[Nickwiz]

Now I've been thinking.

The fact that its still 10-11 degrees here in Brum with no frost at all this year would seem to suggest things aint good in the climate.

The main problem being Co2. Now electric cars new forms of energy generation etc are all well and good but over priced and out of reach of most people in the west and the rapidly developing world. What we need is some retro engineering or whatever you call it that can clean up what we've got while we figure out something better.

Back in the early sixties we sent men into space in capsules fitted with Co2 filters. Before that we had chemicals that were used in submarines to soak up Co2 in accidents. Why haven't scientists managed to come up with catalysers for vehicles that can take the Co2 out of exhaust emmisions? I'm no scientist but if we could build such things then it ought to be possible. Put a Co2 filter on the market, make it so it can be fitted in the exhausts of older vehicles too. Bingo no Co2 emmisions from vehicles whilst we get on with the business of developing alternative drive systems for motor vehicles etc.

40 years ago we were lauching men into space with no more computing power than a modern day calculator using updated ww2 technology. Why are we still flying aircraft that were designed 40 odd years ago? Can't we come up with something better by now?

I wonder whether the market driven commercial world has killed innovation. If it won't sell we won't bother approach. One reason why concorde was killed (though I know it was a mega polluter) Probably why those moon bases we dreamed of as kids haven't happened, and why we are still driving round in vehicles that burn stuff in order to go.

Now I love my combustion engined bikes but I wouldn't mind sticking a Co2 filter down the pipe if it meant that I won't need a boat to drive through London in a few years!

 

[HiDesert]

From
today's Times:

"A study of droughts suggests that the weather of the past 50 years has been unusually kind and that prolonged dry periods would simply be a return to normal conditions."

And, in case I've never mentioned it before, one, or even 50, unusual seasons does not climate change make, especially when we have so little hard data about what the "normal" climate is like.

Moving on, infrastructure is one constraint that holds back really innovative developments. A really new transportation technology is either constrained to using current energy delivery technology, or building a new infrastructure from scratch. That's a serious technological hurdle, and it's why I think ethanol and/or biodiesel have the best chance of filling the gap when the petrochemicals run out, 10-15 years ago according to what I was told as a young student.

 

[Mikey-S3]

From what i've seen in documentaries, the Co2 filters used in submarines during emergency situations used to catch fire or explode when coming into contact with water / oil. Not to friendly a thing to place in the exhaust of a car now would it?

But ofc thats probably not the only type of filter...

 

[Riven]

Not a bad idea, Nickwiz, but unfortunately it will do little more than salve our own conscience... The environmental data that seems to be left out of every debate concerning carbon dioxide and it's effects of our climate is this:
As humans, we only contribute 0.01% (at most) to the total amount of CO2 in our atmosphere.

Sadly, fitting measly filters to our exhaust pipes wouldn't help at all.
(These filters, incidentally, would need to be replaced occasionally, and you know 90% of the driving population would care even less about a CO2 filter than their transmission fluid...)

 

[Nickwiz]

Well we have an MOT test over here. Every vehicle over 3 years old has to have a check every year. Could always check on the state of the filter.

Here what you say re the Submarine thing Mikey-S3 as I said I'm not a scientist so I was merely speculating.

Lee I don't hold on this drought thing. Its been peeing down here for days. The only reason we run out of water is that foreign companies control our supply and don't seem to give a stuff that it leaks out all over the place!

Infrastucture? What infrastructure would need to change? If we went down the electric car route we would need less! Everyone has a plug socket!!!!

Riven As for questioning global warming? well I think even Mr Bush has stopped doing that. We are pumping out Co2 so fast. And now the planet is joining us pumping methane out too.

I love my petrol engines but I prefer bikes to boats!

