diy solar

diy solar

Can Solar & Wind Fix Everything (e.g., Climate Change) with a battery break-through?

Fast refill, similar to gasoline.


And it can be trucked around. Sure, you could truck batteries, but those require about daily cycling to be cost effective. Hydrogen can be shipped around by ... ship. Even liquified.


(Still hard to compete with Dino Diesel, unless your concern is "Carbon Footprint" :ROFLMAO:

View attachment 209442

Just how much methane "greenhouse gas" did those brontosaurus emit? :ROFLMAO:
No wonder they went extinct! Just like humans are going to!

How much energy does it take to chill or compress it?


I guess ultimately what I'm looking for is how many kilowatts of our generated power would make it to the motor of our vehicle and how does that compare to just using normal batteries?
 
And for the love of methane, how much does all this crap cost to build and maintain.

It's shit load more than gasoline that is why the electric car dorks and global warming enthusiasts want to "price the social cost of carbon" into the market.

I.E. make it more expensive via taxation so that expensive, convoluted "solutions" like hydrogen make better financial "sense".

And of course to skim a few $$ off for themselves.
 
Ha ha. Thought you meant using the energy of expanding the hydrogen to drive a compressed-gas motor and then passing it's exhaust (the hydrogen) through the fuel cell.

The hydrogen is flammable hence my reason for needing to do something with the blowby that leaks around our compressed gas-driven motor. 😀

I did.
The air motor powered by expanding hydrogen releases low pressure hydrogen. Just let that crankcase vent to exhaust; blowby is wasted expansion, but the gas can still go to fuel cell.

How much energy does it take to chill or compress it?

A lot.

When consumed in the winter, CHP uses waste heat of fuel cell for domestic or process heat.
In the summer, warm the expanding H2 by air conditioning with it.


I guess ultimately what I'm looking for is how many kilowatts of our generated power would make it to the motor of our vehicle and how does that compare to just using normal batteries?

Not much.
But more than export credits PG&E is offering!

And for the love of methane, how much does all this crap cost to build and maintain.

It's shit load more than gasoline that is why the electric car dorks and global warming enthusiasts want to "price the social cost of carbon" into the market.

I.E. make it more expensive via taxation so that expensive, convoluted "solutions" like hydrogen make better financial "sense".

But how much are we spending on fossil fuel subsidies, such as protecting Panamanian registered oil tankers transiting the Middle East?

And supporting and defending that nation we created by carving out a large area of the "Promised Land" and placing it under the rule of one religion? (While displacing thousands of people who's ancestral homes were there.)

9/11 didn't happen because we had always respected other's rights of self determination.
 
I did.
The air motor powered by expanding hydrogen releases low pressure hydrogen. Just let that crankcase vent to exhaust; blowby is wasted expansion, but the gas can still go to fuel cell.



A lot.

When consumed in the winter, CHP uses waste heat of fuel cell for domestic or process heat.
In the summer, warm the expanding H2 by air conditioning with it.




Not much.
But more than export credits PG&E is offering!



But how much are we spending on fossil fuel subsidies, such as protecting Panamanian registered oil tankers transiting the Middle East?

And supporting and defending that nation we created by carving out a large area of the "Promised Land" and placing it under the rule of one religion? (While displacing thousands of people who's ancestral homes were there.)

9/11 didn't happen because we had always respected other's rights of self determination

Too much to unpack there but Israel isn't a major oil exporter and the Arab world is pretty sore that we unconditionally support a country that blocks them off from an important holy site.

We also export oil.

In the world of economics and that in which we live, fossil fuels are at the core of almost everything we create and do.

It's not possible that fossil fuels are subsidized when the wealth supposedly being used to subsidize them wouldn't have existed in the first place without their existence.
 
And for the love of methane, how much does all this crap cost to build and maintain.

It's shit load more than gasoline that is why the electric car dorks and global warming enthusiasts want to "price the social cost of carbon" into the market.

I.E. make it more expensive via taxation so that expensive, convoluted "solutions" like hydrogen make better financial "sense".

And of course to skim a few $$ off for themselves.
You stop that….. if we save 1/millionth of degree and spend $100 trillion dollars to save planet it is worth it. Slide a trillion dollars my way so can live on the coast with beach front property. Kick the invaders out with police and NG at the ready. Burn out some natives… like Maui … build me an underground shelter like Zucker. Private nuclear generator.

Yes …. You worry to much about the money Steal some too.
 
Getting fossil fuel from middle east to US is subsidized by military defense, and keeping price of oil low by maintaining strife is subsidized by support for Israel, previously Iraq, anywhere we stick our noses.

That subsidy is paid for by the public, who then enjoy lower fuel prices and the prosperity that brings, while wealth is created for the oil industry.

Ratio of defense spending to GDP since WWII has remained several times higher than prior.


1713201044886.png

I say let importers pay the full cost of defending shipping.

