Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

What's your favorite alternative fuel?

Apr 24, 2007 10:45AM PDT

What's your favorite alternative fuel, and why do you think it's the best? Does it offer a possible long-term replacement to gasoline? I've covered some current alternative fuels in my column, Your clean, green car choices.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Hear Hear
May 4, 2007 3:25AM PDT

Hydrogen is probably the only answer since war has been declared on carbon dioxide (one of the dumbest things I have heard in a long time),stop breathing no soda pop and short of hydrogen do not burn anything. If you want this world to include humans without a 90% reduction in humans you had better invest in nuclear fusion (hydrogen into helium), if we do not these tree-hugger's will have us back in the stone age.

- Collapse -
Lets use that billion year old fusion reactor!
May 6, 2007 10:18AM PDT

The problem with fusion is that it takes such incredibly high temperatures that all of the fusion reactors on earth take far more energy to get up to fusion temperature than they can ever possibly produce. Researchers inch towards "breakeven" by building ever bigger and more expensive test reactors, but the trend is obvious - by the time they exceed breakeven and actually produce usable power, the reactor will be so big and expensive that it will make photovoltaics look cheap in comparison.

Better to use that old working fusion reactor call "the sun".

- Collapse -
alternative fuels
May 5, 2007 9:36AM PDT

Take a look at the firefly battery being made by Catapliller - right now only military but it should be able to kick start electric cars that are practical.
kevin

- Collapse -
There is NO alternative fuel!
Apr 29, 2007 5:51AM PDT

There is only the use of the proper fuel for the equipment operated.

You wrote;
"The infrastructure is already in place but it will be stopped at every turn since it threatens the current trillions of dollars yet to be made from the current fuel economy."

In the 1950's during the heyday of the Mobil Oil Enconomy Run, an annual road test of fuel economy, one was always hearing about the 100 mile a gallon carburter but the oil companies would buy & suppress the patent, kill the inventor, buy off General Motors etc. There was a big deal made about one, named after the inventor, the Fish carburator. No one seemed to recognize the competitive advantage a car company would have. Had such a thing existed no oil company would have had enough money to keep it off the market.

In the early days of automobiles electricity, steam and Kerosene were used but the technology of the day made them very impractical, whereas oil was easy to find and refine and the engines had a long, trouble free life compared to anything else at the time. The concept of the hybrid car is some 60 years old but only recently has the battery technology caught up. Chrysler ran a "junk fuel" turbine powered Plymouth Fury sedan on the streets of Detroit but the exhaust had a distressing habit of igniting litter. The engine was banned at the Indy 500 where at the time desiel cars were racing. It was too fast to catch!

I worked on shale oil and oil sands extraction projects in 1965 but it was not economically possible with the $3.00 bbl oil of the time.

Regardless of all the noise that came out of the Three Mile Island power plant, the only thing that proved is that atomic power generation safety controls work but one excellent source of power has been lost.

There is NO alternative fuel! There is only the use of the proper fuel for the equipment operated.

Tex

- Collapse -
Several Bullets and then a BOMB...
May 2, 2007 2:13PM PDT

Well, not a bomb to everyone, but...

Too many ignorant retards in possibly the dumbest nation on earth are totally spooked by a word they really do not understand; Nuclear, and it doesn't help when el presidente pronounces it 'nucular' . . . Modern plant designs do not need to shut down to be refuled. This means no longer is there built in obsolescence from the effects of heating/cooling/expanding/contracting. But of course, all the plants we have are of the old, less efficient designs. Why we suffer such utter fools in USA I will never know. I used to think being an American meant something, but don't get me started...

A new aquaintence is a propulsion engineer who is getting 800 HP from 2.5 liter Subaru engines. First, he says deisel is the future. I say, how bout bio from hemp, oh, nevermind.

I also say, how bout turbine combined with noise cancelling technology; hmmm? Oh, 100% efficiency would gore too many oxes, I understand this...

This guy also confirmed the mythical '100 mpg Carburator' rumored for decades. He said it was real, it worked, and in a large block V-8 at that. The key? It heated and vaporized the gasoline before piston intake, thereby, COMPLETE COMBUSTION!!! Capice?

Oh, and some 13 yo from Cortez, CO made a working model of a hydrogen-generating car, electrolosys of water from electricity generated at the wheels during breaking; exhaust vapor collected and recycled. A 13 YEAR OLD!!!

Shhhhh; these blasphemous things must be kept quiet...

