil fuel dependent Consumer Culture we have become. This dependency has become a full-fledged addiction, with all the hallmarks and symptoms of drug and alcohol addicts of mental incapacitation, violence, crime, and willingness to go to any length to secure the weeks supply. Each person must come to grips with their own addiction, and will suffer the same withdrawal symptoms any alcoholic or drug addict does. These will include physical pain, mental and emotional disturbance and drastic changes in lifestyle. Playmates and playgrounds will change and lifetime friendships will be lost. Addicted friends and family members will brand the liberated one “crazy” for choosing such a dramatic change that now includes bicycles, walking, public transit and local products rather than discount goods shipped from all over the world at the expense of human rights, and only possible in the first place because of cheap fossil fuels for transportation. Just-In-Time (JIT) inventory systems depend on the massive fleet of fossil fuel powered transportation/storage systems in constant motion worldwide. JIT has killed American small business by eliminating competition and ignoring the true costs associated for a short-term consolidation of power and wealth. Commercial Biofuels will only extend this unacceptable balance.<br><br>On a personal level, I speak with authority regarding addictions. I have been liberated from addiction to alcohol since 1991, nicotine since January 2002, and I am recovering from my addiction to fossil fuel. I admit, this last is the toughest, especially when one considers that life is not unlike being in a room full of drunks in denial. There are millions of people racing each other from red light to red light, and they consider a non-addicted pedestrian a real nuisance because they may be required to slow down a bit.<br><br>I have had drivers actually lean on their horn when approaching me on my bike from behind! I followed one home to ask why he was honking at me. He said it was because he wanted to warn me that he was coming because I was going too slowly! I swear this is what he said! This petroleum addict’s denial is so deep he cannot even remember that pedestrians ALWAYS have the right of way. Since all it takes is a bit of pressure with his right foot to increase the speed of his 2 tons of steel, any slow moving thing, including other cars, must be passed at any cost! The next red light is waiting! Confronted with his inhumanity, the addict’s denial turned into rage and his real feelings were exposed when he told me I shouldn’t have been in his way, and that he would do it again.<br><br>The so-called “conscious” people, raw food, yoga, eco-tourist, rainbow tribe or whatever are all equally addicted racing around on jet aircraft, in SUV’s and living on remote property even more dependent on fossil fuel than city dwellers. These hypocrites claim some moral superiority based on a false perception of spiritual awareness induced by drugs and hypnosis. Truly conscious people would be unable to participate in the addictive behavior.<br><br>This is why I am going to consign Fuel and Fiber Company and all associated projects to my archives and will no longer promote biofuels as a viable commercial option. Note that I qualify my statement with the word “commercial”. I remain convinced that biofuels produced and consumed on a local level (within 50 miles or so) are a key part of a successful agrarian economy, and I will surely continue to look for ways to produce and use biofuels for myself when appropriate, but not as a commercial venture.<br><br>In closing, allow me to suggest a few important resources:<br><br>The New Athena Project regarding Energy Policy at <a target=_blank href="http://www.fuelandfiber.com/Athena/">www.fuelandfiber.com/Athena/</a><br><br>The Precautionary Principle from <a target=_blank href="http://www.rachel.org">www.rachel.org</a><br><br>The Carbohydrate Economy by David Morris of <a target=_blank href="http://www.ilsr.org">www.ilsr.org</a> and related Project Areas<br><br>Citizenship Papers by Wendell Berry<br><br>Choose Climate online climate change calculator and information at <a target=_blank href="http://www.chooseclimate.org">www.chooseclimate.org</a><br><br><br>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:11:43 GMTTimCGreen Roofshttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic68-2-1.aspxGreen roofs can inexpensively insulate the underlying building while improving the surrounding microclimate. This can cut air conditioning costs in the summer, heating costs in the winter, and water runoff costs. It also provides ecological niches for displaced biota while looking a lot nicer than a hot tar roof!<br><br>Here's a google search to get you started:<br><br><a target=_blank href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=green+roofs&btnG=Google+Search">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=green+roofs&btnG=Google+Search</a><br><br>-----<br>Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:42:27 GMTrewinnHuman Power, anyone?http://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic97-2-1.aspx<P>Hi All --</P><P>My name is Andrew Grell; I'm IT Director for a law firm here in New York. In my spare time I'm an alternative transportation advocate and I have quite a little collection of human powered vehicles from bicycles to skateboards and many things in between and on the edges.