/sci/ - Science & Math

old people
"cant see it from my house" = its not there

>>2408781

Duh motherfucker. We know that, anyone with half a brain fucking knows that. The only people who buy into this shit in terms of saving the environment are half-retarded hipster faggots anyway.

If they become less expensive I will buy one in a heartbeat, because the electricity to power the damn thing is less expensive than gas, but I have absolutely no illusions of saving the damn whales or whatever these cars are supposed to do.

You're forgetting the type of fuel used though. Cars burn gasoline which has to be refined from oil and is running out in the next couple hundred years. Power stations run on one of three things in most cases. Rivers, coal, and radioactive material. All three of these fuels are more abundant and easier to obtain than oil/gasoline.

There's currently no electric car that can get me from here to my Mom's house without having to charge or change out the battery. I can get there and back on a tank of gas (it'd be cutting it close, but I'd make it).

This is the reason that, even were the cars available where I live and reasonably priced, I would not buy one.

I'm not buying a goddamn train ticket just to get home for Christmas.

>>2408822
And yet if this type of car became common place, mass transit would likely also become more common and less expensive meaning that a train to home would be an easy and normal way to operate.

>>2408807
coal - crap efficiency
rivers -> dams - > flood shit to extinction
uranium-> also finite, and dont we need this shit for space travel. not gonna take coal up there with you.

electric car still shit idea

>>2408822
1. Get solar panel
2. Use solar panel to extend drive time
3. Go home

>>2408826
Yyyyyeah, I don't know if you've ever taken a cross-country ride in America by train, but that's just not going to fly. Imagine a plane during really heavy turbulence. Now, imagine it keeps going for 8 hours.

God, taking the train was a horrible idea.

>>2408830
>Have to work in the morning before the sun gets up
>A) Leave before Christmas dinner to beat the sunset
>B) Don't go home for Christmas
>C) Get fired

Hooray for the environment?

>>2408829

>>2408837
Dude, AmTrak is so far behind modern mass transit it's practically Amish. If the idea became popular and the business started making money it would be fast, comfortable and cheap. Look at European and Asian railway systems and compare to ours.

>>2408847
guess that MFW is for space travel.

it was hypothically speaking. unless you believe in the black triangle UFOs that USfags are making

>>2408846
Sounds like you need to go nuclear.

Even a coal burning power plant produces less emissions for the amount of usable energy than a gasoline-burning car.

Gasoline is a slightly cleaner fuel, but you can't carry sophisticated flue-gas scrubbing equipment in a car, because it's too heavy and expensive. Gasoline, being a mere fraction of oil, is also substantially less abundant.

>>2408856
You mean those stealth jets we've had for years? Or the hovering UAVs with the big lights that interfere with electronics?

Ok, I will cut to the chase, while playing on counterstrike a few gamers somehow obtained my internal computer ip address and stole 20 thousand dollars from my dad's bank account, when we couldnt pay the rent we got evicted, we had to move to a new town, i had to change schools, i lost all my friends, and these guys ruined my life, all i want is for somebody to help me put their computers out of comission so they cant do this to anyone else ever again. I have included their ip addresses in the file and to anyone that helps me, thank you so much, just in case the file doesnt show up here are their internal computer ip addresses: Computer IP 98.245.226.172
Computer IP 72.93.162.58
Computer IP 173.53.226.210
Computer IP 69.137.185.83

once again thank you whoever helps me

Nuclear engines on space/air/ground craft are pretty much out of the picture. The military researched and tried all of them and found them to be negatively cost effective and too much of a risk for contamination if they crashed, or malfunctioned.

>>2408855
So, help me out. We're going to use electric cars (which are functionally running on coal in about 90% of America, now) in town, and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, probably millions, building up a modern train system for our trains (which I believe all run on gasoline) for use out of town?

Meanwhile, we'll be letting the existing infrastructure for highways and gas stations phase out? I guess?

And will a round-trip train ticket ever actually be cheaper than a tank of gas?

It just seems like a whole lot of work that's not saving anybody any money (rather, it will cost an asston for everybody), and (as OP was obviously going for) causes more pollution than it prevents.

And it's more complicated, as I will need two vehicles in order to reach places that I can currently reach with one.

>>2408890
Sort of. A modernized mass transit system would also run off pure electricity though. Granted implementing this on a national scale is a big deal for a nation of this size, but in the end the investment would pay off. Also keep in mind that in our economic system the influx of capital into the electricity market would increase demand for greater efficiency and less pollution as a natural consequence.

>>2408868
nope

thesehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy7vy2VxUKE

sorry for shytty link.

also these aren't even the ones i've seen (not personally obviously)
one bigger engine (ring of light) underneath at each point

>>2408890
The trains run on diesel, actually.

And the plan is to connect all major cities by rail. The design currently being considered for the nationwide build-up project is called the "Anesco." It's a triplewide, meaning three times as wide as your average passenger train. It incorporates various passive and active balance systems as standard, and is quite squat, which makes it very stable, despite the fact that it runs on regulation rails. There are a bunch of models for train cars already worked out. A few vehicle transport cars are planned, which could make it possible for you to take your car with you. The proposed power source is an ultra-compact nuclear reactor, like the ones you can get for individual towns for about 25 million. Obviously, this is going to be extraordinarily expensive and time-consuming, but the deficit's 14 trillion already, so yeah.

Centralized power generation can take advantage of economies of scale to be more efficient than millions of individual power plants regardless of the fuel.

The bigger problem is that battery technology still sucks balls.

>>2408837

Goddamn glad I don't live in the US, then. Sounds like a self-inflicted wound.

>>2408919
That's not a single craft, it's a formation. There is a class of modular UAVs, rather like those little palm-sized robots that network with each other, that is designed to operate as a group, not solo. Tight-formation flying is a good test of their capabilities.

They're not as good as geese at that, but they're faster.

>>2408909
You're...kidding, right?

I can't imagine the kind of infrastructure we would need in order to create regularly-spaced power stations for our new train system...and the drain on energy resources would be unfathomable.

At present, we have 200,000 miles of passenger track. Assuming that the trains are twice as efficient as the cars, that's, what, 500 miles per charge? Assuming all our track is in a straight line (lolwut) and that we don't need anymore (LOLWUT), that's 400 power stations that are large enough to accommodate the significant rail traffic you're planning on us having (all of them, since every train running every route will have to stop at every station on its path, for however long it takes to charge a goddamn train)...

Christ, man. The costs associated with this project are going to be ri-fucking-diculous.

I don't think there's going to be a conceivable way that renewable energy sources will be able to handle this power load.

>>2408864
i'll give u some help
1) go to /b/ or tech
2) get your sister to post pic with bra and time stamp
3) promise tits for help
4) get help
5) delivar tits

>>2408933
>New fleet of $25 million nuclear trains

So, for the low cost of $100 million, you can have just the engines of four of your new trains.

I'm sorry, but this plan sounds less economically feasible the more I hear about it.

I am going to say this only ONCE this thread so everyone listen the fuck up.

Hybrids, plugins, biodiesel, its all troll bullshit right now. Fuck train network, fuck a a - well, fuck ANYTHING that uses main network electricity or gas.

The only thing that will help the emissions issue, THE ONLY THING, is for all the "greening" money, recources, manpower, and though power to go into doing the folowing two things:

>1. INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY OF ELECTRICAL POWER STORAGE (I.E. BATTERIES) AND POWER GENERATORS (INCLUDING SOALR PANELS)
Both of these advances have been make and are continuing at an off the charts rate in the laboratory due to the use of nano-materials and meta-materials. Mainstream, store-bought (and industrial) solar panels and electrical batteries will be astronomically more efficient within our lifetime.

>2. REPLACE THE WORLD'S ENTIRE POWER GRID WITH SOLAR, WIND, AND NUCLEAR. NO FOSSIL FUELS, NO EXCEPTIONS.
Improve the wires and repeaters while you're at it.

This can be done. For Americans, It could be the great Apollo Project or Hoover Dam of our time - upgrading and greening ("upgreening") the entire power grid, no gimmiks, no troll. Just science.


The whole world should have gone completely solar, wind and nuclear 50 years ago.

BUT NOOOOOOO THEN THE OIL BARONS WOULD BE OUT OF BUSINESS

FUCK CORRUPT ECONOMICS

Yes I mad.

>>2408966
i read that as 25 million people

>>2408969
do you have any idea how much it would cost to replace america's entire power grid?

All this bitchen about batteries leads me to wonder why we don't make inductant roads or conductive tires. You can add additives to tires and make them conductive with out loosing hardly anything strength wise. Or you could use linear motors embedded in the roads because that's probably a little more efficient than induction.

If all the major corredores where powered a 40 mile battery for the side roads should keep almost everyone happy. Direct usage tax would more than pay for the transition, the end result would be cheaper than using gas.

>>2408966
That was just an example. Those 25mil reactors are designed to stay buried in the ground for about a decade, then refueled, then put back. Can you even imagine the safety regulations that come with putting a fucking nuclear engine on a train? If those were still only 25 million I would make sure I stayed about 50 miles from one of these things at all times.

Anyway, you're looking at about 150 per unit, minimum. On the plus side, that will give you a solid 14 years of continuous operation without refueling. Oh, and economic feasibility doesn't matter very much to the government. Take a look at the military budget, Medicare, or even NASA if you want to know what the real priorities are.

