Go Back   Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums > General Discussion > Critical Thinking
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-22-2004, 09:35 AM   #21
Jam930
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,069
Default

The Democratic Party.
__________________
-Jamie
Jam930 is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 08:17 PM   #22
jewpinthethird
(The Fat's Sabobah)
FFR Music ProducerFFR Veteran
 
jewpinthethird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Palm Springs, California
Posts: 11,711
Send a message via AIM to jewpinthethird
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jam930
The Democratic Party.
Zing. Originally I was going to say something to do with Republicans or George W. Bush, but you know, I thought, I have nothing against Republicans, and I dont want another arguement over Politics, so I chose NASCAR, not meant to offend any fans.
jewpinthethird is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 08:23 PM   #23
ToshX
FFR Player
FFR Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,111
Default

Wouldnt it just make more sense to make everything Solar Powered...
ToshX is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 09:01 PM   #24
jewpinthethird
(The Fat's Sabobah)
FFR Music ProducerFFR Veteran
 
jewpinthethird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Palm Springs, California
Posts: 11,711
Send a message via AIM to jewpinthethird
Default

It is expensive though.
jewpinthethird is offline  
Old 06-22-2004, 11:55 PM   #25
Jam930
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jewpinthethird
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jam930
The Democratic Party.
Zing. Originally I was going to say something to do with Republicans or George W. Bush, but you know, I thought, I have nothing against Republicans, and I dont want another arguement over Politics, so I chose NASCAR, not meant to offend any fans.
How thoughtful of you......

and ofcourse the republican party has a lot of stupidity too, as it consists of politicians...
__________________
-Jamie
Jam930 is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:42 AM   #26
Cenright
You thought I was a GUY?!
FFR Veteran
 
Cenright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Beaumont (A town with 25 times fewer people than this site)
Age: 33
Posts: 3,139
Send a message via AIM to Cenright Send a message via MSN to Cenright Send a message via Yahoo to Cenright
Default

Why are we not on Natural Gas? It gets renewed faster than we use it, it burns cleanly, and it already works for cars. So why not? It's the gas companies. They have an Iron Triangle Bureaucracy which has such strong roots in the government that it would take decades for us to up root them, but the gas companies pay the polititians so laws are passed to help them thrive and to stop natural gas from getting too large, so it isn't going anywhere right now.


Now, a nuclear power plant runs on Nuclear FISSION, which takes Uranium and slams neutrons into it to break it into smaller atoms. It can break apart a few different ways, depending on the conditions.

neutron + Uranium(235) --->
________________________ Te + Zr + 3 neutrons
________________________ Ba + Kr + 2 neurtons
________________________ Many more ways for fission.

This produces 26 million times more energy than the combustion of methane.



Nuclear FUSION, on the other hand, is what the sun makes. It gives off WAY more energy than Fission. The main problem is that it takes very high temperatures to start the reaction. The attraction of the Nuclear Force has to be very high to make the atoms bond. It gives off enough energy to get the rest of the atoms going, and more. (Enough extra energy to keep us warm and happy) Fusion takes a temperature of about 40,000,000 degrees celcius, or you could double that for farenheit.






Now I remember why I love FFR.
Cenright is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:46 AM   #27
Jam930
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,069
Default

Fact is, racers don't want their hot rods running on carrot juice or the stench radiating natural gas from the lesser parts of the planet.
__________________
-Jamie
Jam930 is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:50 AM   #28
Cenright
You thought I was a GUY?!
FFR Veteran
 
Cenright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Beaumont (A town with 25 times fewer people than this site)
Age: 33
Posts: 3,139
Send a message via AIM to Cenright Send a message via MSN to Cenright Send a message via Yahoo to Cenright
Default

Natural Gas has no smell. That bad smell is actually added by the company so you can tell if you break a gas line. If that wasn't there, it could go unnoticed, someone lights a cigarette, and....


FOOOOMMM!!!!


