|
|
|
|
 |
cforez
 |
|
Mr. Taggart wrote:
To quote a current geology text book:
"Location, spatial relationships, and connections between the environment and people are among the interests of geographers"
And another tidbit:
"Within the world regional framework, this book is also organized around nine thematic concepts:
- Population
- Gender
- Development
- Food
- Urbanization
- Globalization
- Democratization
- Water
- Climate change"
Here's a highlight for the concept of gender:
"For women, the historical and modern global gender picture is puzzlingly negative
In nearly every culture, in every region of the world, women have had (and still have) an inferior status
Around the world, people of both sexes still routinely accept the idea that males are more productive and intelligent than females
In nearly all cultures, families prefer boys over girls"
Tony I would take a look at the textbooks they are giving your kids these days.... That was just a tip of the iceberg...
|
I think you're getting your terms mixed up.
Geology is the science comprising the study of solid Earth, the rocks of which it is composed, and the processes by which it evolves.
Geography is the science that studies the lands, the features, the inhabitants, and the phenomena of the Earth. I can completely see your quote being in a geography textbook.
Here's a quote from my geology textbook.
| In one respect, groundwater contamination is more troublesome than surface-water contamination because of the very slow rate of movement of groundwater. Groundwater velocities, which can range from less than 1m per year to several tens of meters per year, indicate that contaminants may remain in groundwater flow systems for hundreds or thousands of years before reaching discharge points. |
|
Mr. Taggart
|
|
|
Sorry was texting replies while on the phone and was getting spell checked to geology instead of geography. Saw some cool stuff geologists have done with ground penetrating equipment related finding fossil fuels. But you are right there are less and less of them.
|
JP
|
|
TonyE wrote:
Well, it won't be soon now that all diesel motors and cars in California will have to have all those neat "this facility contains stuff that can cause cancer and all kinds of nasty baby issues..."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18415532
Soon they will require that all trucks in California be powered by fungus and unicorns.
I wonder what this will do to the Europeans...
Perhaps California can start fining automakers and diesel engine manufacturers so that we can pay off our $17BIL deficit.
|
Anything with benzene causes cancer... ... And even Dolce & Gabbana products have them. The skin is exposed to it all the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Health_effects
|
JP
|
|
JP wrote:
TonyE wrote:
Well, it won't be soon now that all diesel motors and cars in California will have to have all those neat "this facility contains stuff that can cause cancer and all kinds of nasty baby issues..."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18415532
Soon they will require that all trucks in California be powered by fungus and unicorns.
I wonder what this will do to the Europeans...
Perhaps California can start fining automakers and diesel engine manufacturers so that we can pay off our $17BIL deficit.
|
Anything with benzene causes cancer... ... And even Dolce & Gabbana products have them. The skin is exposed to it all the time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Health_effects
|
Benzopyrenes cause cancer as well, anything cooked with oil has Benzopyrenes...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzopyrene
|
Mr. Taggart
|
|
Tony you are right I meant geography. Sorry I was typing while I was on the phone and spell check failed me.
The quotes are from a sophomore geography course at an institution with over 26,000 undergraduate students and is the required textbook for all classes. The instructor has a PhD in geography. The course is one two courses that can fulfill a state requirement for graduation the other one is anthropology. As Stalin would say this kind of drivel is good for making useful idiots.
The quotes were verbatim from the first day of class PowerPoint slides sourced directly from the textbook.
|
Mr. Taggart
|
|
Saccharin can cause cancer so they took it out of sugar substitutes. What they did not tell you was to get the cancer they were giving the rats about five gallons of diet coke a day to have it cause cancer.
It is just as simple as saying that something CAN cause cancer but to what levels of exposure and and how do these levels increase the risk of cancer and what is the likelihood of getting cancer versus no exposure.
Everytime you fly you are exposed to radiation so you could say flyIng causes cancer so should we ban flying?
|
notyper
|
|
And to confound things further, there is evidence that a certain level of exposure to radiation actually has positive health effects by stimulating the immune system such that any potential problems caused by the radiation are more than made up for by the more active immune response. Call it a prophylactic dose if you like.
Cost and benefit. It's always about the balance.
Hell, drinking too much water too quickly will kill you (and no, I'm not talking about drowning :), and so will too high an oxygen concentration. Too much water and too much oxygen. Will wonders never cease?!?
SC
|
HONDA AFVM
|
|
Mr. Taggart wrote:
HONDA AFVM wrote:
TonyE wrote:
HONDA AFVM wrote:
The Legend wrote:
Another black eye for VW, BMW and MB diesels...
Anything to keep out soot and particulates from spreading to the masses in high-density population centers is A-OK to me :)
IMO diesel should only be relegated to railrods... like CSX commercial trains that use diesel hybrids.
|
Riddle me THIS Batman? How often and how MUCH does it cost to replace the Urea gas tank? I googled every form of question to find out how much it cost with calling a dealer.....I have heard customers tell me anywhere from $230 bucks to $480 bucks every 10,000 to 30,000 miles the tank needs to be refilled........Any answers?
It is NO WHERE on line the cost???? Like it's being hidden.
|
I figure a couple of Heineken six packs and you can fill that urea tank in no time.
|
There is really nothing that can convince me that diesel is a valuable fuel. It is a low refined fuel from a barrel of oil, some 19.5 gallons from the 44 gallons of oil are refined into gasoline and 9 to diesel........I think taking 4 of those gallons of diesel, refining that to JET fuel (only 5 gallons are refined into JET fuel), replacing 75% of ALL government and state medium and heavy duty trucks and transit buses to natural gas will bring the cost down to our government, lower the price of JET fuel, lower the cost of travel in all aspects........that will stimulate the economy to a HUGE factor because people will fly to more places and spend more money creating more jobs.....
It's just a matter of NUMBERS, lower the cost of doing business, the cost of goods and services come down, the more that cost comes down, the more people spend money, the more people spend, the more JOBS are created...............
DIESEL is the problem, at $4.00 a gallon, 90% of all goods are priced according to the cost of diesel because we haven't invented a machine that telaports goods through space at no cost, DIESEL gets it to you. Whether it's Truck or train, DIESEL is a MAJOR cost factor....., cut that cost in half with natural gas and the price of EVERYTHING goes down............
DIESEL SUCKS.....It's STINKS, it's dirty and it produces carbon like CRAZY.....NATURAL GAS, PURE..CLEAN....PERRRRRRRTY........!!!!!!!......:-)
|
Except that the amount of light or heavy products that are produced are based on how the refineries are set up....
And the problem with natural gas is like the problem with Hydrogen in that you need a fairly robust vessel (heavy) to contain the gasses which adds weight and drecreases fuel range. Plus due to the lower BTU output you need more of it to go the same distance. The natural gas civic will go somewhere around 200 miles on a 'tank' of gas while the normal civic will do well over 400.
And if you are talking compressed natural gas it only has about 35k BTU's Compared to gasoline's 109-125BTU's or diesels slightly higher 128-130k BTUs. Liquified natural gas comes in at about 75k BTU's so you sitll aren't close to
|
You are 100% incorrect.........the Civic NG will go 250 to 300 miles on it's 8.3 GGE (gas gallon equivalent) tank........Natural gas burns 98% complete, not 78 to 85% complete........It has 1 to 2 carbon atoms vs 8 to 12 carbon atoms, it increases engine life because the fact it is almost carbon free, it is 100% domestic, there for the MONEY STAYS HERE.......
That 250 miles cost you 16 bucks on the NG Civic, that 400 miles cost you @ $3.75 a gallon $44 bucks.....SO, for the same $44 bucks on a natural gas Civic, you can go 600 miles..........dropping 80% less carbon..........
You were saying?..........I drive these cars ALL THE TIME.......The civic goes almost the same distance on CNG as Gasoline.......maybe 5% less.......I drove it last month to a station opening 60 miles away and got 45MPG the entire trip.......I got 2MPG better on an LX Civic last year driving to PA........a 117 mile trip........Your calculation's are wrong, and you probably have never driven one..........Also, the compression is much higher, it's 12 to 1.......on the CNG.....
|
Mr. Taggart
|
|
HONDA AFVM wrote:
Mr. Taggart wrote:
HONDA AFVM wrote:
TonyE wrote:
HONDA AFVM wrote:
The Legend wrote:
Another black eye for VW, BMW and MB diesels...
Anything to keep out soot and particulates from spreading to the masses in high-density population centers is A-OK to me :)
IMO diesel should only be relegated to railrods... like CSX commercial trains that use diesel hybrids.
|
Riddle me THIS Batman? How often and how MUCH does it cost to replace the Urea gas tank? I googled every form of question to find out how much it cost with calling a dealer.....I have heard customers tell me anywhere from $230 bucks to $480 bucks every 10,000 to 30,000 miles the tank needs to be refilled........Any answers?
It is NO WHERE on line the cost???? Like it's being hidden.
|
I figure a couple of Heineken six packs and you can fill that urea tank in no time.
|
There is really nothing that can convince me that diesel is a valuable fuel. It is a low refined fuel from a barrel of oil, some 19.5 gallons from the 44 gallons of oil are refined into gasoline and 9 to diesel........I think taking 4 of those gallons of diesel, refining that to JET fuel (only 5 gallons are refined into JET fuel), replacing 75% of ALL government and state medium and heavy duty trucks and transit buses to natural gas will bring the cost down to our government, lower the price of JET fuel, lower the cost of travel in all aspects........that will stimulate the economy to a HUGE factor because people will fly to more places and spend more money creating more jobs.....
It's just a matter of NUMBERS, lower the cost of doing business, the cost of goods and services come down, the more that cost comes down, the more people spend money, the more people spend, the more JOBS are created...............
DIESEL is the problem, at $4.00 a gallon, 90% of all goods are priced according to the cost of diesel because we haven't invented a machine that telaports goods through space at no cost, DIESEL gets it to you. Whether it's Truck or train, DIESEL is a MAJOR cost factor....., cut that cost in half with natural gas and the price of EVERYTHING goes down............
DIESEL SUCKS.....It's STINKS, it's dirty and it produces carbon like CRAZY.....NATURAL GAS, PURE..CLEAN....PERRRRRRRTY........!!!!!!!......:-)
|
Except that the amount of light or heavy products that are produced are based on how the refineries are set up....
And the problem with natural gas is like the problem with Hydrogen in that you need a fairly robust vessel (heavy) to contain the gasses which adds weight and drecreases fuel range. Plus due to the lower BTU output you need more of it to go the same distance. The natural gas civic will go somewhere around 200 miles on a 'tank' of gas while the normal civic will do well over 400.
And if you are talking compressed natural gas it only has about 35k BTU's Compared to gasoline's 109-125BTU's or diesels slightly higher 128-130k BTUs. Liquified natural gas comes in at about 75k BTU's so you sitll aren't close to
|
You are 100% incorrect.........the Civic NG will go 250 to 300 miles on it's 8.3 GGE (gas gallon equivalent) tank........Natural gas burns 98% complete, not 78 to 85% complete........It has 1 to 2 carbon atoms vs 8 to 12 carbon atoms, it increases engine life because the fact it is almost carbon free, it is 100% domestic, there for the MONEY STAYS HERE.......
That 250 miles cost you 16 bucks on the NG Civic, that 400 miles cost you @ $3.75 a gallon $44 bucks.....SO, for the same $44 bucks on a natural gas Civic, you can go 600 miles..........dropping 80% less carbon..........
You were saying?..........I drive these cars ALL THE TIME.......The civic goes almost the same distance on CNG as Gasoline.......maybe 5% less.......I drove it last month to a station opening 60 miles away and got 45MPG the entire trip.......I got 2MPG better on an LX Civic last year driving to PA........a 117 mile trip........Your calculation's are wrong, and you probably have never driven one..........Also, the compression is much higher, it's 12 to 1.......on the CNG.....
|
Per Honda's own website and not using your hypermiling technique of drvining 55 in the fast lane:
"Weight-saving technologies, improved aerodynamics and engine modifications result in a new Civic Natural Gas with an impressive EPA rating of 27/38/31 miles per gallon (gasoline-gallon equivalent)[1]. The recent engine and transmission changes have another upside: an increased range of over 10 percent, up to 190 miles. "
Per Honda's website Civic LX combined cycle 32MPG with 13.2 gallon tank (assume 12 usable or 11 usable you choose) gives you 384 miles or 352; either way significantly more than the natural gas model. Per Honda's own website the GGE is only 8 gallons which clearly less than 11 or 12 usable gallons of gas, meaning an effective 27% or 33% reduction in range.
And you cannot get any "MPG" in a natural gas powered car as it is metric made up for comparison purposes but is not really a good comparison. For one thing, it does not take into account the additional weight needed to store natural gas vs. gasoline in a vehicle and how that decreases driving distances. It is simply trying to put different fuels on a similiar power generated (BTU) footing.
Andrew seeing that natural gas is inherently a lower BTU product than gas and diesel there is no way i can make as much power (BTU). It is simple science. Stop looking as your sales brochures as gospel, there is more to understand than what they right down in your sales training manual.
And one does not need to drive a vehicle to understand that lower range means more stops to fill up. You can hypermile all you want to stretch the range but that has nothing to do with the average range. You still do not understand that because of the lower power (BTU) bang for the buck, CNG is not really a great substitute for gas or diesel as you can't go as far and in increases weight of the vehicle for the tank to store it in. The Civic itself is almost 5% heavier in natural gas form.
Price is irrelevant to the point about less range. Either is it being cleaner burning. Either is the higher compression. Like I said stop reading the sales manual and try to understand some of the limitations to the substitution of CNG for gas or diesel as a fuel for transportation methods.
But if you want to go there about price I can play your silly game. I remember in 2007 when natural gas trading at over $11/mmcf vs. today's $2/mmcf. As demand goes up, so does the price which will not stay around $2/mmcf. This number does not include costs needed to install an infrastucture which would need to be borne somewhere, which would must likely be at the 'pump' to recoup those costs. Did you know before the recessioin natural gas averaged $4/mmcf? And these prices quoted are they Henry hub prices and does not include the costs to deliver, so the historical $4/mmcf would be about $4.30-4.40 delivered without profit. So what happens to your model when the economy comes back and there is increased demand for natural gas as power companies burn significantly more of it as they have been forced to convert their plants from coal to only natural gas? Your winning natural gas proposition suddenly becomes a loser as the price you are currently paying will probably double.
There is a reason why gas and diesel are the primary carbon fuels used and it is the relative BTU's they output.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Over the long term, diesels have no future, regardless of what the WHO says. Diesel engines by their very nature are always more compromised than spark-ignition engines due to the balance of power vs. NOx and particulates emissions. Right now, only small displacement diesels can meet emissions standards; but in the future, even these small engines will need urea injection, cooled EGR (with higher flow rates, robbing power), higher fuel rail pressures, lower compression (again, robbing power), and multistage catalysts just to compete with petrol engines. At some point, the cost/benefit won't be there any more.
On the other hand, we're sort of seeing both petrol and diesel engines starting to gravitate towards each other in design. Petrol engines have been bumping compressions and lowering redlines to raise efficiency; diesel engines are doing the opposite to meet petrol performance. Next step in the evolution tree is HCCI....
As for CNG: While energy content is lower, the fact is that you can bump up the compression ratio to the mid teen's, greatly improving thermal efficiency. The other problem is that natural gas displaces oxygen, meaning reduced power outputs. Right now most automakers are using engines that have simply been modified to run on it, with a purpose-built engine with a good direct injection system, there's no reason why a CNG engine cannot fully match the performance of a regular petrol engine. Vessels are also becoming more compact. At some point, they will "only" be twice as large as a regular petrol tank for the same range and engine power.
By the way, it must be said that BTUs can arguably be considered only a small part of any equation involving engine power output and mileage. Engines only use about 1/3 of total fuel energy for power to the wheels; the rest escapes out the exhaust and into the coolant- there's a lot of opportunity to recapture energy, either through turbocharging or efficient thermal management systems. When you start using different fuel types (but still the regular otto cycle), the image gets murkier.
|
superchg2
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
the rest escapes out the exhaust and into the coolant- there's a lot of opportunity to recapture energy, either through turbocharging or efficient thermal management systems.
|
Honda, are you listening?
|
Mr. Taggart
|
|
CarPhreakD wrote:
Over the long term, diesels have no future, regardless of what the WHO says. Diesel engines by their very nature are always more compromised than spark-ignition engines due to the balance of power vs. NOx and particulates emissions. Right now, only small displacement diesels can meet emissions standards; but in the future, even these small engines will need urea injection, cooled EGR (with higher flow rates, robbing power), higher fuel rail pressures, lower compression (again, robbing power), and multistage catalysts just to compete with petrol engines. At some point, the cost/benefit won't be there any more.
On the other hand, we're sort of seeing both petrol and diesel engines starting to gravitate towards each other in design. Petrol engines have been bumping compressions and lowering redlines to raise efficiency; diesel engines are doing the opposite to meet petrol performance. Next step in the evolution tree is HCCI....
As for CNG: While energy content is lower, the fact is that you can bump up the compression ratio to the mid teen's, greatly improving thermal efficiency. The other problem is that natural gas displaces oxygen, meaning reduced power outputs. Right now most automakers are using engines that have simply been modified to run on it, with a purpose-built engine with a good direct injection system, there's no reason why a CNG engine cannot fully match the performance of a regular petrol engine. Vessels are also becoming more compact. At some point, they will "only" be twice as large as a regular petrol tank for the same range and engine power.
By the way, it must be said that BTUs can arguably be considered only a small part of any equation involving engine power output and mileage. Engines only use about 1/3 of total fuel energy for power to the wheels; the rest escapes out the exhaust and into the coolant- there's a lot of opportunity to recapture energy, either through turbocharging or efficient thermal management systems. When you start using different fuel types (but still the regular otto cycle), the image gets murkier.
|
Diesels will continue to have a future as right now there are not any COST EFFECTIVE substitutes that GIVE THE SAME RANGE as diesel does. Even as large trucks are required to have cleaner emissions they are not going to be replaced by some other fuel source anytime soon. Same with trains.
A tank that is twice as large by definition means that to get the same range you have to either sacrifice range or come up with a way to reduce weight.
So even though CNG has significantly BTU's you believe that there can be ways to extract more efficiency out of an engine designed for CNG that is more efficient than a current gas engine???? That is a HUGE leap to match the same thermal output.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Mr. Taggart wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
Over the long term, diesels have no future, regardless of what the WHO says. Diesel engines by their very nature are always more compromised than spark-ignition engines due to the balance of power vs. NOx and particulates emissions. Right now, only small displacement diesels can meet emissions standards; but in the future, even these small engines will need urea injection, cooled EGR (with higher flow rates, robbing power), higher fuel rail pressures, lower compression (again, robbing power), and multistage catalysts just to compete with petrol engines. At some point, the cost/benefit won't be there any more.
On the other hand, we're sort of seeing both petrol and diesel engines starting to gravitate towards each other in design. Petrol engines have been bumping compressions and lowering redlines to raise efficiency; diesel engines are doing the opposite to meet petrol performance. Next step in the evolution tree is HCCI....
As for CNG: While energy content is lower, the fact is that you can bump up the compression ratio to the mid teen's, greatly improving thermal efficiency. The other problem is that natural gas displaces oxygen, meaning reduced power outputs. Right now most automakers are using engines that have simply been modified to run on it, with a purpose-built engine with a good direct injection system, there's no reason why a CNG engine cannot fully match the performance of a regular petrol engine. Vessels are also becoming more compact. At some point, they will "only" be twice as large as a regular petrol tank for the same range and engine power.
By the way, it must be said that BTUs can arguably be considered only a small part of any equation involving engine power output and mileage. Engines only use about 1/3 of total fuel energy for power to the wheels; the rest escapes out the exhaust and into the coolant- there's a lot of opportunity to recapture energy, either through turbocharging or efficient thermal management systems. When you start using different fuel types (but still the regular otto cycle), the image gets murkier.
|
Diesels will continue to have a future as right now there are not any COST EFFECTIVE substitutes that GIVE THE SAME RANGE as diesel does. Even as large trucks are required to have cleaner emissions they are not going to be replaced by some other fuel source anytime soon. Same with trains.
A tank that is twice as large by definition means that to get the same range you have to either sacrifice range or come up with a way to reduce weight.
So even though CNG has significantly BTU's you believe that there can be ways to extract more efficiency out of an engine designed for CNG that is more efficient than a current gas engine???? That is a HUGE leap to match the same thermal output.
|
I was specifically referring to passenger cars, but there is consternation in the commercial trucking industry as diesel emissions continue to tighten. They are even considering using metals such as (gasp) aluminum and magnesium in truck construction and attempting to improve aerodynamics (also relatively alien to the trucking industry), in an effort to reduce weight... because increased EGR flows are now making it difficult for diesel engines to achieve pre-emissions performance and mileage.
It's not a big stretch to match efficiency (not necessarily thermal efficiency, but brake specific fuel consumption, etc.) at all. In fact, diesel engines are making this easier as they are continuing to drop in compression ratios in an effort to provide more "petrol-like" engine characteristics and emissions reductions; pretty soon it won't matter how many BTUs diesel fuel has, because it will all be wasted in emissions crap. Match this with the increasing compression ratios of petrol cars, apply the same technology (including turbocharging and direct injection) to CNG vehicles, and pretty soon those curves are going to be very close to crossing.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
superchg2 wrote:
CarPhreakD wrote:
the rest escapes out the exhaust and into the coolant- there's a lot of opportunity to recapture energy, either through turbocharging or efficient thermal management systems.
|
Honda, are you listening?
|
Pfft, they know better than anyone else. Their last SAE publication detailed a lot of different ideas for powertrains, everything from HCCI to forced induction and other energy recapture methods.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - 1 [2] |
| |
|
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