>>2408969
>The oil barons would be out of business

So give the copyrights, manufacturing rights, and construction contracts to those companies. Suddenly, there will be a definite monetary value attached to green advances. I don't care who gets the money for making my solar panels. Let Shell have it. Everybody's happy.

Jesus tits, Capitalism, what's your deal?

WHAT WE NEED IS JESUS
and not in our hearts - on earth god dammit

that is to say, USFfags are all for democracy, but reality is - IF U HAD A KICK ARSE LEADER - U WOULDNT CARE ABOUT A DICTATORSHIP/MONARCHY

problem is powerful people these days only get there by being corrupt.

jesus should have ruled the earth

world needs - powerful smart cunt that cares

>>2408983

Cost should be no object. It should simply be done, period, for the wellbeing of the entire world. Just pile all the necessary resources up and GET UR DONE. If Obama really wanted to be a hero with the liberals, he would have used the 10 trillion in bailout money to start exactly what I'm suggesting, instead of letting the Fed and the Treasury give it all out to their banker buddies. We live in a sick corrupt civilization that vaules plutoracy instead of technocracy.

And if the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis is true, and it's true that we can do something about it, THEN IT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF IMMEDIATELY, WITHIN THIS GENERATION, or else the climate change will kill everyone, and avarice will be the cause of our extinction.

>>2408969
I love global warming. A warmer earth has a higher carrying capacity even with less land. Yes things will change, populations will need to move and some crop land will turn to crap; but far more newly fertile aired land will aper where tundra and deserts currently exists. Manhattan will build levies or underwater walkways Florida will disappear, we will adapt and move on and be the better for it.

>>2408991
>New fleet of $150 million nuclear trains

You are not making your point easier to believe in.

That's not to mention that these things will, as you mention, be subjected to endless bureaucratic safety checks. That will take 5 years, minimum, before Congress will agree to even consider rebuilding the track system into something that could handle the traffic, which would take at least another 5 years, minimum, and would cost more than the goddamn trains...

Listen, man. I hate to break it to you, but this will never happen. Like, ever.

>>2409006
The bailout wasn't 10 trillion. It was around 800 billion. And 10 trillion wouldn't even scratch the fucking surface.

wind energy will never be used on a mass scale. ever been in a town with 20+ wind turbines? it's fucking horrible to look at (and yes, this IS the factor that will sway people's decisions the most)

solar is promising as a supplementary power source, but is currently too expensive.

geothermal is fucking awesome but badly restricted to only certain areas.

damming is basically like an environmental holocaust wherever it's implemented.

nuclear is definitely the best option. currently rad material storage is taken even more seriously than terrorism, which i'm very happy about. however with large scale use come more slip ups and accidents, and even a small rad leak can be disastrous.

coal/oil will be used until it's not profitable to do so for both derp companies and the consumer. until then try to restrict energy usage however you can.

>>2409006
>Cost should be no object

come on dude, this is america we're talking about.

>>2409006
>climate change will kill everyone
BULL FUCKING SHIT you sensationalist deceptive bastard, either that or your completely derp.

>>2409011
Geothermal is also ridiculously expensive.

And we're starting to find that using wind power is having worrisome effects on wind patterns. Also, keeping a wind turbine moving requires a lot of oil, which kind of defeats the purpose.

Solar's a good option. Nuclear's the best. They ought to be the focuses of our research, but Three Mile Island scared the nation shitless.

>>2409012
question

US owes china a fuck load of money
what happens if u cant repay the shit.

they take alaska? legitimate reason for war?

>>2409006
i understand what you're saying. but you have to accept that it will never happen. our country values soldiers more than innovators and inventors. we're fools, damned fools.

>>2409011
$1 watt now, installation costs more than the panels. Wont be long till you have fleets Mexicans installing it for $2 and hr just like drywall.

>>2409014
The reactors are not the main cost element. Each of these trains is going to cost several billion dollars. And it's not my concern whether this is going to happen or not. I'm just telling you what the plan is.

>>2409025
the us will always be able to pay off it's debts because it can always print more money. the problem is inflation and if it's worth it.

>>2409025
>What happens if China calls in their debt?

We go bankrupt as a nation and fall into a massive depression even more terrible than the '30s.

Since about 85% of China's economy is selling consumer goods to the US, the Chinese economy fails and they go into a deep depression probably at least equal to ours from the '30s (as does most of the region).

China's not stupid. They won't call in their debt until they've got something to fall back on.

>>2409019
is that a totem pole in the background? who keeps a totem pole in their room?

>>2409025
It's in China's best interest to keep us in debt. It gives them a fair amount of leverage. In the short-term, they're going to use it in more subtle ways, looking for small concessions in certain areas, perhaps a look at some of our more outdated technologies, while only pulling out a big request once in a while. There's really no reason for them to want Alaska right now. Also, a war would completely fuck us both over, so no, they're not going to do that.

