<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Perhaps a medical analogy might be apt.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Suppose you are ill and your options are: </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>1. You do nothing after which you will die a slow,
accelerating tortuous death.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>2. You have a $1,000 operation with the likelihood that
afterward you will die a not quite as fast, accelerating tortuous death.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>3. You have a $50,000 operation after which you might not
be as functional as you were before, but you will be able to live an almost
normal, productive life.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Which would you chose?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The situation is similar to the current energy crisis.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We can:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>1. Do nothing. Allow the accelerating demand for
fossil and other fuels to continue given the world's burgeoning population until
there are not enough resources left, and wars, etc ensue to secure the last bits
left. In the meantime, environmental disasters doom many and reduce the
quality of life for almost all.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>2. Try to develop more efficient fossil fuel cars and
fossil fuel based electrical generation. Results: the same as in 1.
just above, only just a little slower.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>3. Invest heavily in alternate fuel source<STRONG><FONT
size=6>s</FONT></STRONG>, even [Gasp!] supporting massive research and
development with tax dollars (I can hear Crabtree's perpetual "free enterprise
is the only answer" hernia exploding from here) in an effort to provide
sufficient energy and to attempt to prevent various kinds of environmental
disasters. I am thinking of the kind of massive program that occurred
right after Sputnik I went up. There was a lot of money spent. There
was lots of waste and corruption (most of the waste and corruption occurred in
private corporations because of lax government oversight). But we did get
a person on the moon. Somehow, in my possible short-sightedness, solving
the energy crisis seems more important for the survival of humankind,
animalkind, and plantkind than getting to the moon.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My guess is that we will do too little until it is too late. Many of
those in influential policy making positions remind me of college students who
do not study seriously until the night before the exam or those that do not
study at all hoping for a severe snowstorm. The problem is complex.
Energy companies have spent millions pooh-poohing the global warming crisis and
assuring us they have the energy demand problem under control. Many of the
credulous believe them. Their money elects far more politicians than does
that of the ordinary citizen.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Fill in the blanks.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<BR><A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=starbliss@gmail.com href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com">Ted Moffett</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=deco@moscow.com href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art
Deco</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 06, 2007 2:44 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] who killed the electric car?</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Wayne et. al.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Boise has heated many homes with geothermal energy for decades...On Warm
Springs Blvd. I stayed with some friends just a few years ago, and they
complained that the dang geothermal heat system kept running in the
summer! </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Idaho and the nearby area has several geothermal energy projects underway
or being investigated for development.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Like solar or wind, geothermal has tremendous potential (read the quote I
posted in this thread from the energy scientist who gave figures that wind
generation power potential in some areas of the US equals the energy from OPEC's
petroleum output), but till we see massive implementation of affordable
geothermal, the question must be asked that if this is such a practical and
affordable option, that can soon replace cheap CO2/mercury polluting coal
electricity, for example, what's the hold up? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ted Moffett</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 2/6/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>Art Deco</B>
<<A href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A>> wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV>
<DIV><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/" target=_blank><IMG
title="New Scientist Environment logo" alt="New Scientist Environment"
src="http://environment.newscientist.com/decorator/img/brand/nsenvironment_logo.gif">
</A>
<UL>
<LI>
<H6><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/"
target=_blank>Home</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/news.ns" target=_blank>
News</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.newscientist.com/blog/environment"
target=_blank>Blog</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/specials.ns" target=_blank>
Special Reports</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/subscribe.ns?promcode=nsenvnav"
target=_blank>Subscribe</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/search.ns" target=_blank>
Search</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/feeds.ns"
target=_blank>RSS</A></H6></LI></UL></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<H1>Hot clean power under our feet</H1></DIV>
<DIV>
<P>America can kick its addiction to fossil fuels by drilling more wells, says
a panel of experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Not for oil,
but to tap Earth's heat.</P>
<P>Converting geothermal heat into electricity by pouring water onto hot rocks
