You think Australia has a Nuclear Future

[Daddles]

If you were serious about volume and towing and ecology, you'd get an ex-courier Mercedes Sprinter and convert it to biodiesel. Now there's volume, comfort and towing capacity!! AND it's economical to boot.

Not being personal about all this, but if an inefficient 4 litre Falcon runs more economically on gas, a well designed 2 litre will half the fuel use!

Actually Midge, and this is wandering from the topic but ...

A Bongo or any other van wouldn't do the job because I regularly carry five people ... like three mornings out of five during the week (some weeks it's five out of five). In the afternoons, it's three.

And while most vehicles lose performance on LPG, my Falchoon doesn't seem to. There's probably a drop off in power, sure, but as far as distance per litre of the chosen brew goes, there's no real difference. Yes, it surprised me too, and this if the fourth vehicle I've owned with LPG, but them's the facts with my beastie.

A 2 litre? Will it tow my 18 foot Samar? I doubt it, even the Falchoon takes a deep breath with that one. Of course, you'd be right to argue that she's currently sitting on my front lawn going nowhere, but even with the more moderate boats, when you start going smaller in motor, you start to go up in fuel consumption very quickly. Even my wee trailer towing Redback on her lightweight trailer, a Mouseboat strapped on as well with a second Mouseboat strapped on the roof takes quite an edge off the performance of my Falchoon. With a 2 litre something, while it'd still pull the load, I'd have to question how efficiently (and I can't see me feeding an eight foot boat onto the top of any of the vans I've owned).

I towed a largish caravan from Adelaide to Waikerie and back behind my 2l Tarago years ago. It did the job, but there was a hell of a price in petrol (and LPG on that one). Interestingly, that Tarago gave worse fuel economy than my current Falchoon which regularly tops 30mpg towing the trailer on the open road.

Now, with your suggestion of biodiesel etc. Those vehicles aren't available in a price range comparable with my dinosaur. See, I'm happy to agree that technology can provide me with a vehicle that will carry all the rubbish that seems to accompany me on my trips, along with all the neighbourhood kids I find myself carting to school, and will tow a ruddy great big boat as well. However, modern economics and 'market forces' and all that other good stuff mean that such vehicles are not available to me. I don't have the money to buy more than my second hand Falchoon.

Richard

[bitingmidge]

Now Daddles, I'm trying to aim my shots at the whole of society, not you personally, but since you seem so ready to defend the attitudes which must be changed, let me respond! (Japan 0 Croatia 0 by the way)

A Bongo or any other van wouldn't do the job because I regularly carry five people ...

And the reason you can't fit three rows of seats in is??? They are all able to be registered as buses you know.

And while most vehicles lose performance on LPG, my Falchoon doesn't seem to. There's probably a drop off in power, sure, but as far as distance per litre of the chosen brew goes, there's no real difference. Yes, it surprised me too, and this if the fourth vehicle I've owned with LPG, but them's the facts with my beastie.

Same distance per litre eh? So you're not listening are you? A more efficient engine will go twice as far per litre!!!

A 2 litre? Will it tow my 18 foot Samar? I doubt it, even the Falchoon takes a deep breath with that one.

Re-read my post above. My '76 Renault was 1.4 litre, front wheel drive and happily towed my Careel 18. Mind you, the engine only lasted 265,000 k's which was a bit of a disappointment.

Of course, you'd be right to argue that she's currently sitting on my front lawn going nowhere, but even with the more moderate boats, when you start going smaller in motor, you start to go up in fuel consumption very quickly.

Yes you do, please read above, my fuel consumption went UP to one third of that of the Cruiser! Towing at highway speeds this is more related to wind resistance than rolling weight I think.

Even my wee trailer towing Redback on her lightweight trailer, a Mouseboat strapped on as well with a second Mouseboat strapped on the roof takes quite an edge off the performance of my Falchoon.

Thats' because the bloody thing has an engine that was basically designed in 1945, (although not because it loses any performance on gas eh ?)

With a 2 litre something, while it'd still pull the load, I'd have to question how efficiently (and I can't see me feeding an eight foot boat onto the top of any of the vans I've owned).

Maybe it's a long time since you checked out the torque figures of modern diesel engines.[/QUOTE]Now, with your suggestion of biodiesel etc. Those vehicles aren't available in a price range comparable with my dinosaur.