</P><P>Anyway, here is my main deal:</P><P>Commuting cars are slow, they consume a great deal of expensive fuel, in many areas they cause devastating respiratory illness, and they are strongly statistically associated with overweight and high blood pressure. For a guy who bikes to work, I wind up paying an awful lot to patrol the gulf to keep the oil flowing, to pay Medicaid to treat poor little kids for asthma, and to pay inflated insurance premiums for lipitor. I think my payout is about $4,000 - $5,000 per year. </P><P>The bit about asthma and other lung diseases is already addressed by the Clean Air Act and by the 11 states following the California regulations. California regulations have mandated zero emissions vehicles for quite some time now, but the automobile manufacturers keep going to court and hiring lobbyists to to stop that mandate on cost grounds. That is to say, they are selling proportionally illegal products and manage to stay out of jail because it would be too expensive to be legal.</P><P>So why not force the industry to buy a pollution warrant for every unsold electric vehicle from someone who replaces a car commute with a zero emission commute by whatever means?</P><P>There are 100,000,000 solo car commuters in America. About 45,000,000 or so ride to, from, or through an EPA non-attainment zone every day. Most of those commutes are under 12 miles and procede at less than 20 MPH. A bicycle route is typically shorter than the same point to point car route and is generally faster. In addition to the air quality benefits, the bicycle rider gets fabulous health (and social) benefits and can save about $3,000 a year if the bicycle replaces a supernumerary car. And the people who still drive get to go faster for each person switching to a bike! This is a win-win-win situation all around, but for some reason there are less than half a million people who bike to work. How would those numbers change if a potential bicycle commuter were offered a chance to sell Ford a pollution warrant?</P><P> </P><P>--ag</P><P> </P>Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:31:48 GMTandygeeFuel Cellshttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic11-2-1.aspx<P>Came accross this article tonight and thought it might be of interest.</P><P>UK firm claims breakthrough in fuel cell technology <!-- END HEADLINE --></P><DIV id=ynmain><!-- BEGIN STORY BODY --><DIV id=storybody><DIV class=storyhdr><P><SPAN>By Stuart Penson </SPAN>Thu May 19, 2:14 PM ET </P><DIV class=spacer></DIV></DIV><P>LONDON (Reuters) - A small British technology company on Thursday claimed to be on the verge of unlocking the vast potential of fuel cells as a commercially viable source of green energy. </P><DIV class=lrec>Cambridge-based CMR Fuel Cells said it had made a breakthrough with a new design of fuel cell which is a tenth of the size of existing models and small enough to replace conventional batteries in laptop computers.</DIV><P>"We firmly believe CMR technology is the equivalent of the jump from transistors to integrated circuits," said John Halfpenny, the firm's chief executive.</P><P>Fuel cells have for years been touted as the next big green power source. They produce electricity via a chemical reaction and emit only tiny amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) -- the main greenhouse gas blamed by many scientists for global warming.</P><P>Coal and gas-fired power stations produce far more CO2.</P><P>But high costs and doubts about widespread availability of fuel -- usually hydrogen -- have held back the technology's transition to the mainstream despite years of research by energy firms and the automotive industry.</P><P>CMR said the new design would run for four times longer than conventional batteries in a laptop or other devices like power tools.</P><P>"It's also instantly rechargable," said Michael Priestnall, chief technology officer at CMR. Priestnall and chief engineer Michael Evans came up with the design while working at Cambridge-based consultancy Generics Group.</P><P>Evans said the design, which would run initially on methanol, was based on new type of fuel stack which mixed air and fuel. Up to now fuel stacks have relied on complete separation of the two.</P><P>Halfpenny said CMR was in talks about possible demonstrations for the Defense Department.</P><P>CMR is backed by venture capitalists including Conduit Ventures, a specialist fund backed by Shell Hydrogen (SHEL.L), Johnson Matthey (JMAT.L), Mitsubishi (8058.T), Danfoss and Solvay (SOLBt.BR). </P></DIV></DIV><P> </P>Fri, 20 May 2005 01:43:07 GMTAZpeterHemphttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic31-2-1.aspx<P>Industrial hemp can be used as a renewable and clean biodiesel fuel to power motor vehicles, light sources, and anything else that needs gas. It can also be used to make paper, plastics, textiles, fabric, fibrous particle board with the same strangth of wood. Hemp is a logical and effective solution to energy dependence. See the following website for more information.</P><P><a target=_blank href="http://www.votehemp.com">www.votehemp.com</A></P><P> </P><P>Fun Fact: Both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grew hemp.</P>Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:26:07 GMTModernBlendZero Carbon Gain Options For Hydrogen Fuelhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic40-2-1.aspx<P>Let's discuss the biomass options for extracting hydrogen from hydrocarbons.</P><P> </P>Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:17:12 GMTMr. PhilFederal Hemp Billhttp://www.ei2025.org/forum/Topic33-2-1.aspx<P>Maybe the group that runs this forum can throw themselves behind this bill. It's definitely a positive step.</P><P><FONT size=+1><STRONG><a target=_blank href="http://www.votehemp.com/PR/6-27-05_federal_bill.html">http://www.votehemp.com/PR/6-27-05_federal_bill.html</A></STRONG></FONT></P><P><FONT size=+1><STRONG>Industrial Hemp Farming Act Introduced at Packed Capitol Hill Hemp Food Lunch</STRONG></FONT><BR><STRONG>HR 3037 Would Give States the Right to Regulate Farming of Versatile Hemp Plant</STRONG></P><P align=left><STRONG>WASHINGTON, DC</STRONG> — For the first time since the federal government outlawed hemp farming in the United States, a federal bill has been introduced that would remove restrictions on the cultivation of non-psychoactive industrial hemp. At a Capitol Hill lunch on June 23 to mark the introduction of H.R. 3037, the "Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2005," about 100 congressional staff feasted on Bahama Hempnut Crusted Wild Salmon and Fuji Fennel Hempseed Salad. The five-course gourmet hemp meal was prepared by Executive Chef Denis Cicero of the New York City-based <a target=_blank href="http://www.galaxyglobaleatery.com/" target=_blank>Galaxy Global Eatery</A>.