| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Dr. Jai Maharaj" |
| Date: |
03 Aug 2005 03:50:01 AM |
| Object: |
FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
Fuel Cell Motorbike to Hit U.S. Streets
By John Roach
National Geographic News
Tuesday, August 2, 2005
A sleek, almost silent, nonpolluting fuel cell-powered
motorcycle is set to begin gliding down U.S. streets by
the end of 2006.
The bike is dubbed the ENV (pronounced "envy"), short for
Emissions Neutral Vehicle. The London-based company
Intelligent Energy decided to develop the bike itself
after years of cool reception to its fuel cell technology
from manufacturers.
"We wanted to show how good the technology is right now
and basically build what we thought would be a technical
example, albeit an example that's wonderful and
stimulates interest," said Andy Eggleston, ENV project
director.
Since its unveiling earlier this year, the ENV has
generated enormous interest - proof that the public is
ready to embrace fuel cell technology, Eggleston said.
The motorcycle has a top speed of 50 miles an hour (80
kilometers an hour) and can run for 100 miles (160
kilometers) or up to four hours on a tank of compressed
hydrogen. A fill-up costs about four dollars (U.S.).
ENV makes no more noise than a home computer and emits
only heat and water
The ENV (or "envy") motorcycle is powered by a hydrogen
fuel cell that can run almost silently at a top speed of
50 miles an hour. Fuel-cell-powered vehicles, which emit
only heat and water vapor, are gaining public interest as
an environmentally-friendly travel option.
Photograph courtesy Intelligent Energy:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/images/050802_fuelcellmotorcycle.jpg
More at:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0802_050802_fuelcellcycle.html
- - - - - - -
Posted on 8/03/2005 1:44:08 AM PDT by kingattax
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
End of forwarded message
Jai Maharaj
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian bible:
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not so send
peace, but a sword.
"For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in
law.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
- Matthew 10:34-36.
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
.
|
|
| User: "Dan Bloomquist" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
09 Aug 2005 01:55:56 PM |
|
|
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) then something must
be done. And since none of those industries are leaders, (they all
follow the market,) it will take strong political leadership to make
anything happen, (ala' Kennedy and the Moon.)
Go back and read the thread: 'The Bush energy plan gives 90 percent of
its tax breaks to big oil and gas'
I did some research. Another poster offered a link to a Matt Simmons
discussion.
As far as natural gas goes, tens years is quite some time at the rate
the ability to produce is coming undone. The decline rates of wells is
short of spooky.
No matter what happens, there will be a large bill for infrastructure
changes. Making gasoline engines more efficient has probably the
least impact, and that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. One way or
the other, major changes are in order.
Mitigation requires a good deal of lead time to avert shortages. In a
world where economies are required to grow, this doesn't bode well. I
will offer this again:
http://www.oilcrisis.com/us/NETL/OilPeaking.pdf
Or we could just leave it to the next generation and let them deal
with it.
The problem appears to be here with us now. The next generation will be
left with a very big mess if we don't get with it.
Best, Dan.
--
Add one for email
.
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
09 Aug 2005 02:30:31 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:55:56 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) then something must
be done. And since none of those industries are leaders, (they all
follow the market,) it will take strong political leadership to make
anything happen, (ala' Kennedy and the Moon.)
Go back and read the thread: 'The Bush energy plan gives 90 percent of
its tax breaks to big oil and gas'
I did some research. Another poster offered a link to a Matt Simmons
discussion.
Good for you. I work in the industry. I get inundated with the data
daily.
As far as natural gas goes, tens years is quite some time at the rate
the ability to produce is coming undone. The decline rates of wells is
short of spooky.
ANWR will take more time to develop than the oil coming from it will
last.
No matter what happens, there will be a large bill for infrastructure
changes. Making gasoline engines more efficient has probably the
least impact, and that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. One way or
the other, major changes are in order.
Mitigation requires a good deal of lead time to avert shortages. In a
world where economies are required to grow, this doesn't bode well. I
will offer this again:
http://www.oilcrisis.com/us/NETL/OilPeaking.pdf
Heisenberg again. Remember the Population Bomb? It isn't the
catastrophe that was predicted _because_ it was predicted. Just
looking at a problem tends to change the problem. Calling attention to
Peak Oil may avert it. But I agree - it is a crisis that needs
attention.
Or we could just leave it to the next generation and let them deal
with it.
The problem appears to be here with us now. The next generation will be
left with a very big mess if we don't get with it.
I was being facetious.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Bloomquist" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
09 Aug 2005 04:26:11 PM |
|
|
Turby wrote:
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:55:56 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) then something must
be done. And since none of those industries are leaders, (they all
follow the market,) it will take strong political leadership to make
anything happen, (ala' Kennedy and the Moon.)
Go back and read the thread: 'The Bush energy plan gives 90 percent of
its tax breaks to big oil and gas'
I did some research. Another poster offered a link to a Matt Simmons
discussion.
Good for you. I work in the industry. I get inundated with the data
daily.
So, what do you think of Saudi Arabia's proven reserves. Is it all they
say it is? If reserves have jumped 200 bbl since Aramco took over, why
aren't they producing from these 'new' reserves?
As far as natural gas goes, tens years is quite some time at the rate
the ability to produce is coming undone. The decline rates of wells is
short of spooky.
ANWR will take more time to develop than the oil coming from it will
last.
I did a google: ANWR 'billion barrels
There are numbers from 2 to 16 bbl in the result. But 10 bbl is a drop
in the bucket and one million barrels a day doesn't make much of an impact.
There is hope out there that opening the Rockies will forestall the
decline. But I read mixed stuff on just how much new production can be
brought on line.
No matter what happens, there will be a large bill for infrastructure
changes. Making gasoline engines more efficient has probably the
least impact, and that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. One way or
the other, major changes are in order.
Mitigation requires a good deal of lead time to avert shortages. In a
world where economies are required to grow, this doesn't bode well. I
will offer this again:
http://www.oilcrisis.com/us/NETL/OilPeaking.pdf
Heisenberg again. Remember the Population Bomb? It isn't the
catastrophe that was predicted _because_ it was predicted. Just
looking at a problem tends to change the problem. Calling attention to
Peak Oil may avert it. But I agree - it is a crisis that needs
attention.
There are a couple of guys in Congress that bring it up. But the general
awareness is very slight. Most folks have no concept of what the numbers
look like.
The above pdf isn't about predicating peak oil. It is about managing
peak oil. Oil peaking was a given.
Or we could just leave it to the next generation and let them deal
with it.
The problem appears to be here with us now. The next generation will be
left with a very big mess if we don't get with it.
I was being facetious.
Ok. But it has a ring of truth for someone as old as I am. The way it is
going, I think my son will see dramatic changes in his lifetime.
--
Add one for email
.
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
10 Aug 2005 02:06:58 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 21:26:11 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:55:56 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) ...
So, what do you think of Saudi Arabia's proven reserves. Is it all they
say it is? If reserves have jumped 200 bbl since Aramco took over, why
aren't they producing from these 'new' reserves?
My comment above, "even if it isn't," was partly about the oil we get
from strategically questionable sources, ie, Saudi Arabia and other
strange political bedfellows. I find it amazing that we aren't trying
our hardest to disentangle ourselves from the Middle East. If we put
some effort into increased gas mileage and decrease our dependance on
Arab oil, we could lower our profile (and seem less an adversary,)
while at the same time, increase our leverage.
I don't know how much they have, but it's a lot. I don't care - I wish
we were in the position of letting them beg to sell it to us.
Or we could just leave it to the next generation and let them deal
with it.
The problem appears to be here with us now. The next generation will be
left with a very big mess if we don't get with it.
I was being facetious.
Ok. But it has a ring of truth for someone as old as I am. The way it is
going, I think my son will see dramatic changes in his lifetime.
I'm 57 and have no offspring, but I still can't see walking away from
the problem.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Moore" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 12:38:07 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 07:06:58 GMT, Turby <turbosurfer@beach.comber>
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 21:26:11 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:55:56 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) ...
So, what do you think of Saudi Arabia's proven reserves. Is it all they
say it is? If reserves have jumped 200 bbl since Aramco took over, why
aren't they producing from these 'new' reserves?
My comment above, "even if it isn't," was partly about the oil we get
from strategically questionable sources, ie, Saudi Arabia and other
strange political bedfellows. I find it amazing that we aren't trying
our hardest to disentangle ourselves from the Middle East. If we put
some effort into increased gas mileage and decrease our dependance on
Arab oil, we could lower our profile (and seem less an adversary,)
while at the same time, increase our leverage.
I don't know how much they have, but it's a lot. I don't care - I wish
we were in the position of letting them beg to sell it to us.
Actually, we get relatively little oil from the Middle East. We get it
from the Americas and West Africa. The problem is that there is a
single world market in petroleum, so we're bidding against everyone
else anyway.
Twenty years ago, our domestic oil production was so high that, if we
had cut back to the per-capita consumption of 1955, we could have
become the largest petroleum exporter. Since then, our population has
increased, and supplies have dwindled, so I doubt that that's true any
more, but I had to laugh at the recent energy bill. It did nothing to
reduce consumption, nor to increase production.
Or we could just leave it to the next generation and let them deal
with it.
The problem appears to be here with us now. The next generation will be
left with a very big mess if we don't get with it.
I was being facetious.
Ok. But it has a ring of truth for someone as old as I am. The way it is
going, I think my son will see dramatic changes in his lifetime.
I'm 57 and have no offspring, but I still can't see walking away from
the problem.
Nobody's walking away from it. Mostly they seem to be driving SUVs.
Al Moore
DoD 734
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Kleinschmidt" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 02:20:18 PM |
|
|
Alan Moore wrote:
but I had to laugh at the recent energy bill. It did nothing to
reduce consumption, nor to increase production.
But on the bright side, it makes it much easier to export weapons
grade uranium, clearing away all the red tape and roadblocks raised
by those national security whackos.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Moore" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 07:30:44 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 12:20:18 -0700, "Rob Kleinschmidt"
<Rkleinsch1216128@aol.com> wrote:
Alan Moore wrote:
but I had to laugh at the recent energy bill. It did nothing to
reduce consumption, nor to increase production.
But on the bright side, it makes it much easier to export weapons
grade uranium, clearing away all the red tape and roadblocks raised
by those national security whackos.
Yeah. I presume that's why Bush wants to shut down Iranian uranium
enrichment. So they have to buy it from us, Like Saddam did his WMD...
Al Moore
DoD 734
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 02:03:26 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:38:07 -0700, Alan Moore
<alan.s.moore@comcast.net> wrote:
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 07:06:58 GMT, Turby <turbosurfer@beach.comber>
wrote:
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 21:26:11 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:55:56 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) ...
So, what do you think of Saudi Arabia's proven reserves. Is it all they
say it is? If reserves have jumped 200 bbl since Aramco took over, why
aren't they producing from these 'new' reserves?
My comment above, "even if it isn't," was partly about the oil we get
from strategically questionable sources, ie, Saudi Arabia and other
strange political bedfellows. I find it amazing that we aren't trying
our hardest to disentangle ourselves from the Middle East. If we put
some effort into increased gas mileage and decrease our dependance on
Arab oil, we could lower our profile (and seem less an adversary,)
while at the same time, increase our leverage.
I don't know how much they have, but it's a lot. I don't care - I wish
we were in the position of letting them beg to sell it to us.
Actually, we get relatively little oil from the Middle East. We get it
from the Americas and West Africa. The problem is that there is a
single world market in petroleum, so we're bidding against everyone
else anyway.
Twenty years ago, our domestic oil production was so high that, if we
had cut back to the per-capita consumption of 1955, we could have
become the largest petroleum exporter. Since then, our population has
increased, and supplies have dwindled, so I doubt that that's true any
more,
Like the California electric ripoff of a few years back, prices and
supply will stay stable until it hits a threshold, then all hell
breaks loose. As the biggest consumer, small changes in our diet could
have a large impact on the market.
but I had to laugh at the recent energy bill. It did nothing to
reduce consumption, nor to increase production.
But hey, it'll do what it intended to do - increase oilco profits.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Moore" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 07:32:20 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:03:26 GMT, Turby <turbosurfer@beach.comber>
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:38:07 -0700, Alan Moore
<alan.s.moore@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>
but I had to laugh at the recent energy bill. It did nothing to
reduce consumption, nor to increase production.
But hey, it'll do what it intended to do - increase oilco profits.
Yep. Even if production and prices go nowhere, they got a nice tax
break, so profits should be up in any case. Not that they weren't
already.
Al Moore
DoD 734
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nemo" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 08:17:05 PM |
|
|
"Alan Moore" <alan.s.moore@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1ernf15j3u904jnaric8fs2ee43tvpe382@4ax.com...
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:03:26 GMT, Turby <turbosurfer@beach.comber>
wrote:
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:38:07 -0700, Alan Moore
<alan.s.moore@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>
but I had to laugh at the recent energy bill. It did nothing to
reduce consumption, nor to increase production.
But hey, it'll do what it intended to do - increase oilco profits.
Yep. Even if production and prices go nowhere, they got a nice tax
break, so profits should be up in any case. Not that they weren't
already.
Al Moore
DoD 734
The Bush family was bought and paid for by the oil companies ages ago. What
the hell do you expect him to do?
These parasites marry themselves to the philosophy of family and religion,
so they can rape and pillage once in office. They know that the average
voting yo-yo in America is afraid to vote against a God candidate. They know
how to pull middle Americas strings just right, while they are screwing
everyone out of their pensions and now social security.
If the Dems (fems?) would get their act together and abandon the left wing
side of politics, they could make some changes for the better, but to do so,
they are going to have to out God/guilt the right.
