Population control to conserve upon energy

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by bradguth, Jul 5, 2004.

  1. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    With sufficient clean energy, this planet could sustain a ten fold greater populous.

    Without said energy we're screwed, blued and perhaps even tattooed as for sustaining even 10% of what we've got, especially if it by way of American consumption standards.

    By way of eliminating 99.9% of humanity (scum of the Earth if going by the standards of most everything sucking up to the likes of NASA), in as much as that gets the worthy (0.1%) portion of the global population down to 6e6 (six million) folks that can essentially get along just fine and dandy with whatever few remaining energy reserves, in that 5 million of the six million surviving would have to become the servants and otherwise slaves to the one million of extremely powerful and if need be nasty folks.

    I'm assuming those few remaining souls are going to insist upon living like kings and queens, or perhaps just kings and kings or queens and queens since incest cloning should have been perfected.

    Thus the only excessively consuming ones would be of the chosen one million, as much as for their servants and slaves would not even be given personal access to whatever it takes for their servitude duties.

    Now then, I'm not exactly sure if the 5:1 ratio is adequate, as for what's existing right here and now is more like 100:1 requirement in 3rd world nations, and of at least 1000:1 in America, and I'd have to think that no matters what, a good number of those truly wealthy individuals still aren't going to be happy campers.

    0.1% of our US existing populous is perhaps 270,000. Whereas upon average, that's roughly an allotment of 5,200 incredibly wealthy and thereby horrifically energy consuming folks per state, whereas only 866 of those could become those of the Skull and Bones alpha dogs in actual power, as in control of absolutely everything about their state, along with their remaining 4,334 allotment of impudent and/or serialized servants that would utilize whatever talents and energy resources on behalf of making their lord and masters happy. Obviously that's still way too many folks for the likes of Washington DC and Road Island, and not nearly enough for the likes of California, Texas or Alaska, but at least there'd be sufficient reserves of clean energy and other resources to go around.

    Of course, if you're one of those GW Bush "so what's the difference" sorts of Skull and Bones energy consuming and otherwise fearless WMD snipe hunter, as then there's absolutely no shortage of energy, and global warming is just another figment of your dumfounded imagination. According to GW Bush; a little acid rain plus soot is perfectly good for the soul, even if we have to blast our intentions as to being the one and only energy Czar.

    Otherwise there's been my dumbfounded notions upon what the Lunar Space Elevator(LSE-CM/ISS) has to offer humanity, in the way of doable access to nearly unlimited amounts of clean energy, that's about as green as it gets. Of course, me may have to stop blowing everything and every other soul to hell if we're ever going to accomplish something mutually beneficial for humanity. http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm

    Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2004
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    Here's a somewhat over-population related topic on "global warming"

    hotsexyangelprincess;
    "I don't think global warming is as much a problem"

    Global warming isn't such a problem for those of us that can afford the necessary energy as to compensate, and otherwise live on sufficiently dry land that's not going to easily become flooded. Clearly the notions of whaever global warming isn't a problem if you're driving your fully air conditioned Lambergini to one of your hill top villas in France.

    the_greenvision;
    "Yo bradguth, you're copying and pasting your thread replies everywhere... Are you advertising for your webbie or something?"

    You bet I'm advertising, as I've got lots of perfectly good notions, and I've got better science to boot. At least my research is honestly reflecting what's what, without an ulterior motive nor hidden agenda that's intended to easily snooker dumbfounded folks.

    I'm cross-posting because global warming is actually a real and present danger to humanity. Unlike what "hotsexyangelprincess" thinks, and unlike those invisible WMD, you and I can see what has been going on, and of any honest scientist with an once of morality and thereby remorse can extrapolate the likely course of events that'll most likely cook our goose if we don't do many things before it's too late, which by the way it's already too late for tens of thousands of otherwise nice folks that last year had to parish specifically due to the recent global warming trends, with perhaps hundreds of thousand more having to bite the dust throughout this year, or having run for higher ground due to rising oceans.

    Unfortunately, that's no lie. The secondary release of methanes and natural freons is yet another dagger that's getting us where it hurts, plus the added 5% of solar influx is way more than what most folks can calculate.

    It'll require clean and efficient energy as to counteract the rising temperature, and clean energy we simply do NOT have even enough as to sustain the status quo. Nearly 75% of our energy is as dirty as it comes, and now it seems there's yet another senseless war over said energy, thus even more inefficient energy is being consumed in massive volumes at that.

    Of course one solution is to quickly use up all of the natural gas and oil reserves, as then we'd be forced into nuclear (preferably French), or perhaps He3 fusion and all of those clean sorts of natural resources that do NOT pollute.

    BTW; you do realize that R-1024/m insulation is doable, and of at least R-16 if not R-32 of air-to-air exchangers are easily obtained, and otherwise if the energy resource was sufficiently clean, then CO2-->CO/O2 is doable.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2004
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Boris2 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,106
    >>>>as I've got lots of perfectly good notions,

    we're waiting.

    ;-)
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    For starters, I believe the lunar recession is worth roughly 5 terawatts, and that's a continuous resource all by itself.

    The LSE-CM/ISS tether dipole is good for at least the same if not another 5 terawatts.

    The amounts of He3 or 3He that can be easily mined and exported to Earth should become worth as much as 100 terawatts/year, of course that's fusion energy of which I know absolutely nothing, but others keep stipulating and insisting that all such things are possible.

    Having a lunar space elevator should become worth saving Earth a few terawatts/year, from not having to launch such horrific amounts of tonnage as for shielding those future expeditions.

    Having the Guth Moon Dirt Express(GMDE) as a mission deployment depot for humanity reaching out to other planets should to be worth something.

    Having an outpost capable of housing the likes of Martha Stewart and ENRON among a few dozen other groups should entirely resolve the "not in my back yard" fiasco of having to construct and operate yet another prison.

    Accomplishing a horrific reduction in production of artificial CO2 for mother Earth is just a little side benefit, of which I can't but wonder how much that's worth?
     
  8. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,219
    I support population control. There are places in Third World countries having reproductive explosions that are threatening world sustainability.
     
  9. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    In that case, we'll be needing even more energy, as obviously the option of controlling said population, other than by exterminations, isn't working. And of what chance is there of getting Earth down to 600 million isn't a good option either, even though it's what it should be.

    More Energy, Part-2

    Once energy is acquired from whatever means, it needs to be effectively stored and subsequently distributed. I'm not exactly an ENRON wizard when it come to such energy expertise but, chances are that among us are such folks (perhaps X-ENRON) that do know a great deal, and perhaps wouldn't mind sharing.

    My thoughts are that in order to properly store such energy, so as to re-distribute such on demand, for that solution I've established those counter-rotating flywheels associated with the LSE-CM/ISS, as situated and regulated within the ME-L1 nullification zone.

    Since there's no size nor mass limitations, and of the overall counter-rotation efficiency of 99.9% per year, if not better, whereas such terawatts could be safely stored in almost any amount.

    Of course, besides all of the recession and/or tether dipole energy extraction, and subsequent storage within those counter-rotating flywheels, there's another few hundred gigawatts available from the likes of robust sterling thermal/energy converters, and perhaps at best there's another few hundred megawatts worth coming from those advanced PV cells receiving the unobstructed influx of 1400 w/m2 and at best deriving 700 w/m2, although the likes of such PV farms isn't all that inexpensive to establish or maintain over the years, thus over the long run you'd best cut the overall usable PV energy down to 350 w/m2, whereas the sterling conversions should eventually obtain a full kw/m2 at a fraction of the cost.

    In order to transmit said energy back towards Earth, as for that task I've conjured up having perhaps 5 of those 100 gigawatt output laser cannons as situated at the termination of the tether dipole element, that which is cruising along at 50,000 km from Earth, whereas those laser cannons are robotically focused upon various Earth receiving stations, or upon you butt if the consensus becomes that we no longer require your butt, much like the butt attached to Osama bin Laden, or that of GW Bush for his role in starting the whole thing in the first place.

    Though an overall 50% including delivery efficiency is possible, at worst possible laser energy conversion efficiency of delivered energy being 25%, this represents that in order to deliver those 500 gigawatts, that'll require the continuous input of two terawatts.

    Of course, at 6 billion customers and counting, that's merely delivering 83 watts per soul. In order for those 6e9 souls to live in style, for that goal we may need ten fold as much energy. The notion of our having to extract 20 terawatts from the lunar recession and tether dipole element might be expecting a little too much, such as enough as to reversing the lunar recession into a serious doom and gloom situation for the future of Earth.