</P><P align=left>At the luncheon the chief sponsor of the bill, Representative Ron Paul (R-TX), described how H.R. 3037 will remove federal barriers to U.S. hemp farming by returning the regulation of hemp to the states. "It is unfortunate that the federal government has stood in the way of American farmers, including many who are struggling to make ends meet, competing in the global industrial hemp market," said Dr. Paul. "Indeed the founders of our nation, some of whom grew hemp, surely would find that federal restrictions on farmers growing a safe and profitable crop on their own land are inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a limited, restrained federal government. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to stand up for American farmers and co-sponsor the Industrial Hemp Farming Act." Dr. Paul was joined by five original co-sponsors, including Reps. Sam Farr (D-CA), Pete Stark (D-CA), Jim McDermott (D-WA), George Miller (D-CA) and Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ). The bill may be viewed <a target=_blank href="http://www.votehemp.com/PDF/Hemp_Farming_Act.pdf" target=_blank>here</A>.</P><P align=left>At the luncheon consumer advocate Ralph Nader called the U.S. ban on hemp farming "bureaucratic medievalism" because over 30 industrialized countries are growing hemp and the U.S. is the number one importer of the crop, but won't allow domestic cultivation. A highlight video of the speakers may be viewed online <a target=_blank href="http://flow.mediavac.com/ramgen/sinkers/2005/rayburnbldgJun2305.rm" target=_blank>here</A>. </P><P align=left>Representing farming interests at the event was North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson. "Industrial hemp is used in a tremendous variety of products, including food products, soap, cosmetics, fertilizer, textiles, paper, paints and plastics," Johnson said. "Once the crop is legalized in this country, I believe science will find even more uses for industrial hemp, uses that will make industrial hemp a popular and profitable crop."</P><P align=left>North Dakota State Rep. David Monson (R-Osnabrock), a farmer who successfully sponsored several bills in the North Dakota State Legislature regulating the production and research of industrial hemp, said "industrial hemp production is on hold in North Dakota and the entire U.S. due to roadblocks in Washington, D.C. We have had tremendous bipartisan support for legislation we've introduced in North Dakota."</P><P align=left>U.S. companies that manufacture or sell products made with hemp include Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, the number-one-selling natural soap, Interface, the world's largest manufacturer of commercial carpet and carpet tiles, FlexForm Technologies, an Indiana company whose natural fiber materials are found in 1.5 million cars, Alterna, a professional hair care company whose hemp products are beloved by Julia Roberts and other celebrities, California-based Nutiva Hemp Foods, and adidas USA which has been selling hemp sneakers since 1995. Although hemp grows wild across the U.S., a vestige of centuries of hemp farming, the hemp for these products must be imported.</P><P align=left>There is widespread support among national organizations for a change in the federal government's position on hemp. The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) "supports revisions to the federal rules and regulations authorizing commercial production of industrial hemp." The National Grange "supports research, production, processing and marketing of industrial hemp as a viable agricultural activity."</P><P align=left>Numerous individual states have also expressed interest in industrial hemp. Twenty-six states have introduced hemp legislation and six (Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, North Dakota and West Virginia) have removed barriers to its production or research. Rep. Paul’s bill will allow <a target=_blank href="http://www.votehemp.com/legislation.html">laws in these states</A> regulating the growing and processing of industrial hemp to take effect.</P><P align=left>"Industrial hemp has become a lucrative crop for farmers in Europe, Canada and Asia, so farmers here are asking 'Why are we being left out?'" says Alexis Baden-Mayer, Director of Government Relations for Vote Hemp. For thousands of years different varieties of Cannabis have been cultivated for non-drug uses such as paper, canvas, soap, food, building materials and recently high-tech bio-composites used in automobiles. Hemp and marijuana come from different varieties of the Cannabis plant. </P><P align=left>"Because there are millions of cars on the road with hemp door panels, tens of millions of dollars are spent annually on hemp food and hemp body care, and hemp paper is being made in the U.S., people are asking tough questions about why the U.S. government won't distinguish low-THC hemp from high-THC drug varieties. I believe this federal legislation will gain momentum over the next year as we spend time educating Congress and their constituents about the need for reform," says Baden-Mayer.</P><P align=left>For more information on industrial hemp, please visit www.VoteHemp.com, the Web site of Vote Hemp, a non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of industrial hemp.</P><P align=left>END<BR></P>Wed, 06 Jul 2005 14:19:22 GMTModernBlend