And, do not meddle in the affairs of other countries. Buy from them, or not, on their terms and at their prices.
Let private companies invest within those countries if desired, at their own risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D71
cLIEmate change is hoax. They know it is, as they fly private jets, build megamansions on the ocean and sail diesel megayachts.

 
Getting fossil fuel from middle east to US is subsidized by military defense, and keeping price of oil low by maintaining strife is subsidized by support for Israel, previously Iraq, anywhere we stick our noses.

This time is long-gone, I think. My hint is the last time an oil embargo was placed on the United States, what was the cause?

That subsidy is paid for by the public, who then enjoy lower fuel prices and the prosperity that brings, while wealth is created for the oil industry.

The wealth wouldn't exist in the first place without the existence of oil. You can show oil being subsidized on paper but if you take oil and it's benefits out of the economy you are left with 3rd world conditions for almost everybody inhabiting the first-world.


Ratio of defense spending to GDP since WWII has remained several times higher than prior.


View attachment 209454

I say let importers pay the full cost of defending shipping.

I would be fine with that but what about the other 60% of ships that are hauling things like IPhone, Solar Panels and batteries to 18650 battery store spring sale, best deal on all Lipo4 prismatic cells?

And, do not meddle in the affairs of other countries. Buy from them, or not, on their terms and at their prices.
Let private companies invest within those countries if desired, at their own risk.

I like it but this would have to occur at home before it occurs internationally.

The apparatus is already in place so it's too late.

The people who enjoy killing brown people overseas will turn that energy and drive inward towards U.S. citizens who are ill-equipped to resist.
 
Those other 60% of ships can pay for their own defense, tack it on to shipping rates, let it be reflected in cost of imported goods. Then domestic goods can compete on an even footing.

The US last I heard exports high sulfur crude, and imports sweet crude.
So shipping happens both ways, and should pay for its own protection.
While we here enjoy clean natural gas.
 
Two gallons of water lets you store 30 kWh of energy....How many gallons does you household use per day?
Sure, individually it's nothing. But the world uses ~63 TWh/d of electricity now. With electrification that could probably be doubled. Just saying it adds up. Plus, it'll leak. Some of the hydrogen lost into the atmosphere will leak into space. Not a concern for now, but it's not endless.

Don't laugh, waste water is valuable stuff:
Not laughing, definitely agree!
 
OK fuse hydrogen into helium, and it will be lost for good.
Prepare for the coming world-wide drought. ;)

As for fuel cells, the exhaust is pure water. So reclaim it to drink. That way the areas you're concerned would have to choose between water and energy, don't have to. Guaranteed not to contain either synthetic hormones or fluoride. (maybe a little platinum or whatever?)
 
Those other 60% of ships can pay for their own defense, tack it on to shipping rates, let it be reflected in cost of imported goods. Then domestic goods can compete on an even footing.

The US last I heard exports high sulfur crude, and imports sweet crude.
So shipping happens both ways, and should pay for its own protection.
While we here enjoy clean natural gas.
Look man we got a bridge to pay for in Baltimore. We are big spenders. Hahahha.

It is a shit show. What we need to do is figure out how to steal our own money back from new green deal. Just steal it Wait it is our money. Is it stealing. That is how our elected view it. ☹️
 
Best proposal I have heard is this:

When there is a revolution and a new government takes over, they still owe the debt of the previous government.

Supposedly another nation (Great Brittan?) insisted on China paying off existing bonds, but U.S. has not. We should do so, either erasing a large portion of the national debt or getting an offsetting amount into the hands of investors, whoever holds that debt.

Just need to prevent Congress from running it back up, BEFORE doing this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D71
We have old established methods. They worked well until we stopped using them. 😃😆😳. Worked for us just negative - they objected. We messed up allowing them laws to protect themselves like giving themselves pay raises and investigating themselves and….

We know how to fix it and it keeps them awake at night. 😊.

They are trying figure out how best to disarm ppl without digging their own grave. They have no problem killing us. They do it slowly. Food medicine air water all the essentials. Most Young ppl have no clue. They blame boomers to which we are partially to blame. I can accept that. Problem is the young generation are mostly spoiled rotten. Squat to pee.
My parent and grand parents thought we were spoiled too. 😃. That is the thing young ppl never get. Until they get old.
 
We have old established methods. They worked well until we stopped using them. 😃😆😳. Worked for us just negative - they objected. We messed up allowing them laws to protect themselves like giving themselves pay raises and investigating themselves and….

We know how to fix it and it keeps them awake at night. 😊.

They are trying figure out how best to disarm ppl without digging their own grave. They have no problem killing us. They do it slowly. Food medicine air water all the essentials. Most Young ppl have no clue. They blame boomers to which we are partially to blame. I can accept that. Problem is the young generation are mostly spoiled rotten. Squat to pee.
My parent and grand parents thought we were spoiled too. 😃. That is the thing young ppl never get. Until they get old.

It was odd. Grammy died 12 years ago, born in 1914.

She remembered they used to deliver ice via horse wagon to her house until they purchase their first refrigerator in 1920.
 
If EVs will work in the Frozen North, they'll work anywhere!

The Candians have been getting wonked for so long that they wouldnt know what to do otherwise.

The leader there is a pass down dynasty …. The king of Canada.

Kings decree
 
Fast refill, similar to gasoline.


And it can be trucked around. Sure, you could truck batteries, but those require about daily cycling to be cost effective. Hydrogen can be shipped around by ... ship. Even liquified.


(Still hard to compete with Dino Diesel, unless your concern is "Carbon Footprint" :ROFLMAO:

View attachment 209442

Just how much methane "greenhouse gas" did those brontosaurus emit? :ROFLMAO:
No wonder they went extinct! Just like humans are going to!
When the Earth is consumed, it will be by fire this time, not the weather. That fire will most likely be full of radiation too.

Stop worrying about the freaking weather and put your energy into fixing humanity, and all the wars that Obiden created through weakness.

China -Taiwan
China - India
Russia - Ukraine
Iran- Israel
Yemen- the World
Muslims - The Infidels
US - China
US - N Korea
US - Iran
Etc etc....
 

The Astrophysicist Warning About the Coming Little Ice Age: “It’s Already Started”​

“CO2 is not a bad gas,” says Valentina Zharkova, a Professor at the Northumbria University in Newcastle, U.K. On the contrary, she points out, every garden centre uses it in its greenhouses to make plants lush and green. “We actually have a CO2 deficit in the world, and it’s three to four times less than the plants would like,” she notes, adding that the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere has been at much higher levels throughout our planet’s history than it is now.

In fact, over the last 140 million years, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has been steadily decreasing and only now slightly starting to rise. It is currently around 420 parts per million (ppm), or 0.042%. 140 million years ago, it was estimated at 2,500 ppm (0.25%), or about six times higher. And it also meant a greener and more biodiverse world. If CO2 were to fall below 150 ppm (0.015%), it would already mean the extinction of vegetation and all other life. We came close to that during the last glacial maximum when it was at 182 ppm (0.018%).

Zharkova says that the fact that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are now increasing is a good thing. “We don’t need to remove CO2 because we would actually need more of it. It’s food for plants to produce oxygen for us. The people who say CO2 is bad are obviously not very well educated at university or wherever they studied. Only uneducated people can come up with such absurd talk that CO2 should be removed from the air,” says Zharkova.

The Sun – a natural driver of climate change

In fact, Professor Zharkova can go on at length about what CO2 does or does not do in nature and how it behaves, but she does not actually study it directly as a scientist. Zharkova is an astrophysicist originally from Ukraine. She graduated in mathematics from Kiev National University and did her PhD at the Main Astronomical Observatory in Kiev, Ukraine. She has worked and done research at various U.K. universities since 1992 and has been a Professor of Mathematics at the Northumbria University since 2013, teaching key Maths and Physics modules.

However, her research has focused on the Sun and she can confirm that, unlike CO2, the Sun plays a major role in Earth’s climate change. So much so, in fact, that Zharkova’s research suggests that we have entered a colder period, or essentially a little ice age, in the next 30 years, as the Sun’s activity weakens in the context of global warming.

In other words, there is not a question of Zharkova – or any other scientist who is justifiably sceptical about the omnipotent power of the CO2 molecule to warm the air – denying climate change. On the contrary, climate change and the cooling or warming of temperatures are very real, she asserts. For example, Zharkova points out that in Scotland, where she has lived for many years, the weather was much warmer 2,000 years ago. “The Romans were growing grapes and making wine in Scotland at that time, for example,” she says.

However, between 1645 and 1715, for example, the period known as the Maunder Minimum, when the Sun’s activity weakened particularly sharply, the weather in Europe became much colder. Britain’s major rivers – such as the Thames and Tyne – could be skated on, and the Dutch canals regularly froze over. Alpine glaciers widened and absorbed large areas of arable land, and the ice mass expanded strongly southwards from the Arctic. Temperatures across the planet were much lower – in Europe and North America, for example, up to 5° to 7°C colder in places. This is a huge change.

Zharkova estimates using some previous research that on average – which of course means potentially much larger changes from region to region – the Earth’s temperature will fall by one degree Celsius over the next 30 years, and not rise, as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns us.

She explains that such abrupt changes depend on the cycles of solar activity. When the Sun is less active, its decreasing magnetic field causes a decrease in irradiance. Less solar radiation means less heat. According to Zharkova, such a change occurs every 350-400 years (grand solar cycle or GSC), and she says we entered one of the Grand Solar Minima (GSM) separating GSCs in 2020. This GSM will continue until 2053 after which in cycle 28 the solar activity will return to normal.
 
Back
Top