Im sure all you have heard aobut Bush's new solution to the gas shortage, Yes Coal, that clean burning soloution.... wait.... COAL! thats a step backwards right? I was thinking why coal? why, they say clean buringing technologies but its still burning, and how would that even work in a car?, get the kids to shovel? with all the research in the past years into hydorgen fule cells, its looks promising and only water as a by product of burning, and the most abundent element in the unviers... then it hit me, thats why coal, so it can be controlled and keeping research $$ away from hydrogen will keep it from coming easiyly and leave them to milk the gas suppliy away where as hydrogen and be made by taking water and adding a small electrical current (Did it in high school science) Anyways i just wanted to share that with you, but isnt that depressing? to know that the future of the enviorment is being sacraficed for more money. And did you ever notice the color of our fules in one form of another seems to be blacker than the black plauge?
Coal would probably make a great alternative to oil. Unlike oil, supplies of coal could hold out for centuries to come instead of decades. How would that even work in a car, you ask? Well, in some ways, better! Solid fuels are generally much safer than liquid ones. Or hydrogen gas, for that matter. Coal would make a swell fuel for gas turbine engines. Or possibly coal mixed with some wood pellets. With gasification, a wide variety of fuels would work, actually. Corn would also be an alternative. Also, with mechanized feed systems, there'd be no need for shovels, beyond maybe the filling of hoppers in some cases. But there are great possibilites for good ol' coal...
I was really surprised when I heard Bush proclaim that he was dumping all kinds of money into alternative energy. And then I couldn't stop laughin when he said that this alternative energy is coal...
Well leo alternative fule dosent nessariyly mean clean or earth friendly fule, and the fact is there is still a limited amount of coal on the earth where is hrydrogen is nearly limitless Also looking at future ways to harvest each of them, Coal we dig, futher to hell and self damnnation, where with hydrogen we would have to explore and search the heavens
It'll be pretty hard for hydrogen to compete with coal and/or other organic fuels economically. I just don't see it happening. Plus it's just dangerous. For me, gas turbines that indiscriminately burn a good range of fuels are the way to go.
Hydrogen technology is comming down in price rapidly, I really don't see how it's dangerous when compared to volatile fuels like gasoline. But there are plenty of other sources of renewable energy worth implementing. Wind, solar, tides, river currents etc.
It is a diffrent technology being used for coal not like the 'old days' Coal cleaning by 'washing' has been standard practice in developed countries for some time. It reduces emissions of ash and sulfur dioxide when the coal is burned. Electrostatic precipitators and fabric filters can remove 99% of the fly ash from the flue gases - these technologies are in widespread use. Flue gas desulfurisation reduces the output of sulfur dioxide to the atmosphere by up to 97%, the task depending on the level of sulfur in the coal and the extent of the reduction. It is widely used where needed in developed countries. Low-NOx burners allow coal-fired plants to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by up to 40%. Coupled with re-burning techniques NOx can be reduced 70% and selective catalytic reduction can clean up 90% of NOx emissions. Increased efficiency of plant - up to 45% thermal efficiency now (and 50% expected in future) means that newer plants create less emissions per kWh than older ones. Advanced technologies such as Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) and Pressurised Fluidised Bed Combustion (PFBC) will enable higher thermal efficiencies still - up to 50% in the future. Ultra-clean coal from new processing technologies which reduce ash below 0.25% and sulfur to very low levels mean that pulverised coal might be fed directly into gas turbines with combined cycle and burned at high thermal efficiency. Gasification, including underground gasification in situ, uses steam and oxygen to turn the coal into carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Sequestration refers to disposal of liquid carbon dioxide, once captured, into deep geological strata. http://www.uic.com.au/nip83.htm http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/18/news/economy/coal/ http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8208/8208coal.html I think a diverse No. of options should be used..
Hydrogen is not an energy source. It is a technique for storing and transporting engergy. The availability, cost, environmental impact, etc. of hydrogen technology all depend on how it is made. Electrolosis is at the heart of most methods, but how is the electicity made? In Bush's plan, it is made by burning coal.
Screw it all! All movement of any kind, Wind, People, Waves, Earthquakes should be captured for energy! Honestly how much energy do u think a tornado or hurricane could make. Hey as long as we are alive there will be movement unless you are all into this evolution stuff, maybe will will just evolve into single cell bitches lol.
To bad theres not a unlimited supply of energy. I wish we could use the sun for just more than gettin sunburns...
Using the kinetc energy from the body to power personal electronics is cathing on. Kinetic watches have been quite a big hit. As more subtle technology like piezoelectics improves the small movements in the skin from the repiratory and circulatory system and even body heat are being used to generate technology. Prototypes devices have already been made, commercial info seems scarce but fromt he little I know commercialisation could be in the next couple of years.