    That ten fold amount of clean energy demand is most likely going to be obtained via nuclear and/or fusion. Although instead of utilizing our atmosphere and/or our oceans for the required cooling process of creating that much energy, thus globally exterminating diatoms by the trillions upon trillions, instead deep underground geothermal transfers need to be utilized, or perhaps the likes of fusion which isn't going to require such inefficient amounts of thermal transfer as with conventional nuclear options.

    If we could stop using oil, coal and natural gas altogether as of today, ten years from now there'd be a measurable improvement in the amount of energy being reflected instead of absorbed from the sun, such as reversing upon the added 5% influx that has been created by way of artificial pollution and secondary absorbson factors.

    The half sphere area of Earth being roughly 2.5e14 m2
    and 5% of the overall solar influx is roughly worth 70 w/m2

    2.5e14 m2 of 70 w/m2 = 175e14 watts, or 17,500 terawatts

    As you can see, the primary oven that's responsible for roasting our goose isn't of what humanity creates, it's what the pollution of humanity creates that permits the solar influx to being essentially absorbed at roughly a 5% greater influx transfer efficiency than before we screwed everything up. Of course, not all of the 5% added influx is IR energy, thus the above influx of 17,500 terawatts/m2 isn't actually as bad as it looks, although that is a continuous influx that's accumulative, however supposedly most of that's radiated out the nighttime side. As to how much of the added 5% influx that Earth retains is not something I have sufficient knowledge of, though even a 1% retention factor is still 175 terawatts.

    Changing the color of a car from white to black does the trick of roasting everything to a fairlywell every time. And, the only way we can alter the color of Earth per the solar perspective is for making Earth as white as possible, short of a full blown ice-age. That means having far less airborne particulates, and much less artificial gases such as CO2 floating about, which subsequently releases natural methanes and freons that are 20 fold worse off for the global environment than the CO2.

    Since our magnetosphere has been collapsing like none other, as such the Van Allen zone of death has equally been dropping like a rock, allowing even greater amounts of solar influx that isn't so much heat related as it's TBI dosage that our DNA can't so easily adapt to. Thus if anything we'll need lots more of those white and fluffy clouds to be surrounding us, as in reflecting solar influx as well as for increasing upon the average density of our atmosphere, of which clean CO2 is actually not such a bad sort of thing to be having, as long as it's clean CO2, like what's surrounding Venus, though perhaps we should stick with N2 until we figure out how to survive within a mostly CO2 environment.

    Without the added protection of the magnetosphere; instead of 100,000 feet worth of an atmospheric surround, we may eventually require 100 km worth, which is again much like what Venus has going for itself. I wonder how they're coping?
     
  10. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    More Energy; Part-3

    I myself consume roughly 1.5 kw/hr, about twice that much in the winter, and perhaps that's down to as little as 1 kw/hr in the summer.

    Tossing in the gasoline that I pollute and otherwise road-rage with, and you can perhaps double that energy consumption if I'm doing a fair amount of driving, though on average I'd have to give the small car/truck a consumption factor of 0.5 kw/hr if we're averaging things out on the per person basis.

    As compared to some of my customers, as they can't possibly manage to keep their multiple porch lights on for less than 2 kw/hr, much less for driving their 10 mpg ultra cars and mega trucks, then sustaining their fully air conditioned homes and offices, tossing in God knows however much as for taking those extended air trips and of utilizing lavish transportation and accommodations on the other end, not to mention their spendy meals and entertainment energy budgets, and I'm not even including the 24+ gallons per mile of what the 150-foot Feadship "Detroit Eagle" Penske Yacht consumes. Good grief, if we had to budget sufficient energy for those folks, I'm not sure that 50 kw/hr/soul would suffice, along with at least ten fold the water consumption at that.

    It's not all that uncommon for the large family yacht (not anything corporate) as to having a pair of 2,000 shp main engines and those 100 kw generators, and of how much energy do you suppose those large trains consume, and of those massive passenger ships and ultra fast ferry boats consume per passenger, and be honest as to accounting only for the actual passengers and not of the onboard and otherwise necessary staff and crew, plus accounting for all of the above dead-runs, whereas even a good metro bus system environmentally sucks, and thus energy wise stinks to high heaven.

    If we all wanted to live like kings, as such our total energy budget per soul might average 100 kw/hr, especially if you have to include all that's surrounding, such as in the way of supermarkets, vast shopping malls, the horrific sports and entertainment industries, factories, farming and other food production, and so forth.