I'm old enough to remember when the Dems were more conservative than the
then new jet-setting Republicans. In those days, Republicans considered
themselves above religion and other plebian folklore. Just mention taking
away a fifties Dem's guns and get ready for a tirade you wouldn't soon
forget.
Ed Cregger
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny Bravo" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
11 Aug 2005 07:15:29 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 22:38:07 -0700, Alan Moore
<alan.s.moore@comcast.net> wrote:
Twenty years ago, our domestic oil production was so high that, if we
had cut back to the per-capita consumption of 1955, we could have
become the largest petroleum exporter.
According to the EIA, in 1985 the US produced 9 million barrels per
day. In 1955 the US used, roughly, 1 million barrels per day for
every 22 million people in the country. 1985 population was
approximately 238 million, which would have required 10.8 million
barrels of oil per day at 1955 levels of consumption. The highest
level ever achieved by US domestic production was 9.637 million
barrels per day in 1970 and it's been declining at roughly 2.3% per
year ever since.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Kleinschmidt" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
09 Aug 2005 03:22:46 PM |
|
|
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) then something must
be done. And since none of those industries are leaders, (they all
follow the market,) it will take strong political leadership to make
anything happen, (ala' Kennedy and the Moon.)
No matter what happens, there will be a large bill for infrastructure
changes. Making gasoline engines more efficient has probably the
least impact, and that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. One way or
the other, major changes are in order.
The quickest change I can think of would be the addition of more
public transportation, particularly busses and smaller vans.
I still recall the Mission Street Jitney in S.F. A fleet of private
operators running older limos and vans, picking up and dropping
off multiple passengers. Similar stuff in Mexico city. Twice as
fast as a larger bus, not a whole lot more expensive and privately
owned and operated.
Apart from the politics, I wouldn't see a scheme like that as all that
difficult. Not the only response or a complete solution, but not all
that hard. We've done "oil crisis" once or twice already, then promptly
gone back to business as usual.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
09 Aug 2005 03:47:01 PM |
|
|
On 9 Aug 2005 13:22:46 -0700, "Rob Kleinschmidt"
<Rkleinsch1216128@aol.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
10 years isn't much in the energy industry. It moves only slightly
faster than a glacier. When you look at what has to change - consumer
products, end point delivery systems, supply lines, all the
subordinate industries, political willpower - it's mindboggling. But
if Peak Oil is for real, (hell, even if it isn't,) then something must
be done. And since none of those industries are leaders, (they all
follow the market,) it will take strong political leadership to make
anything happen, (ala' Kennedy and the Moon.)
No matter what happens, there will be a large bill for infrastructure
changes. Making gasoline engines more efficient has probably the
least impact, and that doesn't seem to be going anywhere. One way or
the other, major changes are in order.
The quickest change I can think of would be the addition of more
public transportation, particularly busses and smaller vans.
I still recall the Mission Street Jitney in S.F. A fleet of private
operators running older limos and vans, picking up and dropping
off multiple passengers. Similar stuff in Mexico city. Twice as
fast as a larger bus, not a whole lot more expensive and privately
owned and operated.
Apart from the politics, I wouldn't see a scheme like that as all that
difficult. Not the only response or a complete solution, but not all
that hard. We've done "oil crisis" once or twice already, then promptly
gone back to business as usual.
It depends on the area. CalTrans did a study 20 or 30 years ago. They
looked at the LA area and tried to come up with a mass transit plan
that worked. They decided it couldn't be done. The problem is
decentralization. If people live in one place and work in another
place, and shop in another place, it's fine, but in LA, people live
everywhere, shop everywhere, and work everywhere. Too many pickup and
dropoff points without consistent routes for busses.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Kleinschmidt" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
09 Aug 2005 05:10:18 PM |
|
|
Turby wrote:
It depends on the area. CalTrans did a study 20 or 30 years ago. They
looked at the LA area and tried to come up with a mass transit plan
that worked. They decided it couldn't be done. The problem is
decentralization. If people live in one place and work in another
place, and shop in another place, it's fine, but in LA, people live
everywhere, shop everywhere, and work everywhere. Too many pickup and
dropoff points without consistent routes for busses.
What I was suggesting was more along the lines of franchisng
privately operated multi-passenger jitneys. Smaller and faster
than busses, more flexible than van pools, relatively low cost,
they manage to impinge on the turf of both the metro transit
operations and the medallion cab companies. Used fairly successfully
in Mexico City, which makes L.A. traffic look like a drive in
the country and now being replaced by a metro line that the riders
are a lot less than happy with.