Combustion engines are going to be around for a while. Until we sort out the infrastructure or come up with a better system a relatively cheap affordable way to clean up existing tech has to be found. I maintain that if we can get men on the moon all that time ago we ought to be able to clean up a bit of Co2. If we weren't wasting time developing new weapons to blow each other to kingdom come, or technology that frankly we don't need, eg HD dvds,to name but one thing, or wasting money on lost wars we might get somewhere. Of course we need leaders with balls and vision but the world seems short on those these days.

 

[LEE]

Sad to say I had pondered the Toyota Prius for a while...The engine is way smaller than the R3 and it gets better gas mileage..I think one of the big draw backs to the Prius (besides being a Japanese poduct) is the issue of replacement batteries cost. They are ridiculously expensive.

The next door neighbor just installed several solar panels and a geo thermal pump, which works great for heating and cooling the house. (have to drill the well much deeper and it is expensive $30,000.)

I have been seing more wind generators as well.

I think California should get a A+ for having good mass transit and great bicycle paths..I was out there for thirteen weeks and would ride 5 miles in and back to work. It was geat, but most places you would be taking your life in your hands trying to ride a bike to work.

The issue of CO2 I think is a big one. The CO2 expelled from animals is way lower than an engine. Besides the other things being expelled with an engine.



[ This message was edited by: Lee on 2007-01-09 19:26 ]

 

[Riven]

Until we sort out the infrastructure or come up with a better system a relatively cheap affordable way to clean up existing tech has to be found. I maintain that if we can get men on the moon all that time ago we ought to be able to clean up a bit of Co2.

I totally agree.

I get miffed when people belittle the attempts by some to reduce pollution. I am in college to study Architecture, and we learn the methods being put into use by modern builders and architects to increase sustainability. I honestly support that kind of thing all the way.

My point was that, scientifically, all politics aside, human co2 output is less than a blip on the radar screen of all the co2 that mother nature provides herself. This site here shows that 90 billion tons of co2 are coming from natural decay and volcanoes, another 90 billion tons from ocean life, and about 6 billion tons from ALL humanity.

We really just don't have a say in the matter...

 

[MES]

We already have CO2 scrubbers. They are readily available,Installation is easy, low maintenance and cheap.
They are called plants.
These little miracles of engineering also help regulate the water cycle and help to control erosion and help break down toxic material. They also come in many shape/sizes and colors to fit almost any application and are ascetically pleasing.

Maybe if we as a species would STOP BREEDING LIKE LEMMINGS we wouldn't have to pave over every last inch of the Earth.
Nah, that would be to easy and make to much sense.
Let's just continue as we have been and hope that a technological miracle falls in our lap.
It ain't going to happen. The Law of Unintended Consequences will see to that.

We are sidestepping the issue.
How does a species self-regulates its growth when the only reason an organism exists is to reproduce.
solve that and we've solved the problem.

 

[keef]

Back in the early sixties we sent men into space in capsules fitted with Co2 filters. Before that we had chemicals that were used in submarines to soak up Co2 in accidents. Why haven't scientists managed to come up with catalysers for vehicles that can take the Co2 out of exhaust emmisions? I'm no scientist but if we could build such things then it ought to be possible. Put a Co2 filter on the market, make it so it can be fitted in the exhausts of older vehicles too. Bingo no Co2 emmisions from vehicles whilst we get on with the business of developing alternative drive systems for motor vehicles etc.


From what i've seen in documentaries, the Co2 filters used in submarines during emergency situations used to catch fire or explode when coming into contact with water / oil. Not to friendly a thing to place in the exhaust of a car now would it?




