1

The Environment / Re: Permanent Solution to the Energy Crisis?

« on: 05/07/2006 06:49:50 »

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id /8129979/

Here is the car of the future! Today!

70 mpg and not a hybrid! And a Cd of .06!

Now imagine this vehicle made of carbon fiber, 50% less weight, a 50% smaller engine, at least double the mileage to 140 mpg!

Now add a super efficient hybird system like the upcoming third generation Toyota HSD, with lithium ion batteries and a plug in option. At least double the mileage again to 280 mpg!

And the whole time running on 100% renewable, carbon netural algea based bio-diesel that is grown in the UK!

And here is some more info on the economics of algea bio-diesel!

http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/biodiesel.html

At the conservative estimates mentioned above, algea bio-diesel would cost 29.74 Pounds/ barrel! Current oil goes for 40.06 Pounds/barrel and will no doubt increase in the future.

The technology is here! The economics work! Algea can save us all! Surely they are the most wonderfull organisms to ever grace the earth's surface! First they oxyginate the atmosphere, fueling life, now they will fuel our economies!

Adam Andrew Galas

2

The Environment / Permanent Solution to the Energy Crisis?

« on: 05/07/2006 06:23:42 »

http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html

Is this for real? Because if it is than mankind's salvation has arrived in the form of algea!

-able to produce up to 15,000 barrels of bio-diesel,(carbon neutral renewable fuel)/acre/year!

-Can be fed waste water from human sewers and animal farms

-can produce highly nitrogen rich fetilizers, no petro-chemicals needed!

What does this mean for the UK?

Well according to the CIA world factbook, http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2174rank.html

the UK consumes 1.722 million barrels of petrol/day, (15th in the world, good for you UK).

That is 6.2853 billion barrels/year.

Now the UK is not a terrible sunny spot of land, so let us assume a conservative 5,000 barrels/acre/year, (1/3 of max in sunny climes like the Sonoran Dessert).

so 6.2853 billion barrels/year would require 125,706 acres of land, or 316.1003075687559 square kilometers!

Now according to the CIA world fact book, 23.23% of UK land is arable.

That means that only .5632% of arable land on the emeral isle can replace all the petrol in the UK!

Now imagine what you could do with hybrid-bio diesels, with plug in options, that utilize wind and tidal energy!

Or carbon fiber cars that weigh half as much as current models and reduce consumption even more!

Am I wrong in my glee? Is a hydrogen economy still the future? If so why? With bio-diesel 14 times as energy dense as H2.

Any thoughts?

Adam Andrew Galas

3

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 3

« on: 03/07/2006 17:36:06 »

1. False
2. True
3. False

Olympus Mons is 25 KM high.
Soul Surfer is correct, a Mobius Strip has just 1 side is a Mobius Strip.

Adam Andrew Galas

4

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 01/07/2006 03:49:27 »

Here are the answers.

1. Although a meter used to defined as 1/10,000,000th of 1/4th the circumfrence of the earth at the equator, it was changed in 1960 to the wavelength of radiation from Krypton-86.

But in 1983 it was changed to the distance light travels in 1/299,792, 458 of a second.

So the answer to number one is FALSE.

2. True, Saturn is the least dense planet in the solar system.

3. I apologize if the wording of this question was ambiguous. The answer is FALSE. AM radio waves have the longer wavelengths, FM the shorter.

Adam Andrew Galas

5

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 30/06/2006 17:27:45 »

I suppose the site was referring to amplitude due to the topic at hand, (how AM signals can bounce off the ionosphere for hundreds of kilometers at night).

I should have specified amplitude, for that I apologize. However, in terms of the competition, that shall remain the question. In the future I shall endevour to be as specific as possible.

Adam Andrew Galas

6

Radio Show & Podcast Feedback / Re: Quiz strategy

« on: 30/06/2006 04:55:24 »

I am glad to say that as of June, 2006 the quiz is back up to 3 questions. I was dismayed when it went to 2 questions, and sometimes even 1. What is the point of so few questions? With 3 questions you can rank players, with 2 there are too many ties, and with 1, well its not even a game then is it?

Thanks for bringing back 3 questions, it is my favorite part of living, getting to play along.

Adam Andrew Galas

7

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 30/06/2006 04:20:06 »

The website I am looking at claims that wavelength is different between the two. This is not a trick question. Here's a hint, it has something to do with the distance AM waves can travel at night.

Adam Andrew Galas

8

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: The Online Version Part I

« on: 30/06/2006 02:57:03 »

Here are the answers.

1. False, Tube Worms that live near thermal vents have been found to live up to 250 years.

2. False, the actual estimate of energy released was 100 Gigatons, or 6,000 Hiroshimas.

3. True, Earth is the densenst planet.

Congrats to Roy P for gettting 2/3 questions correct.

Adam Andrew Galas

9

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: The Online Version Part I

« on: 29/06/2006 09:44:07 »

I apologize for the typo, 50 gigatons is 50,000 megatons, not 5,000. This typo is not meant as a trick question.

Adam Andrew Galas

10

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: How does a gravity tractor work to pull colliding objects out of Earth's path?

« on: 29/06/2006 09:10:37 »

I believe the rational given for the gigaton bomb was that it is so large the fireball it generates will engulf any small to medium sized NEO and vaporize it, no matter its spin, velocity, density, composition, ect. The idea was that a big enough bomb will simply overwhelm all variables and blow them all to hell, leaving no debris to worry about.

Many smaller bombs would face the problem of a ruble pile is that the pile may disintegrate and the subsequent bombs would no longer have 1 target but dozens or hundreds. The incoming missiles would continue to detonate which would only scatter the rubble worse.

The idea however, was in the end dubbed "insane" as it would have been a larger threat to the earth than any likely NEO.

Of course, that leaves us with the question of saving the world when we are threatened by large space rocks. I somehow doubt that a gravity tractor could be built in time. After all, who is going to fund a gravity tractor? It will cost tens of billions, and if the Americans are not directly threatened they will not pay for it, at least not the current administration.

I fear that if Apophis does threaten us in 2036 that each government will simply ask the question, "will it hit us or cause a Tsunamai that will?" If the answer is no, they will find excuses not to pay the costs.

Perhaps we can convince Richard Branson, if he is still alive, to build the tractor. If he can't afford it, then maybe the new $61 billion Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation could pony up the necessary funds.

Adam Andrew Galas

11

General Science / Re: What is god: an answer

« on: 28/06/2006 21:29:00 »

The question of what should the 3rd world do to grow its economy is, perhaps the most important ecological question in history. China and India have discovered that economic growth is wonderfull and have embraced more and more free market ideas to spur on that growth. But if they achieve the growth threw the burning of coal, as they are currently doing, then they will destory themselves and possibly the world.

That is why I am glad to see China taking seriously the issue of air pollution by planting gardens on Shanghai roofs. They are also very active in developing Solar technologies and the 3 Georges Dam is a wonderful project that will provide 18 gigawatts of electricty, the equivalent to thousands of coal fired plants.

Hopefully India will follow China's lead so that 3 billion people don't attempt to recreate the industrial revolution as did the Europeans and Americas.

As for the rest of the developing world, that is a much harder topic. While China and India are rich enough to afford alternatives and are able to attract investment, most poor nations can't.

Nations such as those in Africa will need to be supported by the developed world in the form of massive subsidies in order to grow their economies in a sustainable manner.

Of course for that to happen the governments of these nations would have to be much less corrupt, which may be asking to much.

I fear that Africa in the future will become a hellhole that no one wishes to touch with a ten foot pole. The population of the continent is expected to double by 2050 and they can't support the population they have now without massive improvements to their current infrastructure.

Perhaps the developed world will be forced to help Africa when it becomes a continent of death, but I fear this will not be the case. One need only look at the Genocide in Darfur and Rwuanda to see that the developed world will not lift a finger to help if they feel they must sacrifice too much blood or treausure.

Yet with a massivly growing population of increasingly desperate people, Africa can't be ignored. They will attempt to develep their economy and will burn coal to do it. They will choke their rivers with pollution and clear cut their forests, because they are desperate to earn what little money they can to feed themselves.

Yet with the developed world still unable to deal with its own pollution problems, it may come to pass that nothing can be done to achieve sustainable growth.

The population of humanity will continue to grow until it peaks at 10 billion and the earth becomes to exhausted to support an inefficient mankind. Then a great die off will occur as billions are killed in a massive ecological upheaval.

Those in the west will not be spared, although we will most likely have a slightly easier time not perishing.

Unless mankind can find a way to power modern civilization through renewable means, and spread that technology around the globe, the modern lives we enjoy today will end very soon relativly speaking, within 50 years I imagine.

Adam Andrew Galas

12

General Science / Re: What is god: an answer

« on: 28/06/2006 18:29:31 »

My reference to the Numibian Trees was only as a small example of humans who defied the laws of ecology.

It applies to all cases where humans are idiotic enough to completely destroy a resource they rely on, only to find themselves destoryed by their own making.

On easter Island the same occured, the inhabitants, in order to build ever larger statues, (leaders with larger statues were considered more noble) cut down all their trees and found that they had nothing to eat, and that the soil was eroding. They destroyed themselves because they were too stupid to see the interconnections of the biosphere.

In Greenland, the first Vikings were wiped out because they insisted on building large churches. So they cut down all the available trees, (which where quit limited) and built the churches only to find that without trees their was no way to heat their homes.

Or take the example of the Gulapagos Islands where fisherman devestated the Sea Cucumber population for profit. Why would such people not agree to conservation fishing? Then they would make much more money in the long run, yet they chose to overfish and now their golden egg laying goose is dead.

90% of all large fish have been taken out of the ocean in the last 50 years, according to the IMAX film, "Deep Sea", and that was done by people too stupid to sea that they are destroying their own livly hoods.

Or look at the Brazilian Rainforests, which are being burned and cleared so that farmers can have 1 good season for planting before the nutrients are forever leached from the soil and forced to burn more precious forests.

These forests, besides acting as the lungs of the planet, also contain potential cures for any and possibly all diseases, perhaps even to aging itself. Yet they are being wiped out by ignorant peasent farmers and loggers for short term profit.

Today in Shanghai over 1/3 of the days of the year face air not fit for human consumption, in Mexico City 1 day of breathing their air is akin to smoking 21 cigarrettes.

And then their is the entire issue of global warming.

My point is that the Laws of the Universe smite all those who throw off the balance of the ecosystem, and humans have proven to be the most addepts creatures at this task in the history of the earth.

Either we change and learn to use the Laws of the Universe to create sustainable development, or our way of life is doomed to extinction, as possibly is our species.

Adam Andrew Galas

13

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 3

« on: 03/07/2006 17:36:06 »

1. False
2. True
3. False

Olympus Mons is 25 KM high.
Soul Surfer is correct, a Mobius Strip has just 1 side is a Mobius Strip.

Adam Andrew Galas

14

General Science / Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 3

« on: 01/07/2006 04:16:23 »

Yet more interesting questions. Hopefully, no ambiguity in these. Answers to follow in 48 hours.

1. Olympus Mons, the tallest volcano in the solar system is located on Mars and is 20 km high at its peak. True or False?

2. Solar winds slam into earth’s magnetic field at an average velocity of 400 km/second. True or False?

3. A Kepler strip is a 3-d shape who’s surface has only 1 side. True or False?

3.

Adam Andrew Galas

15

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 01/07/2006 03:49:27 »

Here are the answers.

1. Although a meter used to defined as 1/10,000,000th of 1/4th the circumfrence of the earth at the equator, it was changed in 1960 to the wavelength of radiation from Krypton-86.

But in 1983 it was changed to the distance light travels in 1/299,792, 458 of a second.

So the answer to number one is FALSE.

2. True, Saturn is the least dense planet in the solar system.

3. I apologize if the wording of this question was ambiguous. The answer is FALSE. AM radio waves have the longer wavelengths, FM the shorter.

Adam Andrew Galas

16

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 30/06/2006 17:27:45 »

I suppose the site was referring to amplitude due to the topic at hand, (how AM signals can bounce off the ionosphere for hundreds of kilometers at night).

I should have specified amplitude, for that I apologize. However, in terms of the competition, that shall remain the question. In the future I shall endevour to be as specific as possible.

Adam Andrew Galas

17

Radio Show & Podcast Feedback / Re: Quiz strategy

« on: 30/06/2006 04:55:24 »

I am glad to say that as of June, 2006 the quiz is back up to 3 questions. I was dismayed when it went to 2 questions, and sometimes even 1. What is the point of so few questions? With 3 questions you can rank players, with 2 there are too many ties, and with 1, well its not even a game then is it?

Thanks for bringing back 3 questions, it is my favorite part of living, getting to play along.

Adam Andrew Galas

18

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 30/06/2006 04:20:06 »

The website I am looking at claims that wavelength is different between the two. This is not a trick question. Here's a hint, it has something to do with the distance AM waves can travel at night.

Adam Andrew Galas

19

General Science / Science Fact or Fiction: Online Version Part 2

« on: 30/06/2006 03:09:29 »

Here are some more fascinating questions. I provide answers in 27 hours.

1. Although the meter was originally defined as 1/10,000,000th of 1/4th the circumfrence of the earth at the equator, it is today defined, officially, as the wavelength of Krytpon-86 radiation. True or False?

2. Saturn's density is so low that it would float in a pool of water, assuming one could find one large enough. True or False?

3. While AM radio waves can be as short as 10 Meters, FM radio waves can be as long as 193-580 Meters. True or False?

Adam Andrew Galas

20

General Science / Re: Science Fact or Fiction: The Online Version Part I

« on: 30/06/2006 02:57:03 »

Here are the answers.

1. False, Tube Worms that live near thermal vents have been found to live up to 250 years.

2. False, the actual estimate of energy released was 100 Gigatons, or 6,000 Hiroshimas.

3. True, Earth is the densenst planet.

Congrats to Roy P for gettting 2/3 questions correct.

Adam Andrew Galas