Nice paper:
http://www.uottawa.ca/services/markcom/gazette/000602/000602-art15-e.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
07 Aug 2005 07:54:28 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:38:12 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 22:22:20 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 18:45:49 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 21:14:36 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Here was my point. Current production of natural gas is spoken for. We
have peaked in production, we don't have excess capacity that can be
applied to transportation. Here are the current numbers:
http://eed.llnl.gov/flow/02flow.php
Not true at all. A huge percentage of NG is just blown off into the
atmosphere because it isn't worth building the pipeline infrastructure
to get it to market.
So, those aren't oil _and_ gas rigs in the Gulf of Mexico? Perhaps you
could provide a link?
AFAIK, no offsfore oil rig recoups the NG. There
is potential for a vast increase in production.
google: "natural gas" offshore "gulf of mexico"
138,000 hits.
uh duh. AFAIK means "as far as I know," & I really knew better. The
vast majority of off-shore rigs don't recouperate NG, though.
You are welcome to provide _any_ documentation that would show a
meaningful waste of NG by off-shore rigs.
Business is business. With NG going for $8/Mbtu no meaningful quantities
of gas would be wasted. These rigs are out there for a profit.
Your claim contradicts the purpose of these rigs.
Natural gas is only useful if there is an infrastructure to get it to
the consumer. "Cooking with gas" is uncommon in the 3rd world.
Shipping NG to the US increases the cost dramatically. There are a
lot of rigs in the 3rd world.
This is a strawman argument. The topic is North American rigs. What the
rest of the world does has nothing to do with our production.
Sure it does, just as much as oil imports affect the domestic oil
market. There are currently NG off-loading facilities in the planning
stage for Baja California, just across the border from San Diego. NG
will be shipped to those plants, and piped across the border to the
US.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Bloomquist" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
07 Aug 2005 08:04:23 PM |
|
|
Turby wrote:
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:38:12 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 22:22:20 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 18:45:49 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 21:14:36 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Here was my point. Current production of natural gas is spoken for. We
have peaked in production, we don't have excess capacity that can be
applied to transportation. Here are the current numbers:
http://eed.llnl.gov/flow/02flow.php
Not true at all. A huge percentage of NG is just blown off into the
atmosphere because it isn't worth building the pipeline infrastructure
to get it to market.
So, those aren't oil _and_ gas rigs in the Gulf of Mexico? Perhaps you
could provide a link?
AFAIK, no offsfore oil rig recoups the NG. There
is potential for a vast increase in production.
google: "natural gas" offshore "gulf of mexico"
138,000 hits.
uh duh. AFAIK means "as far as I know," & I really knew better. The
vast majority of off-shore rigs don't recouperate NG, though.
You are welcome to provide _any_ documentation that would show a
meaningful waste of NG by off-shore rigs.
Business is business. With NG going for $8/Mbtu no meaningful quantities
of gas would be wasted. These rigs are out there for a profit.
Your claim contradicts the purpose of these rigs.
Natural gas is only useful if there is an infrastructure to get it to
the consumer. "Cooking with gas" is uncommon in the 3rd world.
Shipping NG to the US increases the cost dramatically. There are a
lot of rigs in the 3rd world.
This is a strawman argument. The topic is North American rigs. What the
rest of the world does has nothing to do with our production.
Sure it does, just as much as oil imports affect the domestic oil
market. There are currently NG off-loading facilities in the planning
stage for Baja California, just across the border from San Diego. NG
will be shipped to those plants, and piped across the border to the
US.
Now you are reaching for straws. LNG imports amount to a quarter of a
Tcf/year. At that, they have nothing to do with the original claim, 'Not
true at all. A huge percentage of NG is just blown off...'
Why are you out to take the discussion on a meaningless tangent?
Address my original premises, without making stuff up, if you don't agree.
Best, Dan.
--
Add one for email
.
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
08 Aug 2005 12:02:56 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 01:04:23 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:38:12 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 22:22:20 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 18:45:49 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 21:14:36 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Here was my point. Current production of natural gas is spoken for. We
have peaked in production, we don't have excess capacity that can be
applied to transportation. Here are the current numbers:
http://eed.llnl.gov/flow/02flow.php
Not true at all. A huge percentage of NG is just blown off into the
atmosphere because it isn't worth building the pipeline infrastructure
to get it to market.
So, those aren't oil _and_ gas rigs in the Gulf of Mexico? Perhaps you
could provide a link?
AFAIK, no offsfore oil rig recoups the NG. There
is potential for a vast increase in production.
google: "natural gas" offshore "gulf of mexico"
138,000 hits.
uh duh. AFAIK means "as far as I know," & I really knew better. The
vast majority of off-shore rigs don't recouperate NG, though.
You are welcome to provide _any_ documentation that would show a
meaningful waste of NG by off-shore rigs.
Business is business. With NG going for $8/Mbtu no meaningful quantities
of gas would be wasted. These rigs are out there for a profit.
Your claim contradicts the purpose of these rigs.
Natural gas is only useful if there is an infrastructure to get it to
the consumer. "Cooking with gas" is uncommon in the 3rd world.
Shipping NG to the US increases the cost dramatically. There are a
lot of rigs in the 3rd world.
This is a strawman argument. The topic is North American rigs. What the
rest of the world does has nothing to do with our production.
Sure it does, just as much as oil imports affect the domestic oil
market. There are currently NG off-loading facilities in the planning
stage for Baja California, just across the border from San Diego. NG
will be shipped to those plants, and piped across the border to the
US.
Now you are reaching for straws. LNG imports amount to a quarter of a
Tcf/year. At that, they have nothing to do with the original claim, 'Not
true at all. A huge percentage of NG is just blown off...'
Why are you out to take the discussion on a meaningless tangent?
Address my original premises, without making stuff up, if you don't agree.
OK. I'll try to make this as simple and as clear as possible. I
thought the train of thought was obvious, but I guess not.
Your point was that natural gas supply in the US is limited. Notice I
said _supply_. You said "production." The question was _originally_
about usage in the US, so whether we produce it or someone else
produces it is irrelevant. If the flow to market increases, the source
does not matter. You said "we have peaked in production." Since there
are huge quantities of untapped NG overseas, and the infrastructure to
import it is just getting built, there will be enormous amounts that
"can be applied to transportation."
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Bloomquist" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
08 Aug 2005 12:34:28 AM |
|
|
Turby wrote:
OK. I'll try to make this as simple and as clear as possible. I
thought the train of thought was obvious, but I guess not.
Your point was that natural gas supply in the US is limited. Notice I
said _supply_. You said "production." The question was _originally_
about usage in the US, so whether we produce it or someone else
produces it is irrelevant. If the flow to market increases, the source
does not matter. You said "we have peaked in production." Since there
are huge quantities of untapped NG overseas, and the infrastructure to
import it is just getting built, there will be enormous amounts that
"can be applied to transportation."
Nice bit. You seem to have gone out there and done some homework.
Now proved the result of planned construction of LNG tankers over the
next ten years. Show the impact. (I've come up with 2% of _current_
demand in a decade busting butt. Means nothing if there is a 10-30%
decline in production in twenty years.)
My question on this, and mitigation on peak oil still stands. 'When do
we start?'
And, yes, production is everything. Delivered production.
Best, Dan.
--
Add one for email
.
|
|
|
| User: "Turby" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
08 Aug 2005 02:39:26 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 05:34:28 GMT, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@lakeweb.com> wrote:
Turby wrote:
OK. I'll try to make this as simple and as clear as possible. I
thought the train of thought was obvious, but I guess not.
Your point was that natural gas supply in the US is limited. Notice I
said _supply_. You said "production." The question was _originally_
about usage in the US, so whether we produce it or someone else
produces it is irrelevant. If the flow to market increases, the source
does not matter. You said "we have peaked in production." Since there
are huge quantities of untapped NG overseas, and the infrastructure to
import it is just getting built, there will be enormous amounts that
"can be applied to transportation."
Nice bit. You seem to have gone out there and done some homework.
Now proved the result of planned construction of LNG tankers over the
next ten years. Show the impact. (I've come up with 2% of _current_
demand in a decade busting butt. Means nothing if there is a 10-30%
decline in production in twenty years.)
My question on this, and mitigation on peak oil still stands. 'When do
we start?'
And, yes, production is everything. Delivered production.
Heck, that would take a crystal ball the size of Manhatten. Energy
policy is a political football, and considering this administration's
team, I wouldn't put any money on it. If we ever put our mind to it,
though, anything is possible. When Kennedy started the moon project in
'61, the obstacles seemed literally astronomical, but we did it.
--
Turby the Turbosurfer
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marshall Dudley" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
05 Aug 2005 05:18:06 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:
Anyway, as I said before, I think CNG is a better short term solution...
Then, you will have to show infrastructure and source, compared to NG
peaking in North America. In Europe, where the NG source is Russia, it
may be different.
I was comparing NG to hydrogen and petroleum.
Hydrogen is currently manufactured mostly from methane.
There's currently much more NG infrastructure than for
hydrogen. Fewer storage issues too. Less infrastuctre
clearly than for petroleum.
Methane in one form or another is pretty ubiquitous, though
not necessarily easy to extract at current price levels.
It is cheap to extract, but expensive to deliver. I know of a number of huge
methane wells that are simply capped because there is no way to get it to market
economically. The well owners would likely love to sell it at 1/10 the going
rate if they could.
Marshall
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Kleinschmidt" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
05 Aug 2005 06:09:54 PM |
|
|
Marshall Dudley wrote:
Rkleinsch1216128@aol.com wrote:
It is cheap to extract, but expensive to deliver. I know of a number of huge
methane wells that are simply capped because there is no way to get it to market
economically. The well owners would likely love to sell it at 1/10 the going
rate if they could.
I stand corrected on my choice of words.
Just out of curiousity, where are these wells and how much would
you figure NG would have to rise to make them viable ?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ed Cregger" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
05 Aug 2005 12:02:33 AM |
|
|
"Rob Kleinschmidt" <Rkleinsch1216128@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1123191193.849813.10200@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ed Cregger wrote:
"Rob Kleinschmidt" <Rkleinsch1216128@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1123180003.323245.79660@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ed Cregger wrote:
Long term maybe. Short term, I'd see CNG as a drop in replacement
with a much better infrastructure in place. Suitable for both
an ICE and (I think) fuel cells. A pretty good H to C ratio too.
An excellent point, but the enviro wackos would attack it based upon
its
emissions.
I already cleared it with my fellow envirowhackos and my state
chapter of the evil envirowhacko conspiracy and they're fine with
it. What a crock of sh*t Ed.
WTF are you talking about?
Your gratuitious "enviro whacko" crap.
Oops! Sorry if I stepped on your toes...
Ed Cregger
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Nem" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
04 Aug 2005 08:54:36 AM |
|
|
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
.
|
|
|
| User: "James Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
06 Aug 2005 01:36:50 AM |
|
|
Nem wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
Isn't running an ICE on hydrogen about like replacing the boiler of a steam locomotive with a
nuclear reactor? Stick a roundel on its nose and everyone proclaims it a "glimpse into the future".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ed Cregger" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
06 Aug 2005 03:48:47 AM |
|
|
"James Clark" <clark35.at.attglobal.net@mousepotato.com> wrote in message
news:42f45db2_2@news1.prserv.net...
Nem wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
Isn't running an ICE on hydrogen about like replacing the boiler of a
steam locomotive with a nuclear reactor? Stick a roundel on its nose and
everyone proclaims it a "glimpse into the future".
Actually, no.
Burning hydrogen in an ICE brings out the best in this type of engine. The
need for oil changes are reduced, emissions are mostly water - no carbon. We
can do away with the catalytic converter entirely. One could even argue that
the super high voltage, computerized management systems of present petrol
burning engines are no longer needed. Although replacing it with mechanical
parts will be more costly, but at least the home mechanic could once again
maintain their own vehicles.
There is nothing outdated about an ICE - just the fuels we presently use.
Fuel cells face a tough adversary in the ICE. Are we there yet? Nope.
Ed Cregger
.
|
|
|
| User: "daestrom" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
07 Aug 2005 11:16:50 AM |
|
|
"Ed Cregger" <ecregger@homtail.com> wrote in message
news:RP_Ie.2158$Zo3.422@fe03.lga...
"James Clark" <clark35.at.attglobal.net@mousepotato.com> wrote in message
news:42f45db2_2@news1.prserv.net...
Nem wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
Isn't running an ICE on hydrogen about like replacing the boiler of a
steam locomotive with a nuclear reactor? Stick a roundel on its nose and
everyone proclaims it a "glimpse into the future".
Actually, no.
Burning hydrogen in an ICE brings out the best in this type of engine. The
need for oil changes are reduced, emissions are mostly water - no carbon.
We can do away with the catalytic converter entirely. One could even argue
that the super high voltage, computerized management systems of present
petrol burning engines are no longer needed. Although replacing it with
mechanical parts will be more costly, but at least the home mechanic could
once again maintain their own vehicles.
Would there be a problem with piston-ring lubrication? I know air
compressors have to use a different sort of piston-cylinder seal because
compressing just air is a 'dry' process. Not that changing piston ring
design is insurmountable, just a thought.
Although I too long for the days of being a 'backyard mechanic' and fixing
my own car again, I think computer controls and ignition are hear to stay.
Regardless of fuel. Computer-controll of air-fuel mixture and timing to
reduce NOx is probably here to stay :-(
daestrom
.
|
|
|
| User: "G. R. L. Cowan" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
07 Aug 2005 12:16:13 PM |
|
|
daestrom wrote:
"Ed Cregger" <ecregger@homtail.com> wrote in message
news:RP_Ie.2158$Zo3.422@fe03.lga...
"James Clark" <clark35.at.attglobal.net@mousepotato.com> wrote in message
news:42f45db2_2@news1.prserv.net...
Nem wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
Isn't running an ICE on hydrogen about like replacing the boiler of a
steam locomotive with a nuclear reactor? Stick a roundel on its nose and
everyone proclaims it a "glimpse into the future".
Actually, no.
Burning hydrogen in an ICE brings out the best in this type of engine. The
need for oil changes are reduced, emissions are mostly water - no carbon.
We can do away with the catalytic converter entirely. One could even argue
that the super high voltage, computerized management systems of present
petrol burning engines are no longer needed. Although replacing it with
mechanical parts will be more costly, but at least the home mechanic could
once again maintain their own vehicles.
Would there be ...
Bizarre tense noted ...
a problem with piston-ring lubrication? I know air
compressors have to use a different sort of piston-cylinder seal because
compressing just air is a 'dry' process. Not that changing piston ring
design is insurmountable, just a thought.
Although I too long for the days of being a 'backyard mechanic' and fixing
my own car again, I think computer controls and ignition are hear to stay.
Regardless of fuel. Computer-controll of air-fuel mixture and timing to
reduce NOx is probably here to stay :-(
It's astonishing the people who crop up who seem to think
internal hydrogen combustion for cars is a whole new thing.
All down the right side of this --
http://www.h2cars.de/overview/main01.html --
dating back to 1974 or 1975, what do we find?
Interestingly, some of these seemingly forgotten cars
were significantly nicer than today's FCEV prototypes.
--- Graham Cowan, former hydrogen fan
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/Paper_for_11th_CHC.html --
boron as energy carrier: real-car range, nuclear cachet
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hornberger" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
04 Aug 2005 09:08:51 AM |
|
|
On 8/4/05 9:54 AM, in article
1123163676.930956.145230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com, "Nem"
<ndanilovic@gmail.com> wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
300hp from a Four is quite... Impressive, to say the least.
--
----------------------------
chris@chornbe.com
http://chornbe.com/weblog
Raging with indifference since 1966.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Henry" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
04 Aug 2005 09:17:07 AM |
|
|
"Chris Hornberger" <chris@chornbe.com> wrote in message
news:1123164527.e82260ae3d7fe9614473ab1611553204@teranews...
On 8/4/05 9:54 AM, in article
1123163676.930956.145230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com, "Nem"
<ndanilovic@gmail.com> wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
300hp from a Four is quite... Impressive, to say the least.
In the 50's, Offenhauser/Indy 4-bangers developed 420 horsepower.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Hornberger" |
|
| Title: Re: FUEL CELL MOTORBIKE TO HIT U.S. STREETS |
04 Aug 2005 09:25:11 AM |
|
|
On 8/4/05 10:17 AM, in article 3lemb5F12hbthU1@individual.net, "Richard
Henry" <rphenry@home.com> wrote:
"Chris Hornberger" <chris@chornbe.com> wrote in message
news:1123164527.e82260ae3d7fe9614473ab1611553204@teranews...
On 8/4/05 9:54 AM, in article
1123163676.930956.145230@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com, "Nem"
<ndanilovic@gmail.com> wrote:
True. One interesting point I found out was that BMW's H2 powered land
speed record holder super car has the same engine as will be in the 700
series made available on the market. I also heard a presentation by an
engineer from BMW who said with H2 as a fuel they are hoping to get 300
hp from an inline 4 engine... I don't know much about cars but it
sounded very impressive.
300hp from a Four is quite... Impressive, to say the least.
In the 50's, Offenhauser/Indy 4-bangers developed 420 horsepower.
It's a new era. :(
--
----------------------------
chris@chornbe.com
http://chornbe.com/weblog
An example of proper posting technique.
"Hi. I have a question about my motorcycle..."
"Sheeeoooot, lightweight. That's what you get
for supporting Bush. You usenet dancing poser!"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Terrorists, they brought my cats to the streets of this country
Hydrogen powered motorbike
Hit with excruciating waves of anxiousness, push up psychosis, read subliminal scrip, affect hearing, amplify sound to demons, flonk. Anally rape, poke ***** in irregualr, repeated patterns" Enough is enough. Everyone is game, sto0pid flonk, everyone.
B-factories score direct hit on CP violation
Re: Final Evidence: No 757 Hit The Pentagon
pirets hit 20 ships last month and great laker exploded
Re: Big asteroid likely to hit Earth 21 March 2014
Why killer earthquakes hit during night?
| Given the unknow cause of the error in pioneer acceleration calculations, will the400 meter diameter asteroid Apophis hit earth in 2029?
Asteroid Apophis 390m wide could hit Earth in 31 years time("outside chance")
Re: Melting Arctic sea ice may have hit point of no return, scientists fear
Sunspots hit new highs
Bush hit the towers FACT
If I can hit a baseball about 300 feet throwing a ball to myself...
Re: Big asteroid likely to hit Earth 21 March 2014
|
|
|