That bad smell is a safety measure.
Cenright is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 07:24 AM   #29
TheTypist
FFR Player
 
TheTypist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 126
Send a message via AIM to TheTypist
Default

Yes. They add sulfur to it to make it smell bad.

Actually, natural gas (at least the methane) is pretty clean. It's a hydrocarbon with a lot of hydrogen and a little carbon. I think it's like, CH4. Obviously it is not as squeaky clean as hydrogen, but it sure is cheaper and easier to find...
TheTypist is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 07:25 AM   #30
TheTypist
FFR Player
 
TheTypist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 126
Send a message via AIM to TheTypist
Default

Hmm... that 4 didn't turn out right. It was supposed to be smaller. Sorry.
TheTypist is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 12:14 PM   #31
petterminator
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7
Default

OK, starting off with the temperature in space:

In general, temperature in space lies around minus 271 degrees celsius (don't ask me about Fahrenheit), which is a few degrees higher than the absolute zero (0 degrees Kelvin).

Now, since the sun radiates huge amounts of energy in all directions, any surface facing it will be heated up a lot, which is one reason why space travel is so difficult, not only must you be able to withstand vacuum and intense cold, you have to be able to take care of a lot of heat too.

That about heat in space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenright
This produces 26 million times more energy than the combustion of methane.
Depending on what? Energy inserted?

You get an awful lot of waste from nuclear fission, first when mining the uranium, then during the production of the fuel (enrichment), then the byproducts from the actual fission, then finally the reactor itself, which after x number of years in large parts has become highly radioactve.

The first two problems are mostly problems in Russia and other countries "far away", where the mining and enrichment takes place, so most people wouldn't know about it. As for the others, we simply aren't there yet. Mostly, anyway.

Another possibility for a renewable energy source are wave-power plants. There are several possible ways to harness the energy created by waves, but I don't think it's being done anywhere on a very large scale, maybe because the technology hasn't existed for very long.

*points up* Kinda long for a first post, don't you think? Oh well, I got a little carried away...
petterminator is offline  
Old 06-23-2004, 11:31 PM   #32
Cenright
You thought I was a GUY?!
FFR Veteran
 
Cenright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Beaumont (A town with 25 times fewer people than this site)
Age: 33
Posts: 3,139
Send a message via AIM to Cenright Send a message via MSN to Cenright Send a message via Yahoo to Cenright
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenright
This produces 26 million times more energy than the combustion of methane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petterminator
Depending on what? Energy inserted?
They are both exothermic reactions, and if you measure the energy input to the energy output (aka the change in energy) in 'Joules of energy per reaction', Then you get 26 million times more Joules of energy per atom reacted. (Both reactions lose energy, and that probably a higher percentage, but you are still getting way more energy.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by petterminator
You get an awful lot of waste from nuclear fission, first when mining the uranium, then during the production of the fuel (enrichment), then the byproducts from the actual fission, then finally the reactor itself, which after x number of years in large parts has become highly radioactve.
This is where Nuclear Fusion would be helpful. There just needs to be more technological advancements.


Quote:
Originally Posted by petterminator
*points up* Kinda long for a first post, don't you think? Oh well, I got a little carried away...
Not at all. It is nice to get new people (who actually think) in the Forums.
Cenright is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 12:59 PM   #33
IronMonk
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 155
Default

amen to that. i personally think that a motor created using rare earth magnets would be an excelent way to produce energy. if built on a large enough scale it would be creat a very large amount of energy. plus it wouldn't require any resources to keep it running.
__________________
Towles may be harmfull when swallowed in large quantities
IronMonk is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 02:34 PM   #34
petterminator
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenright
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cenright
This produces 26 million times more energy than the combustion of methane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petterminator
Depending on what? Energy inserted?
They are both exothermic reactions, and if you measure the energy input to the energy output (aka the change in energy) in 'Joules of energy per reaction', Then you get 26 million times more Joules of energy per atom reacted. (Both reactions lose energy, and that probably a higher percentage, but you are still getting way more energy.)
It's way harder to get even one fission reaction than to combust a lot of methane, though...