Ummm, oh ya, the carburator part was the bomb part... Now it makes working sense...

Now, I believe oil is produced by the Earth's crust. Mainly because we woulda cooked alla dang dinosaurs 100 times over by now. And oh ya; old previously drained oil wells are once again filled with oil. And also; methane and oil are also produced by other planets/moons in our solar system. Dinosaurs my nads.

H/3 in the moon's dust; it's loaded. It's loaded with energy. But, the Chineese will mine it first, probably with the help of Cuba; launch sites work better near the equator you know.

Didn't Tesla die in jail because he proposed collecting lightning; one strike enough to power Chicago for 3 months? Hmmm? Oh ya, a shuttle load of moon dust could power the entire planet for a year. I dunno, just what I heard.

Problem: Hey I am a total capitalist, but government should fit in the equations somewhere. But it won't. Why? L-O-B-B-I-E-S. Campaign contributions. Well, it's gotta come from somewhere. I can't sit on my thumbs in office if I can't win an election, stop looking at me, or I will sick the secret service on your _________.

Alternative fuel for the boarder wall? 6 months hard labor for illegals. Let's start by emptying our prisons, feed 'em alla tacos they can eat for 6 months work on the wall before we ship them down to Antarctica. Whut? Would be better than how Mexicans treat invaders of THEIR southern boarder. Sheeeeesh.

- Collapse -
The part about Tesla is a bit off I think
May 2, 2007 3:25PM PDT

Sorry, Tesla did not die in jail, just in poverty. He was discredited because he was attempting to get electricity that would not cost anything to produce aside from building the huge induction coil, and using the magnetic nickle iron core of the planet as the moving mass. He did invent the induction coil, alternating current, the electric motor, etc. After all, Westinghouse had just invested in the manufacture of all those generators and dams. They have to be able to charge money for power.
It's the same principle that makes a magnetic guitar pickup work, just a lot bigger.

- Collapse -
i must agree!
May 2, 2007 4:34PM PDT

'fossil fuels' my ****! It's plain rediculous! I don't think there is any observation of grave yards creating any oil underneath, nor do i think dino's all went to die in the same swamp, creating vast mountains of steaming corpses all waiting to entombed under millions of years of sediment....no! i think they turned to food for other animals just what we see happen today. You don't see forest floors turning into oil pits nor do you see elephant graveyards yielding any black gold.

I don't know that the crusts 'make' oil but possibly....like coal beds put under massive heat and pressure, no, wait! that makes diamonds! back to the drawing board??????????

- Collapse -
The Earth's oil
May 3, 2007 1:11AM PDT

The oil we use today has been in the earth for billions of years. At one time oil appeared to be abundant, but roughly 100 years after the first well successfully drilled for oil in the US and 75 years after the first one in the Middle East, today we are rarely finding new oil fields. The problem is that if the earth's crust produces oil as you say, it probably produces much less in one year than the world uses in 1.47 seconds (based on age of earth at 4.3 billion years, and 200 years of oil supply).

- Collapse -
Alternative Power
May 3, 2007 5:09AM PDT

Toshiba has a small reactor supposedly the size of a water heater, that can power like 600 homes in Alaska, for 30 years between refuelings. We, in the US, invented atomic power, how come we are not able to use it?? Atomic power is the only clean source of generating the power we need with current technology. France can evidently reconcentrate the spent fuel into new fuel. Once again, why can't we?? Electricity, as it is generated in the US is still a joke. Other than hydro and nuclear, it still depends on burning a fosill fuel somewhere. The charging problem on electric vehicles can be solved simply by the use of a small, highly efficient 10-12 hp diesel genset to recharge en route, along with circuitry to use braking/decelerating to recapture energy.
Another method of energy storage would be a flywheel running in a near vacuum. Same recharging principles can work, small elec motor to spint it up to speed, plug it in at night. Small diesel genset to supply en route boost. This was actually tried with busses in the early 50's, I think successfully, but not competiyive with 14 cent a gallon diesel at that time.

- Collapse -
Free Energy
May 3, 2007 12:59PM PDT

Nikola Tesla used the energy of the "aether" to create electric. Henroy T. Moray also discovered this years before Tesla, and Daniel McFarland Cook, of Mansfield, OH received a patent (U.S. Patent No. 119,825) in 1871 for a device that was to eliminate "galvanic batteries" that powered the telegraph.