underground and using the steam to turn turbines is arguably the most
promising - and renewable - source of "green" energy on the planet. So
concludes the MIT experts' report, released on Monday, which examines what
geothermal energy could do for the US in the 21st century. </P>
<P>The 18-member panel calculated that there is more than enough extractable
hydrothermal energy available to generate the entire 27 trillion
kilowatt-hours of energy consumed in the US in 2005. In fact, a conservative
estimate of the energy extractable from the hot rocks less than 10 kilometres
beneath American soil suggests that this almost completely untapped energy
resource could support US energy consumption, at its current clip, for more
than two millennia to come. </P>
<P>Developing a new generation of geothermal plants is thus a top priority for
tackling global warming, the panel says. "By any kind of calculation, this is
an extremely large resource that is technically accessible to us right now,"
says the study's lead author, Jefferson Tester. "It doesn't require new
technology to get access to it. And there's never going to be a limitation on
our ability to expand this technology because of limits of the resource." </P>
<DIV>From issue 2588 of <STRONG><EM>New Scientist magazine</EM></STRONG>, 27
January 2007, page 4</DIV></DIV><SPAN class=q>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4"><B>From:</B> <A title=starbliss@gmail.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com" target=_blank>Ted Moffett</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=godshatter@yahoo.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target=_blank>Paul Rumelhart</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target=_blank>vision2020@moscow.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 06, 2007 2:18 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] who killed the electric car?</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></SPAN>
<DIV><SPAN class=e id=q_110992f164463ea1_2>
<DIV>All-</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I do not doubt that the corporate manipulations regarding the electric
car in California were obstructive to improving and implementing consumer use
of these cars...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But the bottom line on electric car/trucks being practical for widespread
use (even ignoring the limited range of these vehicles before needing
recharging, which has been a significant negative in many consumers minds) is
the huge amount of electricity that would be needed. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>California has problems supplying enough electricity for current
needs. To implement widespread electric car use in California would
require huge increases in electricity generation.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Paul's suggestion that electric cars make it possible to turn off coal
fired electric plants that might power these cars en masse, by replacing
the coal fired plant with nuclear, wind or solar plants, is not a
practical solution. The need for the massive amounts of electricity
involved would require adding more coal, natural gas and nuclear plants,
plus adding wind and, well, maybe solar, though solar is currently too
expensive. We need to cut back on coal electric generation as it is, due
to CO2 output, or switch to CO sequestered coal power, yet we still get 50% of
our electricity from coal, and there is tremendous resistance to cutting back
on cheap coal generated electricity, cheaper than nuclear, wind or
solar. New nuclear fission plants have many drawbacks also. Wind
and solar electricity to power widespread use of electric cars can be a part
of the solution, but not enough to turn off coal plants. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>To solve these problems nationwide would require a massive
reorganization of and expansion of electricity generation requiring
cooperation across numerous sectors of the economy. Even if the oil and
auto industry pushed the electric car option for widespread use, they might
not succeed. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The elephant in the room of the energy/fossil fuel depletion/global
warming crisis is the fact that our current consumption of energy for
transportation needs of all kinds uses too much energy, and increases in
efficiency and implementation of new technology will not sufficiently solve
the problems quickly enough, even if they can eventually be solved, given our
current economic and lifestyle demands on energy consumption. It is hard
to get around the need to radically downsize transportation energy
consumption. Almost no one wants to face this fact, the economic and
lifestyle implications. It is assumed we can have our energy cake and
eat it to... </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There is no patent that the oil or auto industry is hiding (though they
may be hiding some) on electrical generation sources or super efficient
electric motors that will make solving these transportation energy problems
easy, nor is lifting corporate control over the work of
engineers going to make the problem less daunting, though that might
help. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We could use more coal combined with CO2 sequestration
to generate some of the extra electricity needed to power electric
cars, but coal will deplete, and coal electricity with CO2 sequestration
is more expensive, though absolutely necessary to avoid catastrophic
climate change. We could expand natural gas generated electricity, but this
source will deplete. We could build 100s of new nuclear power plants to
power electric cars. Good luck with that idea, with the nuclear
waste problem, the expense of nuclear plants, and the storage of dangerous
nuclear material in a world of terrorists threats. More hydro could be
implemented, as if our rivers are not damned enough already. Wind power
is being expanded and is a realistic option, but will eventually be needed to
replace coal and natural gas energy... Solar is currently too expensive,
though hopefully it will become less. What else? Hydrogen
fuel for electric fuel cell cars...? Some of the options for generating
large amounts of hydrogen fuel suggest building more nuclear plants.