    Thus conserving isn't the answer, and of obtaining nearly unlimited energy isn't the answer, because, everyone is going to keep insisting upon having as much as the next guy. As such, vast reductions in population is our only way out. Getting Earth down to 1% may be a wee bit drastic, but that would certainly do the trick.

    For that to happen, all we'll have to do is reelect GW Bush, and in no time at all there'll be far fewer souls consuming any piece of the remaining energy pie.

    BTW; the energy I'm consuming is mostly clean/renewable hydroelectric, whereas of whatever comes from petroleum based elements is generally of 33% efficiency (meaning that twice again as many energy units are actually consumed for every one utilized), whereas even by the larger utility resources having better than 50% efficiency at their power plant, those watts still need to be distributed and serviced by a vast infrastructure hosting a community of folks that consume way more than there fair share of megawatts in the process of continually having to construct their equipment and infrastructure, maintaining it and delivering those fossil fueled resources of generated electrons over an inefficient power grid, thus the overall end result is still close to being 33% efficient at the consumer.

    Supposedly we'll surpass the 25t/soul in the way of creating artificial CO2, then what?

    6e9 * 25e3 = 150e12 kg (150 gigatonnes) worth of artificial CO2 for mother Earth, each and every year after year. Sort of makes you feel all global-warming and fuzzy all over.
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2004
  11. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    Since people are worse off than pigs about controlling population, much less capable of de-populating Earth with any due respect as to eliminating those of us that consume way more than our fair share of energy, as such we need lots of energy (preferably clean energy), such as from what can be derived by way of our moon.

    If we could manage to create and/or import 10 kw/soul of essentially clean energy, as of today that's merely supporting a demand of 60 terawatts, of which Earth might be capable of sustaining half that amount in earthly renewable energy that's relatively clean, and otherwise deriving the other 30 terawatts as coming from the moon or from the dipole tether element that's nearly reaching Earth from the LSE-CM/ISS.

    Of course, I have lots of perfectly doable notions as to how that average consumption can be sustained at one kw/hr/soul, although that would represent a serious deviation in applied technology of what's already existing and easily available to implement. So, don't hold your breath over that ever transpiring because, humans are simply too poorly educated and otherwise outright greedy, and simply too preoccupied at being too damn nasty to one another as to ever accept the truth or consequences, much less show any remorse for what has transpired.

    Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2004
  12. invert_nexus Ze do caixao Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,686
    Wow, people really are taking to your ideas.

    I imagine you will be part of the .1% that is saved right. How big of you. The salt of the Earth.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Persol I am the great and mighty Zo. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,946
    Sorry to break it to you dumbass... but just by using a computer you've put yourself into the overconsumng 99.9% of humanity.

    Perhaps if you kill yourself for the good of humanity, others will follow.
     
  14. Facial Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,219
    Killing is not the answer. We have to model upon China's Family Planning laws. Give licenses for birth, and limit the number of children/family to 1.
     
  15. invert_nexus Ze do caixao Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,686
    But, isn't abortion illegal in China? So if someone should get pregnant with a second child, they can't abort the fetus but rather wait 'til it's born and then commit infanticide? Might be just cold war rhetoric. I don't know.
     
  16. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    At least China is developing upon sufficient energy reserves, having the educated populous to make things happen, such as silica and basalt composites that'll improve upon structural attributes as well as safety and energy efficiency once those are being integrated throughout.

    No matters what population does or doesn't accomplish in getting things down to any dull roar, and unless we bring back those Cathar exterminating Popes in force (such as by re-electing the likes of GW Bush), we'll soon need lots of clean and hopefully renewable energy, as unlike the intellectually incest cloned souls of "Persol" that's most likely consuming at least at the 100+kw/hr level, especially if you'd consider upon the collateral damage and carnage associated with his cloak and dagger mentality, in which case he'd be exceeding a MW/hr. Whereas myself I've managed upon roughly 1% of that base amount, with no ulterior motives, hidden agendas nor collateral impact in site, although I'd certainly like more energy.

    And, at least I've got notions with science backing up the idea of R-1024 materials and of utilizing the essentially free tether dipole extracted energy of the LSE-CM/ISS, plus whatever lunar extracted He3 or 3He worth of fusion fuel.