Burning fuel to produce electric is one of the biggest jokes in the world. The universe is abound with electrons just waiting for the right conditions to tap into them.

And just to get the goat of the "debunkers" I propose that UFOs are powered by atheric energy, otherwise they would have a real problem finding a fuel station in this part of the galaxy!

Fred M
Corvallis, OR

- Collapse -
Someones a liar.
Jun 24, 2007 12:14PM PDT

"This guy also confirmed the mythical '100 mpg Carburator' rumored for decades. "

It was a myth. The guy who ran around with it, never produced any, and got a lot of money from people for it, then said "guys" came and stole it from him. If he invented it he'd have been able to make another. He never let anyone inspect it or verify the results. It was a scam. Just like you'll see scams today "add this thingy to your car and increase gas mileage 20%!".

The guy you talked to lied. It was never confirmed or proven. Fisher got a bunch of money and retired with it. Current day auto are designed for complete vaporization prior to ignition. In fact gas in liquid form does not burn. That is how old timers can put out their cigarettes in a can full of gas. Yet mileage has not increased so much. Further, if you run your car on LPG, you don't get incredible mileage, yet it's complete vaporized in the bottle.

The fisher carb was a scam, it never happened.

Please read
http://www.snopes.com/autos/business/carburetor.asp

I'm tired of dealing with this insane urban legend.

- Collapse -
Turbine efficiency
May 5, 2007 1:26PM PDT

Ok here we are again with the conspiracy theories. The Chrysler turbine engines in the early 60s suffered from 3 problems. 1 they are very expensive to build. 2 Accelerator lag, when you step on the gas pedal it took a few seconds for the turbine to spin up and the car to move. Turbo charged cars today have a similar problem waiting for the boost to build from a dead stop. 3 fuel efficiency. A turbine engine is not quite as efficient as a piston engine when you have to keep changing the engine speed all the time (stop and go traffic).
Also they did not burn "junk oil" they burned regular gasoline or kerosene. Also, There was a heat exchanger in the engine that heated the incoming compressed air using the heat from the exhaust gas. This was to increase the efficiency of the engine. It also reduced the temp of the exhaust. No roadside litter was ignited. The cars were distributed to several Mr. and Mrs. use families for regular use. The reception was Luke warm from the drivers. Chrysler was smart enough not to repeat ford mistake with the Ensile.

- Collapse -
Electricity is more palooting
May 2, 2007 3:31PM PDT

Electricity sounds nice but your losing energy at every stage. Coal becomes heat, heat becomes steam, steam becomes motion in a turbine, motion becomes electricity, electricity travels many miles to your home fighting electrical resistance the entire trip, then it's converted to magnetism, to turn a generator in your car, which makes electricity, the electricity is finally converted by a chemical reaction and stored as lithium plates in a battery. If you don't drive the plates degrade anyway. If it's a hot day, the plates degrade anyway. You're losing power with every change in state and with the chemical nature of a battery... Not only, that your putting more of a burden on an already maxed out power grid. And you're not saving any pollution from being made, it's just not coming out of your tail pipe. It's coming out of the smoke stack of a coal burning power plant.

With this, you're giving fuel to the Bush administrations argument that we need more nuclear power plants. Nuclear Fission energy stifles more advanced forms of power generation (I.E. Nuclear Fusion) and creates the most deadly toxic substances known to man. Conventional nuclear power is not the answer.

There is not enough coal to come to our rescue, an oil fired power plant will put us back where we started, and we can't build more dams...

The only answer is hydrogen. If you have sun light and water, you can make hydrogen fuel. Anywhere you find these two ingredients, you can make clean, abundant, and free fuel. But the industry doesn't want you to have this fuel because they can't turn a profit on something that's free and everywhere. It's technology that's over 100 years old, but they keep saying it's experimental??? Under development??? People, use your brains. And storage of this fuel is not the issue they would have you believe.

There's your answer. Hydrogen.

- Collapse -
An alternative source.
May 2, 2007 3:39PM PDT

hey. Suppose your series electric vehicle came with not only a photovoltaic exterior, but a photovoltaic recharging pannel to mount over your garage. Just a thought.

- Collapse -
You would expect all Europe to use it because......
May 2, 2007 3:58PM PDT

..........When I fill up the tank of my little car (compare to the American type), I never manage to pay less than 60 dollars!

Man! 4 dollars for a full tank that's a bargain! Forget the green stuff, let's go on the real polluting stuff!