Again, good luck!: </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/kiss.htm"
target=_blank>http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/kiss.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" color=blue size=2>Third,
hydrogen ? unlike electricity ? can be stored, and so the tremendous value of
nuclear power can be translated into energy for the transportation energy
system, a vast market into which nuclear power can now penetrate. Professor
Paul Kruger of Stanford University has estimated that requirements for meeting
this demand, but avoiding carbon emissions, will require hundreds of nuclear
plants in the coming decades, unless one believes that renewable energy
systems can grow at staggering rates [ <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/kis-ref.htm#[point16]"
target=_blank>Ref 16</A>].</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>-------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What else? Biomass, biofuel, geothermal, tidal or wave electric
generation? Probably not solutions for powering a nation wide fleet of
electric cars.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The development that might make electric cars practical for widespread
use, even hydrogen fuel cell electric cars, that could be the energy
breakthrough of human history, fusion, is currently just a gleam in the eyes
of the physicists and engineers building ITER in France, a 10 billion dollar
project that is the largest internationally funded scientific project after
the International Space Station: </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/ITER_Host.html"
target=_blank>http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/ITER_Host.html</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ted Moffett</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 2/5/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>Paul
Rumelhart</B> <<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target=_blank>godshatter@yahoo.com </A>>
wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">Bill London wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=http://mid00d601c7498e$f45763a0$0200a8c0@techlab
type="cite"><SPAN>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yes, engineers likely could design more
efficient vehicles and better power sources -- but will they be allowed to
do so?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>That is the lesson of the electric car fiasco
in California.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>When the gas/auto industries were able to
destroy the state mandate for zero emission cars, they stopped their
engineers from improving the existing electric cars, stopped their
customers from buying any (or transferrring their leases to purchases),
and destroyed all existing vehicles. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>BL</FONT></DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I think
they will eventually be allowed to do their designs. What I can't tell
you is if they will be allowed to do so by the forward-thinking progressives
or by those who will be picking up the pieces after the oil runs dry and the
economy comes crashing down. <BR><BR>I definitely want to watch the
DVD. I am entertained by watching self-serving billionaires ruin
everything for us because they have a level of greed most people stamp out
of their children by the time they are four. Gives me faith in
humanity.
<BR><BR>Paul<BR> </DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>
<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>
mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"
target=_blank>Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================
<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<SPAN class=q>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.fsr.net/"
target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A>
<BR> mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"
target=_blank>Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================
</SPAN>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>
<DIV>
<DIV><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/" target=_blank><IMG
title="New Scientist Environment logo" alt="New Scientist Environment"
src="http://environment.newscientist.com/decorator/img/brand/nsenvironment_logo.gif">
</A>
<UL>
<LI>
<H6><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/"
target=_blank>Home</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/news.ns" target=_blank>
News</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.newscientist.com/blog/environment"
target=_blank>Blog</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/specials.ns" target=_blank>
Special Reports</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/subscribe.ns?promcode=nsenvnav"
target=_blank>Subscribe</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/search.ns" target=_blank>
Search</A> <SPAN>|</SPAN><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://environment.newscientist.com/feeds.ns"
target=_blank>RSS</A></H6></LI></UL></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<H1>Hot clean power under our feet</H1></DIV>
<DIV>
<P>America can kick its addiction to fossil fuels by drilling more wells, says
a panel of experts at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Not for oil,
but to tap Earth's heat.</P>
<P>Converting geothermal heat into electricity by pouring water onto hot rocks
underground and using the steam to turn turbines is arguably the most
promising - and renewable - source of "green" energy on the planet. So
concludes the MIT experts' report, released on Monday, which examines what
geothermal energy could do for the US in the 21st century. </P>
<P>The 18-member panel calculated that there is more than enough extractable
hydrothermal energy available to generate the entire 27 trillion
kilowatt-hours of energy consumed in the US in 2005. In fact, a conservative
estimate of the energy extractable from the hot rocks less than 10 kilometres
beneath American soil suggests that this almost completely untapped energy
resource could support US energy consumption, at its current clip, for more
than two millennia to come. </P>
<P>Developing a new generation of geothermal plants is thus a top priority for
tackling global warming, the panel says. "By any kind of calculation, this is
an extremely large resource that is technically accessible to us right now,"
says the study's lead author, Jefferson Tester. "It doesn't require new
technology to get access to it. And there's never going to be a limitation on
our ability to expand this technology because of limits of the resource." </P>
<DIV>From issue 2588 of <STRONG><EM>New Scientist magazine</EM></STRONG>, 27
January 2007, page 4</DIV></DIV><SPAN class=q>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4"><B>From:</B> <A title=starbliss@gmail.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:starbliss@gmail.com" target=_blank>Ted Moffett</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=godshatter@yahoo.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target=_blank>Paul Rumelhart</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target=_blank>vision2020@moscow.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 06, 2007 2:18 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] who killed the electric car?</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></SPAN>
<DIV><SPAN class=e id=q_110992f164463ea1_7>
<DIV>All-</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I do not doubt that the corporate manipulations regarding the electric
car in California were obstructive to improving and implementing consumer use
of these cars...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But the bottom line on electric car/trucks being practical for widespread
use (even ignoring the limited range of these vehicles before needing
recharging, which has been a significant negative in many consumers minds) is