However, modern economics and 'market forces' and all that other good stuff mean that such vehicles are not available to me. I don't have the money to buy more than my second hand Falchoon.[/QUOTE]

As I said, I'm not picking on you, but as fuel gets more expensive, you won't have the money to drive the thing (gas notwithstanding). Second hand Merc vans are hitting the sub $10k range at the moment.... and I'm looking for one! (My 8 foot boats will fit IN one of those!)

Cheers,

P

[Harry72]

Harry, it doesn't actually work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fuel_cell

Well someone should tell the American Congress they've been had...
It does work, http://www.squizzle.com/movieview.asp?id=6648

[Daddles]

Actually my good Midge, I believe YOU are the one that missed my point, that point (made a bit earlier and which led to the discussion of the reincarnation of Moby Dick) being that I have certain requirements and, thanks to our beloved business leaders and their subservience to the stock market, the Falchoon is the best answer to those requirements within my budget. As you have pointed out and as I myself pointed out only a few posts ago, with the state of technology in this world, this is ridiculous and a major reason why our planet is in the state it is.

Richard

gotcha

[bitingmidge]

As you have pointed out and as I myself pointed out only a few posts ago, with the state of technology in this world, this is ridiculous and a major reason why our planet is in the state it is.

So it's not AWA's after all.... :confused: :confused: :confused:

P

[Grunt]

Harry, where is the reference that shows the U.S. congress is actually taking it seriously? These claims have been around since the ‘70s and all have been debunked. I’d really like to see some actual proof that this works.

Oh sure, we will run out of materials if we continue to use them at the same rate and dig them up at the same rate as we do today.

You example of copper, might be a good one.

Except that what copper is used for, most often transmitting power, can be replaced by various other things, depending on what that situation is.

Just about every electrical or electronic device uses copper. Please explain a way to move electricity from a power plant to the consumer that doesn’t use copper. Build me an electric motor that doesn’t use copper windings.

But what you missed Grunt, (again) is that all these doomsayers base their calculations on 'todays consumption' with 'todays technology'.

What is going to stop consumption? Serious recession/depression. Running out of raw materials, so we just can’t make the item or it’s just too damned expensive to bother.
Technology requires resources. We can’t make the raw materials.

We don't know what the heck will be invented/discovered next week.

Take the video camera I mentioned.

The old one would use up heaps of batteries, record images (but not very well), and used up enormous resources just by being old-tech.

The one we have now records longer, at higher quality, is much smaller, made largely from recycled materials and various other improvements as you would expect over 20 years.

I would think that in another 20 years the thing will record for a week, at eye-perfect quality and be the size of a matchbox.

It will still require aluminium, copper and oil.

With new technologies popping up all the time, old tech being constantly re-worked, todays consumption figures will prolly increase still, but at a reduced rate than the doomsayers predictions.

There is also a nifty little political model called 'capitalism'.

The short version of it is that 'if you can't afford it, then you go without'. Cold, harsh and tough, but it sorts the men out from the girls.

You are saying here is that everything is going to rosy, except for the boys and girls who can’t afford it. Technology will save the day.
Ultimately, everything will get so expensive that only the very rich will be able to afford their IPods. By this time Apple will be out of business (sorry Midge). Ford, Holden et. al. will be out of business. A lot of unemployment here
The price increases will mean inflation. Reserve Banks will up interest rates. In most of the western world, people are in hock up to there eyeballs. High interest rates will kill them. Foreclosure city here we come.

Also has a nifty habit of bringing prices closer to their proper value, if never quite hitting it just right. If they are too low today, they might just be too high tomorrow.

The will continue to rise. Even if demand stabilises. Supply will decrease.

And for extra credit, it also pushes technology to improve, because if your blue ipod is out of vogue, then the shinier, smaller and slicker red one might just replace it...

And ( ) use fewer resources doing it.

You do of course realize that it is advancing technology that got us into this pickle, right? If we had stuck to where we were 20 years ago, I don't think we would be in half the trouble we are now.

But the doomsayers forget that too...

I forgot that, silly me.

What are you saying here, that everything is rosy but we’re in a real trouble now and we should have stopped progressing 20 years ago?

[Grunt]

Hyrogen as anm alternate to petrol is very feasible.

The biggest obstacle to hydrogen as a fuel is the Governments all around the world. They all tax petrol heavily for their own slush troughs.