Just to stress that even if in Europe the price are sky high people didn't change their habits because the green car are still too expensive and the pump in the countryside are nowhere to be seen.

- Collapse -
You've got to be kidding me!!
May 2, 2007 9:13PM PDT

All you need is sunlight and water??? 'Hey honey, go out back and russle me up some hydrogen...I've got to go to work.' Come on writeleft, you definitely write left. Get off you're left wing agenda and 'use your brain'. Hydrogen would have to be produced, distributed, and used. All of these produce $...yes evil profits. Its just not viable at this point and until the market says so, its not going to be viable.

Also, why are the polar ice caps on other planets melting, or does the answer skewer the sacred cow of man-made global warming?

Peace...

- Collapse -
ummmm close but not quite...
May 2, 2007 9:25PM PDT

Hydrogen doesn't just spontaneously appear when you have sunlight and water Happy It takes electricity to break down hydrogen from water. I agree that hydrogen is the best alternative for the next 20 years but it really IS still experimental.

- Collapse -
Electricity does not pollute
Jun 25, 2007 9:29PM PDT

It's not electric that creates pollution, it's the arcane ways in which electric is used. Electricty does not require fuel for it to exsist. It's already there. The problem is that to get that energy, we need to think about physics differently.

Theer is no more abundant energy in the universe that electrical energy. Electrons flow through every atom and through the spaces between.

Many physicists have experimented with resonant frequencies that begin to "create" electricity" Daniel McFarland-Cook patented a device in 1871 that generated electric with two concentric coils. Henry T. Moray demonstrated several "radiant energy" devices that powered lights, clothes iron, and built an electric car that ran with an antenna instead of batteries. Nikola Tesla did the same, and further stated that he could transmit that electric power wirelessly like radio waves without danger to animals or humans. MIT just dmonstrated the wireless transmission of electric to power a 6- watt bulb. Tesla did this with dozens of bulbs. In fact, he ran his entire lab with "wireless and free" electricty. He recieved it from "the cosmos" or the "Sea of Energy" that Moray wrote about.

18th and 19th century physicists called it the Aether, but along came Albert Einstein, and Relativity. Using the Michelson-Morley experiement as proof, light became a fixed maximum speed, and nothing could travel faster.

Nothing can give us space travel like electric can. It powers the universe. Tesla estimated that space emits millions of volts without current, constantly now and forever. He was able to capture it and trandform it to utility power.

He designed his WardenClyffe Tower to do just that. J. P. Morgan didn't like that idea, but George Westinghouse could not afford to pay Tesla for what he had done under contract let alone finance such an endeavor. Tesla lab was destroyed and the rest as they say is history.

The technology to rid us of "our oil addiction" as President Bush labeled it, is here with us and has been for years. It's suppressed for the benefit of the industries that stand to lose the most.

Just as we don't have real healthcare, we won't have real energy freedom unless everyone one of us starts to take action. Otherwise you're just part of the problem.

In the time it took you to write about what doesn't work, and my telling you what will, Exxon-Mobil will have made hundreds of millions of dollars, terrorists will have received weapons from laundered oil funds, and many more lives will have been lost.

Someone wrote that such energy technology would fall into the wrong hands and that is the reason its not made public. That is such a crock. If we were able to stop all use of oil and oil products next month, do you know how that will effect global terrorism?

If you could drive to work, take a bus or train, and no fuel is burned, no pollution is generated, less noise than diesels and holes in mufflers and manifolds, no empty oil containers littering all over the streets and sidewalks at Auto Zone or Pep Boys, or, hey wait! There would be no need for all those auto stores! Guess they will have to get jobs at fast food joints.

- Collapse -
Elecricity
May 2, 2007 3:53PM PDT

Oddly enough, I suspect you're on to something there.

In a nutshell, most of the other alt fuels have a problem with rspect to the laws of thermodynamics. In the end there are three sources of energy to be used on this planet: solar and its derivatives, geothermal, and nuclear (i.e. conversion of matter to energy).

Aside from nuclear and geothermal, every source of energy derives from solar. Fossil fuels are stored solar energy. So are fuels such as biodeisel and alcohol: some plants convert solar energy to carbohydrates, fibers, alcohols, lipids, whatever. These are all essentially stored solar energy.