the huge amount of electricity that would be needed. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>California has problems supplying enough electricity for current
needs. To implement widespread electric car use in California would
require huge increases in electricity generation.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Paul's suggestion that electric cars make it possible to turn off coal
fired electric plants that might power these cars en masse, by replacing
the coal fired plant with nuclear, wind or solar plants, is not a
practical solution. The need for the massive amounts of electricity
involved would require adding more coal, natural gas and nuclear plants,
plus adding wind and, well, maybe solar, though solar is currently too
expensive. We need to cut back on coal electric generation as it is, due
to CO2 output, or switch to CO sequestered coal power, yet we still get 50% of
our electricity from coal, and there is tremendous resistance to cutting back
on cheap coal generated electricity, cheaper than nuclear, wind or
solar. New nuclear fission plants have many drawbacks also. Wind
and solar electricity to power widespread use of electric cars can be a part
of the solution, but not enough to turn off coal plants. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>To solve these problems nationwide would require a massive
reorganization of and expansion of electricity generation requiring
cooperation across numerous sectors of the economy. Even if the oil and
auto industry pushed the electric car option for widespread use, they might
not succeed. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The elephant in the room of the energy/fossil fuel depletion/global
warming crisis is the fact that our current consumption of energy for
transportation needs of all kinds uses too much energy, and increases in
efficiency and implementation of new technology will not sufficiently solve
the problems quickly enough, even if they can eventually be solved, given our
current economic and lifestyle demands on energy consumption. It is hard
to get around the need to radically downsize transportation energy
consumption. Almost no one wants to face this fact, the economic and
lifestyle implications. It is assumed we can have our energy cake and
eat it to... </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There is no patent that the oil or auto industry is hiding (though they
may be hiding some) on electrical generation sources or super efficient
electric motors that will make solving these transportation energy problems
easy, nor is lifting corporate control over the work of
engineers going to make the problem less daunting, though that might
help. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We could use more coal combined with CO2 sequestration
to generate some of the extra electricity needed to power electric
cars, but coal will deplete, and coal electricity with CO2 sequestration
is more expensive, though absolutely necessary to avoid catastrophic
climate change. We could expand natural gas generated electricity, but this
source will deplete. We could build 100s of new nuclear power plants to
power electric cars. Good luck with that idea, with the nuclear
waste problem, the expense of nuclear plants, and the storage of dangerous
nuclear material in a world of terrorists threats. More hydro could be
implemented, as if our rivers are not damned enough already. Wind power
is being expanded and is a realistic option, but will eventually be needed to
replace coal and natural gas energy... Solar is currently too expensive,
though hopefully it will become less. What else? Hydrogen
fuel for electric fuel cell cars...? Some of the options for generating
large amounts of hydrogen fuel suggest building more nuclear plants.
Again, good luck!: </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/kiss.htm"
target=_blank>http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/kiss.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" color=blue size=2>Third,
hydrogen ? unlike electricity ? can be stored, and so the tremendous value of
nuclear power can be translated into energy for the transportation energy
system, a vast market into which nuclear power can now penetrate. Professor
Paul Kruger of Stanford University has estimated that requirements for meeting
this demand, but avoiding carbon emissions, will require hundreds of nuclear
plants in the coming decades, unless one believes that renewable energy
systems can grow at staggering rates [ <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2002/kis-ref.htm#[point16]"
target=_blank>Ref 16</A>].</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>-------</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What else? Biomass, biofuel, geothermal, tidal or wave electric
generation? Probably not solutions for powering a nation wide fleet of
electric cars.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The development that might make electric cars practical for widespread
use, even hydrogen fuel cell electric cars, that could be the energy
breakthrough of human history, fusion, is currently just a gleam in the eyes
of the physicists and engineers building ITER in France, a 10 billion dollar
project that is the largest internationally funded scientific project after
the International Space Station: </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/ITER_Host.html"
target=_blank>http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/ITER_Host.html</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ted Moffett</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 2/5/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>Paul
Rumelhart</B> <<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" target=_blank>godshatter@yahoo.com </A>>
wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">Bill London wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=http://mid00d601c7498e$f45763a0$0200a8c0@techlab
type="cite"><SPAN>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yes, engineers likely could design more
efficient vehicles and better power sources -- but will they be allowed to
do so?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>That is the lesson of the electric car fiasco
in California.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>When the gas/auto industries were able to
destroy the state mandate for zero emission cars, they stopped their
engineers from improving the existing electric cars, stopped their
customers from buying any (or transferrring their leases to purchases),
and destroyed all existing vehicles. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>BL</FONT></DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I think
they will eventually be allowed to do their designs. What I can't tell
you is if they will be allowed to do so by the forward-thinking progressives
or by those who will be picking up the pieces after the oil runs dry and the
economy comes crashing down. <BR><BR>I definitely want to watch the
DVD. I am entertained by watching self-serving billionaires ruin
everything for us because they have a level of greed most people stamp out
of their children by the time they are four. Gives me faith in
humanity.
<BR><BR>Paul<BR> </DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>
<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>
mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"
target=_blank>Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================
<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<SPAN class=q>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.fsr.net/"
target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A>
<BR> mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"
target=_blank>Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================
</SPAN>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P></DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>
<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>
mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BODY></HTML>