But how can they tax the water that hydrogen is made outa?

So they''ll legislate against anything that don't fill the trough.

Hydrogen is at best a battry. The problem is how do you get hydrogen? There is lots of it in water but the task of separating hydrogen from water takes about as much energy as you get in the resulting hydrogen. It's really not worth it.

Hydrogen is also very difficult to store. Hydrogen molocule is the smallest around. It leaks to glass and rubber. It turns steel very brittle.

[woodbe]

What we need is for the yanks to get their Shuttle off to the moon and bring back a few tonnes of Helium3. In 1999 the nerds at University of Wisconsin predicted that 40 tons of Helium3 from the moon would fuel their fusion reactor and supply the entire electricity demand for the USA.

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/gallery

http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/presentations/glk_lasvegas.pdf

Nuclear power without Radioactive waste sounds good to me, the other sort is a game of russian roulette. (scuse the pun)

woodbe.

[echnidna]

And d'yer relly think the seppos will make the helium readily avaiable to the world (economically)

[Eddie Jones]

"Please explain a way to move electricity from a power plant to the consumer that doesn’t use copper."

Ummm..............Aluminium? (Wot most HV transmission line cables are made of.) But of course you knew that, didn't you?

[kiwigeo]

"Please explain a way to move electricity from a power plant to the consumer that doesn’t use copper."

Ummm..............Aluminium? (Wot most HV transmission line cables are made of.) But of course you knew that, didn't you?

Aluminium plants noted for their huge consumption of electricity.

[Rocker]

What we need is for the yanks to get their Shuttle off to the moon and bring back a few tonnes of Helium3. In 1999 the nerds at University of Wisconsin predicted that 40 tons of Helium3 from the moon would fuel their fusion reactor and supply the entire electricity demand for the USA.

woodbe.

Yeah, right.

Rocker

[kiwigeo]

But how can they tax the water that hydrogen is made outa?

Making hydrogen from water requires inputting a significant amount of energy. Its more likely hydrogen for vehicles would be sourced from natural gas.

[bitingmidge]

You are saying here is that everything is going to rosy, except for the boys and girls who can’t afford it.

Isn't that already the case? We just happen to be the lucky 20% or so of the world's population that can afford it.

I'm not sure that running out of copper will impact terribly on a Mongolian yak herder, or an Amazonian native.

Ultimately, everything will get so expensive that only the very rich will be able to afford their IPods. By this time Apple will be out of business (sorry Midge). Ford, Holden et. al. will be out of business. A lot of unemployment here

No need to be sorry, it will happen gradually (unless someone wakes up and elects a government with real guts), and I'm OK, i was educated in a time before electronic calculators, fax machines and photocopiers, so I'll survive thanks. (Except I'll be dead by the time it happens).

The price increases will mean inflation.

Strangely enough, if they are big enough it may not. In order for inflation to occur, there has to be demand for the product. Bankruptcies and unemployment could very well reduce demand on "luxury goods" to the point where recession or most probably depression occurs

Reserve Banks will up interest rates. In most of the western world, people are in hock up to there eyeballs. High interest rates will kill them. Foreclosure city here we come.

Won't that fix the over consumption problem? In hock to their eyeballs is a self inflicted disease brought on by over consumption which in turn is the cause of all this. Those who have been frugal and thrifty, will survive, and there's another notch in Mr Darwin's belt!

The people that thumb their noses at we, the frugal few will suffer!!

What are you saying here, that everything is rosy but we’re in a real trouble now and we should have stopped progressing 20 years ago?

Didn't we???
I find it hard to see evidence of real progress over that time. All we have done is created more ways to consume unnecessary items. Is the fact that we can communicate like this, evidence of technical progress, or a symptom of the decline of our social structure?


P
(Trying to be on Grunt's side, but without the doom and gloom!)

[bitingmidge]

The future is here! So you worry about wasted technology? Wasted resources, going insane?

Maybe you need a genpet.

Are Genpets Real?
Genpets are living, breathing mammals. Bio-Genica is a Bioengineering Company that has combined, and modified existing DNA to create the Genpets lineup. Genpets are flesh and blood just like any other animal.

So we create doll shaped organisms with certain personality configurations, designed with a lifespan of a mere 12 months. Surely someone is having a lend of us?

And I worry about people driving Falcons!

P