If we want to tackle the energy problem we have to convert and use energy efficiently. Indirect use of solar energy is simply inefficient. Somewhere along the line we have to reach the point where the per capita use of energy exceeds that which can be reclaimed from the amount of solar energy that reaches our planet per unit of time. We may have reached that point already. After that the only solutions are either reduce energy consumption per capita or reduce the capitas.

Not a pretty picture, eh? ***, go forth and multiply all ye dumb arses, and cart your doomed kids around in your SUVs.

- Collapse -
Lets think Hydrogen first!!
May 2, 2007 6:26PM PDT

I have to agree that some form of combined, or all electric car seems the right route forward in the short term, but I find it strange that Governments around the World have not given more direction toward Hydrogen as an altarenataive fuel. As a planet it seems obvious that we are going to have to rely more and more on Atomic power stations for the rapid increase in our energy needs. These mainly will be beside areas of sea, this allows for excess power to be used for water de-salination, and Hydrogen production, as well as electricity, all in one plant. This will help to supply clean water in areas of greatest need, along with electricity to growing economies, and a fuel that is easy to transport, and when used produces water as its only polution. By keeping the powers stations and production plants in one area, the pollution is controlled and security is easier. The latest design of Light Water Reactors can be made in quite small sizes that would be small enough to supply single towns or communities. This stops the need for vast arrays of energy consuming electricty distribution systems, which in themselves cause pollution and destruction of resources. The problem with Hydrogen is the popular memory of films of airships burning. The most volatile chemical handled every daty is Gas (Petrol). The vapour alone is so explosive that if it is handled in a laboratory situation, it comes under incredably strict Government safety controls. Yet millions of gallons a day is pumped at Gas stations with people smoking, talking on phones, all ignoring the dangers. Hydrogen would be deliverd like LPG is now, if it accidently vents the vapour instantly rises, instead of pooling at ground level, and it dissipates very quickly. The liklehood of explosion is much lower than with ordinary Gas (Petrol).
My vote ---- easy, lets go HYDROGEN, the planet has more Hydrogen than all the humans could consume in the next two or three hundred thousand years, plus we get the water we are about to run out of..

Jonathan Ryan

- Collapse -
hydrogen last
May 3, 2007 7:32AM PDT

Lets first use new nuke plants and solar energy to meet new electricity demand, then shutdown existing fossil fueled power plants. After all that you can begin talking about using excess electricity to produce hydrogen for transportation. that is a long, long way off in the future.

... not to mention popular memory of Challenger explosion....

Hydrogen must be stored at extreme pressure. I don't want it venting anywhere near me after a car crash. I'll take my chances with the slower burning and more stable biodiesel.

The planet has a lot of water, not free hydrogen. Saying "the planet has more hydrogen than all the humans..." because we have a lot of H2O is like saying "the planet has more free carbon than all the humans ..." because we have a lot of CO2.

H2O and CO2 are the waste product, not the energy source.

- Collapse -
Alternate fuels
May 3, 2007 12:45AM PDT

"On top of that it is then possible to have solar, wind, other collectors at home"

I agree with you R. Proffitt, this would be great. However, the problem you have is as always, it's great for producing energy, it's also GREAT due to the fact you have what is called Home Owners Associations, You know, those few individuals that think they are God's gift to mankind!! They wont like it because IT RUINS THE LOOKS OF MY PROPERTY. Get rid of groups like that and you can make advances in alternate fuels. Until then, you have a few individuals that will rule what you do. You know, the squeaky wheel gets the grease!!

- Collapse -
homeowners associations
May 4, 2007 7:00AM PDT

The fact is, a minority of people in this country (less than 60 million) are affected by homeownes associations, and with those that are, it is by choice. The real problem at this time with photovoltaics is thier high cost. But in the not-too-far-distant future that is likely to change as the collectors become cheaper, and the energy supplies that they replace become more expensive. Which will the cost return faster and will create a greater demand for them.

- Collapse -
Solar Electric Panels.....
May 3, 2007 1:27AM PDT

.... should be sold with nearly every EV. Plunk them on the roof, in the back yard, on top of the car port, etc. While the vehicle is at home and parked, it can be charging (for FREE as long as the sun is out). There will be people who park underground or can't put up solar panels but those would be the exceptions, not the rule. The panels may not supply all of the needed recharge power but they would definitely make a difference.

The transition to any alternate fuel sources will take time and a lot of PR work. People are going to want an incentive to go to the extra trouble and expense. In it's current form, the hybrid vehicle is too expensive and provides too little real advantage to make it worth while to me. Give me an EV (possibly with a small IC engine to charge the batteries in a pinch). I can stop for a coffee break while it's charging.

