Discussion in 'General Gallery' started by Fangman, Nov 3, 2006.
I am sure that a Green Tax and extra parking charge would apply to this!
Um..... don't steam engines burn coal?? One of the worst energy offenders?? Cool shot! What exactly do they use it for??
As long as anything needs to get burned to create the enery for running it, it is no cure, I'm afraid, but the vehicle is nice and endearing and - like Johno here - also I am wondering where you saw it and for which event it put-putted along the road? (I actually feel my eyes keep wondering more to that ever-so-cool-about-it looking leaning guy in his cap than to the "Peacock" itself )
Thoughts all there......... but Its not gonna happen. Ha
Keep them Coming. Props on the shot.
Taken in the village at a bygones exhibition - I collect old pictures of the village going back to the late 1800's. I think the chap in the cap is trying to disown the puddle on the road!
The mythic "London Fog" was actually due to the factories burning coal. Once the Industrial Revolution ended, the factories cleaned up, and the fog disappeared.
HYDROGEN IS THE ANSWER!!!!!
When burned in an engine, hydrogen produces effectively zero emissions; when powering a fuel cell, its only waste is water.
Nice shots btw.
Unfortunately, there are two problems with hydrogen:
The first one, and the more technical of the two, is that hydrogen can produce some extremely toxic chemicals when it's burned in a non-pure oxygen environment (i.e., fuel cells in cars). Not too big of a problem, but it is there. Hydrogen only produces pure water when you're reacting it with pure oxygen.
The second: Where are we getting the hydrogen from? So far, water. If you run a DC current through water, it breaks the molecules up (electrolysis). But, we currently get 70 percent of our power from coke-fueled power plants. In the energy world, everything with an upside has a downside - simply because the scales are so huge. Small problems become large ones when applied to economies of scale, and power is a huge industry.
The rest of the world is going to nuclear fission, as fusion looks to be several decades away from becoming a commercial technology. Nations are allowing nuclear reprocessing, which we don't allow here in the united states due to proliferation concerns (nuclear reprocessing increases the manageability of nuclear waste). It's stymied, ultimately because the public is completely unfamiliar and ignorant in regards to what nuclear power is, and what its real dangers and benefits are.
Very few people understand nuclear power, much less understand it enough to be making policy on it. Yet, everyone in marketing and sales in middle class America to Joe Blow down on the farm has something ignorant about it to write their policymakers.
Separate names with a comma.