Think.

>Oh, and economic feasibility doesn't matter very much to the government. Take a look at the military budget, Medicare, or even NASA if you want to know what the real priorities are.

This. Take all the money from Defense (including black budget) and redirect it to this >>2408969 and a winrar is you.

Humans are adaptable and cleaver, but in large groups lead by a handful of leaders (a social style we tend to use often), we become far FAR too self-destructive, short-sighted, and wrathful to get certian things done for the sake of it.

As it stands the only way to do what must be done is to
A) Convince the first-world governments that an all-renewable power infrastructure is a national security priority (not just "it might help" but more on the level of "nuclear deterrent against the USSR during the cold war" i.e. totally necessary)

2. Convince the first-world plutocracy that an all-renewable power infrastructure is profitable beyond their wildest dreams

tl;dr stupid monkeys would rather spend energy on killing each other with new kinds of poop-flinging machines than on working together in peace and harmony to live smart and explore space.

>>2409012

the 800 billion was tarp. that was in 2008 and under the lasst watch of Bush. Since then, over 10 trillion in extra money has been helicoptered both officially domestically and under the table to foreign banks and companies through various other stimulus efforts. Get your fucking facts straight and read up on what has been going on.

>>2409049
>Pull all of America's Defense budget

You've just gone full retard.

That kind of talk is acceptable from complete acid-burnout 48-year-old hippies who still wear tie-dye, but anybody with a lick of sense ought to know that it'll never happen.

Why don't you just tell Muslims to convert to Christianity, so we can stop worrying about religious differences, while you're at it?

>>2409065
No. I have the right to be as uninformed as I wish. Suck a bag of dicks.

>>2409006
>Cost should be no object.
Can you first explain to me how you will magically feed a magically infinite workforce, as cost is no object? Cost includes such things like the number of people on the planet. Cost is something which is important, like it or not.

>>2409069
we are working on that

>>2409069
he was just pointing out that the money from 1 year's worth of defense could solve most of humanity's derping

>>2409086
Yes, it could. If directed to the sterilization of the planet's surface.

>>2409086

This is exactly what I was pointing out. Never in my short life did i ever think I would see the entire human race have to collectively stuggele so blatantly and ironicly with our Thanatos Drive

>>2409086
It could also fund Universal Education to the advanced degree level for all of our youths, but guess how much chance either of these plans has of even being proposed to Congress, much less ever being ratified?

I'll give you a hint: preheat your oven to 350 and toss a snowball in...

ITT: MISANTHROPY AND ARROGANCE. MISANTHROPY AND ARROGANCE EVERYWHERE

>>2409141

>says with capslock on

.....

If capitalism existed in america, I would have probably been writing this post from the restaurant at the end of the universe. Though thanks to keynesian economics, I'm still living in this shithole.

>>2409006
>Cost should be no object.

LOL. What fantasy world are you living in?

>>2408781
> Cars burn fuel. 40% of power gets to back wheels

The first sentence is enough to identify OP as an anti-environmentalist troll. Any thermal-cycle engine made from steel has an absolute maximum efficiency of 37% due to the Carnot limit and the melting point of steel. In practice, in internal combustion engine is lucky to get 20%.

> power stations burn fuel. maybe 55% efficient.

It's typically 35-40% for coal, maybe 45% for dual-stage gas. That doesn't include any waste heat utilisation. OTOH, wind, hydro, etc don't consume fuel, so it's hard to ascribe a meaningful efficiency figure (e.g. if a solar plant only converts a small fraction of the solar energy to electricity, it's not like it's wasting valuable sunlight).

>>2409290

thank fucking god someone else understands that we arent a capitalistic society. we are a mix of fucking everything. we have fascism in the car insurance and now health insurance mandates. we have socialism in the roads education health care socail security unemployment insurance and food stamps. we have capitalism in everyday life and purchases. we have communism in the police forces fire and ambulance services as well as most municipal services

>power stations burn fuel
maybe in third world countries, like america..

What about cold fusion? We get energy and copper, and get rid of that pesky nickel.

>>2409771

Words are fun, but only when used properly.

It would appear you don't actually grasp the concepts of which you speak.

without jesus you would be nowhere

>>2409049
>Take half the money from Defense (including black budget) and redirect it to this >>2408969

>Take the other half and redirect it to nuclear fusion reactors research.

fix'd.

>40% of power gets to back wheels

how did you measure that?

you could turn that power into continuous power. what percentage would that be?

>>2408781
>implying combustion engines are 40% efficient, most are less, far less when accounting for how poorly people maintain them
>implying combustion engines do not also have transmission losses, both in the vehicle and in the fuel supply chain
>implying a 20% reduction of 55% is not 44% and not still better than your incorrect premise regarding combustion engines.

trollolololol