    And as usual there's lo and behold, lots more to share within my UPDATE page.
    Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2004
  17. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    This is only a wee bit off the energy/population topic, although it clearly demonstrates the extent of what the "mainstream status quo" of "http://scifourms.com" is willing to go through in order to keep folks snookered, as well as tight lids on those badly plugged and otherwise overflowing intellectual space toilets. This following short excerpt has been added into my (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=38195) "NASA uses LLPOF anti-flak to protect Apollo butts" external follow-up page; http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-scifourms.htm

    As per this official NASA report: http://conxproject.gsfc.nasa.gov/radiation/docs/con_x_dose1.pdf
    @705 km (thus situated well below the initial Van Allen zone)

    (Solar minimum) Not even including any Electron or Bremsstrahlung rads, nor other influx, just per the available proton rads(si);
    "I=98 deg, H=705/705 km (solar maximum)" @0.01 g/cm2 = 2.21e4 rads/y = 60.7 rads/day

    Total rads(si) per "I=98 deg, H=705/705 km (solar maximum)" is 2.59e5/y = 711 rads(si)/day

    External to the Van Allen buffer zone (70,000+km) of what a solar minimum has to offer is at the very least 5.5 fold greater amounts of solar and cosmic minimum proton energy, though since those Apollo missions were 24/7 illuminated by their no longer orbiting Earth at solar minimum, as such a ten fold value can be assumed as conservative.

    Though adding insult to injury are of those Bremsstrahlung rad emissions as per secondary reaction with the lunar surface itself, whereas instead of your being shielded behind such highly reactive material, instead you're being TBI from nearly every direction, and from a considerable 1e6 m2 worth of a surrounding resource of such substances comprised mostly of dark basalts plus meteorites and shards sharing off mostly those IR photons, but also creating a hard X-Ray dosage of perhaps 32 mr/m2/hr, having no other mass (such as atmosphere) between yourself and the source of the surrounding Bremsstrahlung rads. Protected by a 0.5 g/cm2 moon suit designed primarily as a pressurized and only a partial thermal environment solution at best, of which at best is allowing 10% of the available TBI dosage if the Bremsstrahlung factor of the primary influx and suit density itself is honestly taken into account.

    Thus the fully illuminated moon surface is NO walk in the park, not even on the nicest of solar days. With nearly a third of the solar energy influx being reflected off the surface, this alone makes the thermal environment worth nearly 2 kw/m2 upon them moon-suits, plus the 1000 btu/hr being contributed by the astronaut within represents a great deal of cooling requirement which has not been agreed upon by other than that NASA/Apollo chicken bloated fox, and them Apollo cows are still nowhere in sight.

    This is besides their Kodak moment, of actually every stinking photo that is not the least bit color shifted nor skewed by the increase in near-UV(375~425 nm), nor of the UV/a spectrum of which the yellow dye portion of the Kodak film was most sensitive to that older film, that otherwise would have required an extensive usage of deep orange and/or amber filters to have roughly compensated, whereas a polarising filter alone would only have recorded the lunar surface as somewhat darker than otherwise recorded, without ever cutting the amounts of skewed photons that should have been the case since there's no atmosphere as to filter such rays. Whereas their Apollo photos do otherwise indicate nearly an exact match to the artificial xenon illumination. Thus the mistake of not utilizing the proper xenon/mercury lamps for illumination, and/or a color shift filter make it rather easy to establish that none of their Kodak recorded images ever transpired as exposed to the lunar environment.

    The Kodak Moment: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-photo-entro.htm

    This is not to say that Kodak film wouldn't have managed, just not unscaved, and not without recording a healthy amount of the primary influx of near-UV and of the UV/a, plus secondary emissions of near-UV photons created by the horrific influx of the unfiltered UV/a reacting as it should with all of that supposed clumping moon dirt, plus recording within frame as well as between frames and of the leader/trailer portions of the film as for registering the foreground and background radiation associated with hard X-Rays.

    Of course, according to the incest cesspool of pro-NASA/Apollo freaks, absolutely non of this is evidence of our being snookered, nor have I presented any evidence of motive or the means by which such a ruse was ever pulled off. Apparently this is another one of those "so what's the difference" instances when we're supposed to accept that those WMD actually existed, and thereby justify upon the tens of thousands of perfectly innocent folks that paid the ultimate price, not to mention those which merely survived being tortured, or the nearly thousand of our own kind plus friendly fire deaths, plus those thousands of 9/11 folks that were not privileged to what our GW Bush warlordship was plotting against humanity.

    Therefore, apparently everything regarding the lunar space elevator (LSE-CM/ISS) is bogus.

    And apparently absolutely everything regarding whatever Venus has to offer is just as bogus.

    Thus obviously my research into our associations with the Sirius star system is equally bogus.

    Furthermore, my environment concerns and notions of clean energy solutions are just as bogus.

    Obviously anything associated with my photon research is to be automatically and summarily bashed to death as well.

    Absolutely anything associated with interplanetary laser communications is being touted as totally bogus.

    Then for certain, anything regarding applied technologies as for robotics and of other life surviving Venus is entirely out of the question.

    Apparently the physics of whatever affects life and science upon Earth not only doesn't apply to anything lunar, it simply doesn't function at all upon Venus, though works just fine and dandy for the likes of Mars or even Saturn. Most importantly is, that their mainstream status quo seems to know for another bloody fact that intelligent other life of any sort doesn't exist nor coexist other than upon Earth, and if need be upon a flat as well as a sadistic and intellectually bigoted Earth at that. Thus regardless of whatever applied physics, other life (especially more physiologically evolved and/or intelligent than) outside of Earth is simply a another "flat Earth society" absolute no-no.

    And folks are being informed as to wonder why I'm not being Mr. nice guy to these absolute arrogant bastards, as in sucking up to these intellectually incest cloned borgs (if not biologically speaking), and of joining and/or worshiping their pagan "Skull and Bones" cultism of their "mainstream status quo" or bust. Especially odd that they don't seem to like me since I've posted dozens of perfectly good and viable cold-war motives, and shown close associations of our NASA/Apollo past and present with the likes of NSA/DoD agendas, along with sufficiently proving the means and of their having the talents as to pulling off exactly what they did. And, I've way more than proven that a government lie consistently begets another lie, and so on until them cows come home. Yet these folks (excuse me; bastards) are accusing myself of being the "bad guy" that doesn't provide answers, almost as though I'm beinf treated this way simply because I haven't bagged by fair share of innocent folks, nor have I roasted another batch of astronauts on behalf of accomplishing almost nothing of worth for humanity, nor have I taken out the wrong fully loaded 747, but I might as well be hiding Osama bin Laden, plus a stash of WMD as for all the flak I'm receiving.

    Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2004
  18. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    Not that this solution of hydrogen energy is anything new. However, since most folks are woefully under educated as to what's what, much less upon what's possible, I thought there was another dim but improving illumination as coming from the other end of our doom and gloomy tunnel of vanishing energy reserves.

    Instead of being LSE-CM/ISS moon based alternatives (as that's a ways off), this one is a whole lot more Earthly based and, if you'd care to do a "search for" whatever by way of including the terms of hydrogen, h2, energy and natural, possibly even h2o2 should be included since it's so much easier to create, store and transport about, as such you'll get way more than what's necessary for the likes of obtaining a good deal of relatively clean energy from hydrogen. There's even something of what 2h2o2 has to offer that's worth a look-see.

    Hydrogen can be produced naturally, or taken as a byproduct, and certainly as created from most any source of surplus energy.

    A typical forced process of obtaining h2 offers roughly a 1000:1 volume of h2 at 1-Bar, as extracted from an equal volume of H2O(water). Various processes require differing amounts of energy input and/or reactions as taken from other materials that would typically have been previously produced from energy in the first place.

    Thus the task of intentionally consuming energy as to produce h2, store and transport the likes of this newly created h2 is a no-win situation (a net loss), unless the bulk of process energy was either truly of a surplus nature, and/or being created by way of natural means in which that process energy could not have otherwise been directly utilized as is.

    So, the h2 solution isn't actually a solution, unless you've got all the facts straight, excluding anything the likes of ENRON or via skewed bookkeeping has to offer, as the likes of whatever Arthur Andersen types are telling you is absolutely phony baloney because, almost everything those bastards have to say is either an outright lie, or some portion of an ongoing ulterior plot to rule the global energy reserves at all cost, and I'm not inferring that any of that "at all cost" is coming out of their dirty pockets.

    This following is just one of hundreds of perfectly good topics, though not exactly telling us the truth and nothing but the truth, as that would most likely dry up their contributors (including those taxpayer funded grants) right on the spot. And, if I should compile other hydrogen production/consumption related links, as such I just as soon edit this portion of this topic as to reflect such.