I suppose that the energy you are counting in those figures is the thermal energy. Because, as you probably know, there is no "change" in energy, but rather just energy going from one form to another. In the methane combustion, it's the bonding energy in oxygen and methane that gets converted into thermal energy (a lot of it is used up moments later forming the new bonds incarbon dioxide and hydrogen gas though), and in the uranium fission, a small bit of the mass of the uranium atom gets converted to thermal energy (using E=mc^2). The total energy is always constant, though.

Anyways, nuclear fusion would be a really good idea, if we could get it to work properly, and safely. But until we can make fusion powerplants ourselves, why not used the natural one we orbit? (the sun, that is)
petterminator is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 09:59 PM   #35
Thingy
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19
Default

There are 2 problems with using the sun as an energy source. The first problem is the expense of putting up solar panels to get the energy. But if we needed energy THAT badly, money really wouldnt matter that much. Secondly, it is actually a very inefficent way of gathering energy, the main problem is the earth's atmosphere. Orbital power stations could solve that problem; but then how would you get the energy to the ground, drop a line?

Right now, I think the best thing to do is to put more money into fusion power research here on Earth. You don't have to worry about getting the power where it needs to go, and it could also help stimulate research in other areas.

Also, does anyone know the current progress on developing a room temperature superconductor? That alone would make almost all of the world's energy problems disappear...
Thingy is offline  
Old 07-6-2004, 01:45 AM   #36
ramonesfan
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 89
Default

dont get mad if someone put this

ok, get this recently scientists have discovered anti-matter while testing the big bang thory( the product of there test was matter and ant-matter ) and when anti-matter touches any kind of matter it annihalates making a huge amount of energy if scientists could find a way to stabalize anti-matter better and control the annihalations it could create so much energy like 1 gram of anti-matter is enough to run a small city for something like a week, so tell me what u think of that idea^^^
ramonesfan is offline  
Old 07-12-2004, 07:55 PM   #37
Chrissi
FFR Player
 
Chrissi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: The Game
Age: 34
Posts: 3,019
Send a message via MSN to Chrissi
Default

I couldn't read it. You have atrocious grammar. Write it out again but speak normally and don't tell us not to get mad - why would anyone get mad? Just state the facts.
__________________
C is for Charisma, it's why people think I'm great! I make my friends all laugh and smile and never want to hate!
Chrissi is offline  
Old 07-12-2004, 08:11 PM   #38
LEGO
Banned
 
LEGO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: In the Mountains
Posts: 994
Send a message via AIM to LEGO
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrissi
I couldn't read it. You have atrocious grammar. Write it out again but speak normally and don't tell us not to get mad - why would anyone get mad? Just state the facts.
Speak? This is the internet buddy.
LEGO is offline  
Old 07-12-2004, 08:16 PM   #39
Chrissi
FFR Player
 
Chrissi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: The Game
Age: 34
Posts: 3,019
Send a message via MSN to Chrissi
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LEGO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrissi
I couldn't read it. You have atrocious grammar. Write it out again but speak normally and don't tell us not to get mad - why would anyone get mad? Just state the facts.
Speak? This is the internet buddy.
Yeah, wrong word, sorry.
__________________
C is for Charisma, it's why people think I'm great! I make my friends all laugh and smile and never want to hate!
Chrissi is offline  
Old 07-13-2004, 06:36 PM   #40
CalibreneGuru
FFR Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 108
Default

The anti-matter sounds like a good idea, if all that you said is true.

Also, I have heard of places running off of lightening energy. Some where out in some desert on this huge plateau they have a lot of rods sticking in to the sky (I'm assuming it storms alot there). Tidal energy is also a major form of energy in France.
CalibreneGuru is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution