To: MainFrame65
2 posted on
10/23/2007 9:24:35 AM PDT by
M. Dodge Thomas
(Opinion based on research by an eyewear firm, which surveyed 100 members of a speed dating club.)
To: MainFrame65
I was expecting to see Algore’s house in there somewhere.
To: MainFrame65
It looks like all we need do is expand that "Biomass/other" from 3.2% to 90%, and the problem is licked.
4 posted on
10/23/2007 9:31:53 AM PDT by
Plutarch
To: MainFrame65
It's interesting how inefficient electrical generation and transportation are. I haven't checked out the source files to see if some energy sources are more efficient than others or if they even cover that.
5 posted on
10/23/2007 9:34:10 AM PDT by
KarlInOhio
(May the heirs of Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski rise up again to defend Europe.)
To: MainFrame65
The U.S. is the “Saudi Arabia of coal”. We should be conducting a Manhattan Project-style effort to produce clean-burning coal plants across the nation.
7 posted on
10/23/2007 9:45:03 AM PDT by
montag813
To: MainFrame65
I remember back in the seventies reading how transmission of electricity resulted in losses of 50%.
Superconductive transmission lines were the answer then.
Are they anywhere on the horizon?
9 posted on
10/23/2007 9:52:05 AM PDT by
exit82
(I believe Juanita--Hillary enabled Juanita's rapist.)
To: MainFrame65
That 27.8 loss in eletrical system losses is a freaking shame. We should be researching room temp superconductors as a national strategic project.
10 posted on
10/23/2007 9:58:34 AM PDT by
Centurion2000
(False modesty is as great a sin as false pride.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson