tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post6344747787701778072..comments2023-06-11T13:12:20.435+01:00Comments on The Anger of a Quiet Man: Too good to be true?Quiet_Manhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09575652127079681825noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-5659925038763156032012-10-20T07:01:31.204+01:002012-10-20T07:01:31.204+01:00@ Anon @ 6:04pm
As far as I'm aware there are...@ Anon @ 6:04pm<br /><br />As far as I'm aware there are no problems with the site and I view it on 2 different pc's with 2 different browsers (Firefox and Chrome) I can also view the mobile version on my phone, so unless someone tells me different I'm assuming the problem is at your end or your browser.Quiet_Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09575652127079681825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-81307672941606254492012-10-19T23:34:29.479+01:002012-10-19T23:34:29.479+01:00Assuming that this isn't total rubbish and dep...Assuming that this isn't total rubbish and depending on the economics prehaps it could be used as a rather indirect system of storage.<br /><br />So for stupid things like tidal and wind, intermittant and miles from anywhere instead of supplying the national grid could the power they use supply an automated petrol factory. Emptying a tank every month or whatever might make some economic sense.<br /><br />In the same light don't some powerplants need to run at a relativly constant speed for efficiency even if the power they produce isnt needed. Could these petrol plants be sited near by to act as a giant battery, using the surplus and otherwise wasted power (assuming no better use)to produce petrol for general sale?<br /><br />As a general business the idea seems nuts, essentially burning fuel to create the energy to rebuild the fuel just burned, as a sideline to use up spare energy maybe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-34171406866878135552012-10-19T22:31:43.649+01:002012-10-19T22:31:43.649+01:00About 10 years ago, I had an interesting conversat...About 10 years ago, I had an interesting conversation with an American who worked for a major oil company. He told me that his employers, and other companies, are sitting on patents for non-petroleum based energy. The system, apparently, is to buy out the patents so the technology can't be used by anyone else, and thereby destroy their share price, but when oil really does become too expensive, or rare, then the patents will make their appearance. By this means, the oil companies can still hold everyone else to ransom, that is, apart from those happy to use sail!<br />Penseivat Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-34756679175530678832012-10-19T18:04:54.107+01:002012-10-19T18:04:54.107+01:00I do not know if it’s just me or if everybody else...I do not know if it’s just me or if everybody else encountering issues with your site. It seems like some of the text in your content are running off the screen. Can someone else please provide feedback and let me know if this is happening to them as well? This might be a problem with my browser because I’ve had this happen previously. CheersAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-62417918786891549702012-10-19T12:00:21.308+01:002012-10-19T12:00:21.308+01:00Why would they take CO2 to create sodium carbonate...Why would they take CO2 to create sodium carbonate then electrolyse that to create CO2 again? Seems a expensive way to purify it, if that is what's happenning.Woodsy42https://www.blogger.com/profile/12355671210161625647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-36142626951816660512012-10-19T10:50:03.396+01:002012-10-19T10:50:03.396+01:00I also think this looks 'too good to be true&#...I also think this looks 'too good to be true'. I also remember the fuss over cold fusion and how that story panned out.<br /><br />I agree with anon that the electrolysis processes use more energy than they liberate and is therefore not cost effective.<br /><br />Personally I'd like to see Britain go down the shale gas and oil route if we have sufficient deposits. I'd also like to see our coal mines opened again not just for fuel but for chemical feed stock.Farenheit211http://farenheit211.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-21001023067587677172012-10-19T09:13:38.250+01:002012-10-19T09:13:38.250+01:00Isn't the key the two electrolysis processes -...Isn't the key the two electrolysis processes - where does the electrical energy come from? (I think water electrolysis needs twice the energy that the hydrogen/oxygen reaction produces, for example). <br /><br />It is possible that if we ran out of natural oil it would be worthwhile making it (expensively) from other energy sources if it was essential for applications where there was no alternative (aircraft?) but it makes no sense as part of the energy economy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-27199944688838859482012-10-19T07:23:56.781+01:002012-10-19T07:23:56.781+01:00In the 1950's Nuclear energy was lauded as bei...In the 1950's Nuclear energy was lauded as being 'too cheap to meter' it does, of course work out at being the most expensive way to produce energy when development and de-commissioning is taken into consideration. I'll bet some far-sighted consumers are still laughing. There is money to be saved in conserving energy not just consuming it. The less you consume the more you are charged pro-rata - that cannot be right. We have allowed the basic requirements of society i.e. water, gas, electricity etc to be sold off to foreign governments and suppliers.......big mistake!<br /><br />Laurie -StourbridgeRantBoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13425410359312882937noreply@blogger.com