    The Hydrogen-Powered Future
    http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/010451.html

    Natural hydrogen factory analyzed
    http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4184857/

    Hydrogen Production (infomercial site)
    http://www.chevrontexaco.com/technologyventures/commercialize_tech/hydrogen_production.asp
     
  19. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    The population of Earth needs to replace likes of ENRON with superior Dogon expertise.

    If we were actually half as smart as certain folks claim, we'd elect some neutral energy czar control group, like perhaps the nice Dogon tribe, as to being encharge of all the global energy reserves. Since these controllers (energy brokers) don't actually produce energy, nor physically distribute or even contribute squat towards creating and maintaining the power grid infrastructure (much like ENRON), as such here's what I'm thinking.

    Firstly, there's only a relative few Dogon, and as such no matters how much they manage to learn from the GW Bush school of ENRON/Andersen (high standards and accountability) as to take/steal from the till, the cost to the world population will be next to nothing. Besides, as of today if the each took a hundred bucks a month from the till, they'd be incredibly rich by their standards.

    Secondly, without even reasonable population control over their expanding in ranks, the expected growth of Dogon tribe members that'll be on-the-take should not exceed the general population growth of the world, thus the ongoing cost to humanity (per soul) will remain a relative constant, somewhat like the speed of light being somewhat of a constant (unless you add or subtract something that's in the path of them photons, as then the speed of light is almost anything you want it to be).

    Thirdly, with the advent of smart bombs that seem to have established a fetish at taking out our own kind, supposed allies, friends and neighbors, as opposed to the supposed enemy that's hording all of those WMD, we could at any time exercise our past wisdom by way of the "oops factor" of exterminating the Dogon, even if need be in the same manner as the Pope took out those nasty Cathars that were less than 1% of whom paid the ultimate price, and by way of Gods will must have seemed perfectly wholsome. Thus, with the mere push of the neutron button, in a flash we'd be right back to our usual fighting with one another over the profits and global domination glory of commanding over the dwindling and ever spendier energy reserves.

    Or we could always head for the moon, whereas the moon and of what's in between represents something that's all together quite different, whereas there's seemingly endless loads of potential energy benefits, plus countless Earth sciences (including terrific astronomy benefits if we only had those SAR aperture image receiving modules deployed) and of what the moon itself has to offer the near future of humanity: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm

    Of course, we'd still be wise to enlist the talents and wisdom of those Dogon members, as to rule over the proper and moral usage of those multiple 100 GW laser cannons (intended for delivering energy to Earth), and perhaps God save the Queen if they(Dogon) should ever get a little pissed at someone.

    And there's certainly lots more that's available on the UPDATE page.
    Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm
     
  20. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    An easy solution would be to less energy. Why does the US need much more energy then Europe?

    Because they waste much more energy.

    We could start by wasting less energy. It is probably more efficient than trying to decimate the population.
     
  21. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    God forbid, the notion of actually conserving energy, what a rash concept. Not that I don't agree, that at most a kilowatt/hr per soul should more than do the trick. Although, a good many folks (the bulk of humanity) are not consuming 1% of even that much in the way of artificially produced energy, and I seem to know of individuals that must be consuming 100 kw/hr upon average. So, obviously you're right, but there's this rather horrific differential between the haves and the havenots.

    Thus population reductions are in order, unless you've got energy, and lots of it.

    As I've said before; all we need is 60 continuous terawatts, and we're home free. That is if we can manage to curtail those folks that are currently consuming at the 100 kw/hr level.
     
  22. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    Just for a little further argument sake, let us establish that the average anual income and/or share of benefits per man, woman and chield upon this Earth was worth $1000/year.

    Obviously that's having to include the likes of Arthur Andersen, ENRON, WorldCom, MicroSoft and Martha Stewarts, along with the remainer of heathens (scum of the Earth), such as perhaps yourself and me.

    Including the initial global impact of 9/11 which was essentially unavoidable due to the ulterior motives and premeditated actions being undertaken by the likes of our commander and chief village idiot warlord moron (GW Bush), in which that initial impact alone was worth far more than a trillion, and I believe that's still not giving squat of worth to the thousands of innocent dead folk. Plus, if we were to just consider upon the global aftermath impact as being an annual inflationary and thereby real cost impact of 10%, as obviously 10% of $1000 and we're into forking out $600 billions/year as for sustaining the ongoing impact.

    Now then; what if instead of the 9/11 investment, at my conservative global impact estimate of $2e12 for the first year, and of the 0.6e9 X 10 years worth which computes out to $6e9 plus the original $2e12, for a grand total of at least 2.6e12 dollars (adding in something other for inflation upon that and we're at $3e12), that which has essentially been flushed down the proverable space toilet, as what if merely 10% of that were invested directly into our Earthly humanity, which could have easily prevented the likes of 9/11 in the first place, and of another 10% having been invested into what's most obtainable about astronomy and space explorations?

    Besides the rather better off world as a whole, having tens of thousands of perfectly innocent folks still alive and kicking, and of our NOT having to build and maintain such horrifically spendy walls of bigotry, arrogance and ignorance, and I'm not suggesting those walls as for keeping the likes of others out, but as for keeping our cold-war perverted mentality of global/energy domination in-tact and thriving in spite of all the collateral damage and subsequent carnage. As such, we'd likely have that LSE-CM/ISS either well underway or operational, and of the tether dipole element hosting the termination pod of those multiple 100 GW laser cannons delivering perhaps a combined terawatt of clean energy to Earth, plus having those robotic deployed SAR apertures upon the lunar surface of accommodating extremely detailed images pouring-in as we speak (as good as 10 mm of Venus or Mars, and perhaps the likes of 100 mm of Jupiter and Saturn are within what that sort of extended VLA/SAR radar imaging has to offer, not to mention the rather invaluable aspects of effectively tracking every possible chunk of debris that's of a kg or more, and of providing us with the nearly ultimate interplanetary/interstellar communications transponder site.

    In addition to delivering that sort of positive contribution to humanity, and towards improved Earth sciences, plus the notion of the LSE-CM/ISS offering such continuous and clean energy, we'd obviously have that GMDE(Guth Moon Dirt Express) CM/ISS(Counter Mass w/1e6 m3 of ISS within) as our depot of making future space travel expeditions into a perfectly safe and sane reality. And, God forbid if some Osama bin Laden like fool should try to make trouble in the future, as all it would take is a slight misalignment of one of those 100 GW laser cannons and the problem is resolved, as in burnt to a crisp.

    Of course, with the current level(s) of energy hoarding mentality ongoing, and of the gap between the haves and havenots increasing, the chances of another spendy tit-for-tat as orchestrated by some other do-gooder is only around the corner, although this time it could become a little more like the nearly nuclear fiasco of what our perpetrated cold-war against the USSR nearly created on more than one occasion, or like our more recent China button pushing that had either side at the brink of nuclear exchange. In which case the 10% impact of the world having to sustain yet another added overhead is there to behold, as all that some moron needs to do is to keep pushing those "DO NOT PUSH" buttons.

    Of course, not all is to be lost because, once all the smoke and radiation settles, and perhaps billions of folks have given up upon their right as to survive, along with the likely extinctions of perhaps another 10% of all other forms of life on Earth, at least there'll be more of said energy to go around. As within the short run, as in this perverted control of population by way of collateral exterminations is the real and present solution that has become more likely than not (certainly technically feasible). Or on the other hand, perhaps we could stop lying our butts off, and subsequently get down to the business of fixing things before we've utilized every last m3 and kg worth of accessible/affordable energy, not to mention averting our having created a global warming greenhouse where only the wealthiest of folks will have the means by which to survive.

    Not that my research is in any way concise or easily decrypted from my usually dyslexic analogies and reverse-engineering methods, but if you can manage to read past the necessary favor-returning and return flak of what I've been saying for nearly four years, perhaps you'll realize why I've portrayed modern humanity as being so thoroughly snookered, especially for the last four decades and counting, and as for the upper 0.1% of humanity living like kings and queens at the expense and if need be demise of the lower 99.9% (apparent scum of the Earth) such as yourself and especially folks like me that can't seem to stay within their mainstream box.

    Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm
     
  23. bradguth Banned Banned

    Messages:
    226
    We seem to have yet another brewing moral cesspool of intellectual squat, along with folks suggesting by way of their intellectual flatulence that global warming isn't real. Of course, these are the very same folks insisting that those WMD were real, so whom do we dare believe?

    Is global Warming a huge problem?
    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34927

    Take notice of how there's seldom an offering of how to fix anything, just continually argue about it and/or study it to death do us part.
     

Share This Page