Now, I don't know much about submarines but… :razz:


Seriously though, we're going to have to do something about it at some stage soon. However, I'm not convinced that all these new automobile technologies appearing are really the answer – at least in the short term. It may be more helpful to look at them in terms of their overall CO2 footprint rather than just the emissions they absorb. With this in mind, it may be that the filters require a great deal of manufacturing to the point where they might even outweigh, at this stage, more than they save in vehicle emissions. Also, the electricity used by hybrid vehicles still require the electricity to be generated which, in itself, will produce atmospheric CO2. Given that we are nowhere near producing power at 100% efficiency (a huge proportion of energy is lost at each stage of conversion), it may still be better to go the route of fossil fuel to horsepower rather than fossil fuel to electricity to horsepower.
I reckon, for the time being at least, we need to switch to biofuels which can be used with current engine technology as a matter of urgency whilst continuing to research other means of large-scale electricity generation with a view to future use (with renewables and maybe even making use of the vast quantities of methane being liberated as the permafrost melts). Perhaps some bright spark might even come up with a way of dissociating CO2 into carbon for manufacturing and oxygen to replace the shrinking amount being transpired into the atmosphere from rain forest photosynthesis.

Just a thought.

 

[miker]

MES, I think you've hit it on the head.

Whilst every other species on the planet has been content with living in a cave or a tree and eating what it can find, ie, living off the land and adapting TO the land. We as humans have been intent on trying to bend the land/earth to our will. We have tried to make the earth do what we want it to, to feed, cloth and house us. A very arrogant approach when you think of it.

How many times have you seen farmers crying because their farm is dry and their sheep are dying? The problem isn't the weather, it's the fact that sheep in some areas are just not a suitable species to farm. Same as the broadacre crop farmers. Some areas are just not suited to growing wheat, but we dam a river, divert the water and make it suitable, to the detriment of all life on the downstream of the dam.

The data concerning world weather is so small in comparison to the time the Earth has existed, we are all very arrogant to suggest that the World population could be making very much impact, but it may have just been enough to tip the balance. Which also means that we may not have to do too much to make a change, but it has to be everyone.

There are already many patents for low emission, low energy power sources, but they're already owned by the oil/gas companies and will not see the light of day until all the oil is gone, or they figure out a way to make more money out of the new source than they do out of oil.

Mick

 

[HiDesert]

Cars you plug into an outlet? Great idea! How much do batteries cost and weigh? How much pollution does manufacturing them generate? And where are you gonna get that electricity?

There actually is an answer to the last question; nuclear power doesn't produce any CO2. So while I don't believe mankind is causing any global warming, I'd be very happy if we started to make more use of nuclear power. Living down wind from a fossil fuel powered plant sux.

 

[Nickwiz]

On 2007-01-09 20:03, miker wrote:

There are already many patents for low emission, low energy power sources, but they're already owned by the oil/gas companies and will not see the light of day until all the oil is gone, or they figure out a way to make more money out of the new source than they do out of oil.

Mick

The market is stifling innovation? We're doomed Mainwairing we're doomed :wink:

Now excuse me I have to go and prepare my flood defences as its still raining!

Hisesert why was snow so late in the mountains of the country you inhabit?

 

[Nickwiz]

It can be done!

My wife took this picture when she worked at London Science Museum! Its the Apollo10 capsule dating from 1969. We did it then why not now?

[ This message was edited by: Nickwiz on 2007-01-10 06:11 ]

 

[HiDesert]

On 2007-01-10 01:54, Nickwiz wrote:
Hisesert why was snow so late in the mountains of the country you inhabit?

You can't do epidemiology by asking one person about their sore throat. How many data points does it take before you can claim to have identified a trend, much less talk meaningfully about what's causing that trend?

Here's a more relevant question; why should I believe their climate models when they can't even correctly forecast a below-average hurricane season? They kept saying "this is gonna be a really severe hurricane season" until it was almost over, and personally, I can't remember the name of a single storm from this hurricane season. I'm sure there were a couple, because if there hadn't been ANY some loudmouth would have made the front page by finding a way to blame that on President Bush and/or global warming.



[ This message was edited by: hidesert on 2007-01-10 11:29 ]

 

[Nickwiz]

Funny the MET office here was talking about El Nino effect in the Pacific and a possible below average Hurricane season, last time I looked.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/impacts/200612/17999644.html

:???: