71
   

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

 
 
ican711nm
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2008 05:01 pm
@parados,
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt
2005 0.463 0.376 0.493 0.536 0.480 0.512 0.532 0.503 0.507 0.513 0.494 0.371 0.482

2006 0.296 0.443 0.385 0.357 0.338 0.443 0.434 0.488 0.417 0.481 0.441 0.536 0.422

2007 0.632 0.520 0.441 0.472 0.374 0.377 0.401 0.370 0.409 0.364 0.267 0.201 0.402

2008 0.050 0.192 0.445 0.267 0.278 0.312 0.403 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.278

spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2008 05:41 pm
@ican711nm,
That's pretty conclusive I must admit.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Aug, 2008 11:26 am
Not that I think this to be THE solution.

But it's quite interesting to watch what can be done if only wanted.

http://i38.tinypic.com/o9k3o6.jpg
(via Science Daily, August 6, 2008)

On August, 23rd the InVentus Ventomobile competed in the Aeolus Race in Den Helder (Netherlands)

http://i37.tinypic.com/e6zux4.jpg
Official website: http://www.windenergyevents.com/

In this first edition of RACING AEOLUS©, an event that is unique around the world, the teams were challenged to sail straight into the wind, solely driven by the power of wind.


On a three kilometre track five teams from different universities and research institutes from all over Europe were racing - and the Stuttgart team won.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Aug, 2008 11:26 am
@Walter Hinteler,

http://i34.tinypic.com/rsemnq.jpg
The first and second in the race

http://i36.tinypic.com/svoz9w.jpg
On the dike in Den Helder
[Photos via Spiegel: http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-34569.html#backToArticle=574303 ]



Related video @ spiegel-online: http://www.spiegel.de/video/video-35029.html

cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Aug, 2008 11:30 am
@Walter Hinteler,
And when there's no wind, what happens?
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Aug, 2008 11:39 am
@cicerone imposter,
On one day of the weekend, there wasn't enough wind ... for three 'cars'. Wink

They've got, however, batteries on board (I should have posted more infos above Embarrassed ) but no wind-powered engine or turbine can run without wind (and no normal car without diesel or petrol).
Quote:
The design is free and the only restrictions are adherence to safety and technical rules. The WPV may carry an empty battery which can be charged during the race. Outside dimensions: length ≤ 4m, width: ≤ 2m. Maximum height of the complete vehicle is 3.5m. Maximum rotor area 4m2. The maximum speed equals (more or less) the wind velocity. E.g. wind force 4 = 20 to 28 kilometres per hour. The participants are Technical University Risø (Denmark), Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), Center for Renewable Energy Sources (Greece), Fachhochschule Flensburg (Germany), Technical University Kiel (Germany), Technical University Stuttgart (Germany).

High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 04:21 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
All along I've been telling you we should invest in thermonuclear fusion reactors >

Quote:


http://alum.mit.edu/news/WhatMatters/images/sun_233x170.jpg

> that's how the sun burns - how much more natural can you get?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 05:31 pm
@High Seas,
Is it alright for sunbathing?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 05:52 pm
There's a fellow down in the Socorro area who has been experimenting with a vehicle similar to this. (This one is in Australia.) I thought it interesting that the caption for this says that theoretically, this vehicle can travel six times the speed of the wind? Wind storms out here can easily be 30 to 40 mph sustained with gusts much higher. That would sure be moving on:

http://www.treehugger.com/Wind-Powered-Greenbird.jpg

Quote:
Last week, in the post "Six (Or 7) Ways To Power A Vehicle With Wind" I left out a super-fast land yacht now waiting for perfect weather in Perth to try to set a world record in wind-powered land-yacht speed (didn't even know there was one of those, did you?)

Ride Like The Wind, Greenbird
Engineer Richard Jenkins has built the Jetson's/Forumula 1 version of those wind-powered vehicles right now racing the beaches at Race Aeolus 2008 in the Netherlands. Jenkins' craft, named Greenbird, now has a sponsorship deal with U.K.-based Ecotricity and sports its logo, and Ecotricity's managing director will ride along when the wind and the weather gets good enough near Perth for the record-breaking attempt (the previous 1999 record is 116.7 miles per hour).

Vertical sailing wing, rather than a turbine
Instead of a turbine, either vertical or horitzontal, Jenkins' craft has a rigid vertical wing like an aircraft's wing, which theoretically allows it to travel at six times the speed of the wind. Jenkins told the Guardian:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/08/another-wind-powered-speedster.php


Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Aug, 2008 11:43 pm
@Foxfyre,
The example you posted, Foxfyre, unfortunately ended last (see my links above) in that race. I could imagine that the advantage of the some of the other vehicles is that they can be driven not only in very windy weather.
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Thu 28 Aug, 2008 03:27 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Dang. You mean it doesn't go 180 mph?
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Thu 28 Aug, 2008 03:51 pm
@Foxfyre,
Might be. (The current world record is a bit less than 120 mph.)

Bu I suppose, since not many 'normal' cars do 760 mph like done during the last world record attempt ...
okie
 
  2  
Reply Thu 28 Aug, 2008 04:22 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
I think 180 might be possible WITH the wind, on some days in Oklahoma, if there is a flat enough stretch of road.
High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Thu 28 Aug, 2008 04:25 pm
@okie,
......if you meant not "flat stretch of road" but "downhill at precipitous incline", then you might get 200mph....
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Thu 28 Aug, 2008 04:37 pm
@High Seas,
It snows sideways in Oklahoma. The downhill thing might not be necessary.
spendius
 
  3  
Reply Thu 28 Aug, 2008 04:46 pm
@Foxfyre,
The "downhill thing" is always necessary Foxy.
High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2008 03:08 pm
@spendius,
My dear Spendius - you should review your understanding of "necessary" vs "sufficient". But I am the bringer of great news: the solar airplane is here:

http://media.economist.com/images/columns/2008w35/solarimpulse.jpg

Quote:
With the wingspan of a commercial airliner, the two-man Solar Impulse (pictured above) is designed to climb on solar power to almost 30,000 feet during the day, and then gently glide on thermals, uplift and battery power down to 6,000 feet at night"repeating the procedure for several days at a time.

http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/techview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12011734
okie
 
  2  
Reply Fri 29 Aug, 2008 10:36 pm
@High Seas,
Perhaps some of these inventions provide some levity to the discussion, but I believe these inventions could evolve into something rather significant, given time, refinement, and breakthroughs in regard to certain aspects of their design. For example, I think before the Wright brothers, the idea of actually flying in an airplane was also laughed at and ridiculed. Many inventions, in their initial and most crude forms, have been ridiculed as being useless and doomed to failure.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 09:11 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

The "downhill thing" is always necessary Foxy.


But sometimes you need to go uphill so that is sort of important too. (I swear the older I get, my walking route is all uphill these days.)
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Aug, 2008 09:26 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Perhaps some of these inventions provide some levity to the discussion, but I believe these inventions could evolve into something rather significant, given time, refinement, and breakthroughs in regard to certain aspects of their design. For example, I think before the Wright brothers, the idea of actually flying in an airplane was also laughed at and ridiculed. Many inventions, in their initial and most crude forms, have been ridiculed as being useless and doomed to failure.


Absolutely, and I think that's the main hangup in this whole global warming debate.

I don't anybody who is not in favor of progress or who thinks that the industrialized world will always run on oil or other fossil fuels. Certainly many of our grandparents at one time could not have conceived of marvels such as a modern Ford F-150, a big combine in Kansas, airplanes, computers, the internet, bullet trains, television, vacuum cleaners, routine excursions into space, solar powered calculators, etc.

But in one century, humanity has achieved all that and much much more. With new technology being developed and made effective at a faster and faster rate, imagine what new wonders will have been imagined and perfected by the end of this century?

I think the important thing is to know that it is happening and will continue to happen and allow it to happen naturally and/or be market driven as all our previous accomplishments have happened. When the government, in some misguided motives driven by what is probably faulty science re global warming, meddles excessively in that, I can see nothing good coming from it.

Right now oil is the fuel of freedom, prosperity, and possibilities for most of the world. I see no advantage to be gained by restricting its use or hamstringing economies by forbidding its use. Let's use it as we need to while the world moves forward into better, more efficient products, processes, and means.

 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.91 seconds on 11/22/2024 at 02:27:57