Most importantly, we need to consider the greenhouse gas problem. Many of the alternatives reduce the output of CO2 but not enough to make a real difference in our atmosphere. We need to use fuels which produce little to no CO2 and the production of those fuels needs to follow that same thinking. To produce ethanol takes as much energy as what it can provide. It's only real advantage is to stretch the supply of gasoline a little further. Hydrogen takes energy to create it. The best options are nuclear power plants, solar plants and to some degree, hydroelectric and wind power. None of these power sources produce CO2. We need to get over the scares of the past about nuclear power. With todays technology it can be done safely and the waste is far less hazzardous than what we are currently doing to this planet. Perhaps even that waste can be put to work in lower level power production.

Why are honey bees disappearing? They are our number 1 source for crop pollination and their numbers are dropping rapidly. No one knows for sure why this is happening. Perhaps it because atmospheric CO2 levels are rising at an alarming rate. Perhaps the slight temperature rise on the planet is killing them off. Humans are very durable creatures. Many other animals, insects included, are not. Something to consider. It's not just about saving a few bucks, it's about keeping our planet alive as well. We have to look at the BIG picture.

- Collapse -
Sun being out
May 6, 2007 9:50AM PDT

Solar panels charge when the sun is in your part of the world, whether you can see it for the clouds or, they work off the different UVs, and whether or not it is raining, snowing, clouded over or the sun is bright and shining the panels will produce electricity.

The sun only has to be over your head, does not matter if you can see it or not, if it is there, it is producing UVs and there-fore will produce electricity

- Collapse -
No new car for me.
May 3, 2007 2:30PM PDT

First off Im not buying a hybrid just because gas goes up $1 a gallon, or even $2. Even if I had a big SUV with a 30 gallon tank (those are the people who complain that it took $100 to fill their tanks at $3+ a pop, do the math, but they dont mind spending $35,000+ on that SUV!), which I dont! Even if gas went up $2 a gallon and I filled a 30 gallon tank once a week, thats only an extra $240 to $300 a month! Yes I said only, because thats what a new car note would be, if not more, and you still need gas after that. Getting a a new car makes even less sense with my 15 gallon tank that I fill up every other week!

Now, if I were in the market for a new vehicle anyway, I would definitely buy an alternative fuel vehicle. Either ethanol or a hybrid. Detroit has been making Ethanol (E85) powered vehicles for about a decade now, way longer than Japan has been offering hybrids. E85 is an option in all types of vehicles, small cars, mid sized, pickups and full sized SUV's, if E85 isnt available it will still run on unleaded gas.

I think I recall hearing there are about 15 million new vehicles sold in the U.S. every year. People can talk and vote all they want, but until automakers see large percentages of new vehicle sales screaming for alternatives not much will change at a fast pace!

- Collapse -
THIS IS A REAL ANSWER TO THE ENERGY CRISIS & GLOBAL WARMING
May 6, 2007 11:19AM PDT

Global Warming - is it caused by mankind, and how can we stop it ?

Hurricanes - they destroy homes and oil refineries. Can we do anything about them ?

Oil - we need it to grow food and to heat our homes. How can we reduce our need for it ?

Fortunately there is a near-term technology that can cure all three - Solar Shields.

Imagine an enormous shield in space, a shield that could deflect sunlight away from earth. Most Scientists agree that even a 2 percent change in the sunlight falling on earth would have a major long term effect on climate.

Polar Ice Caps melting ? Shield them.

Hurricane forming ? Shield it. Without the energy of sunlight the storm would cool off and die.

Oil Supplies in doubt ? Take a Shield and instead of using it to deflect the light, use it as a Mirror to focus the sunlight onto Solar Energy Plants on earth. These would generate any electric need - electricity that could be used to power our civilization in an economic and environmentally sound way.

Would these shields be heavy and impossible to build ? No. They could be formed of membranes of micro-thin plastic. In the vacuum and low gravity environment of space, these structures could be extremely lightweight yet remain practical.

Ever see a child's soap bubble toy ? A micro-thin wire could be used to create a 50 mile circle. As the wire is extended, it would pull out a metalized liquid that forms an ever-increasing liquid membrane.

Tiny computer controlled positioning engines can be deployed at appropriate locations. By releasing tiny amounts of compressed gas, or sputtering ions, they would slowly stretch out the shield, as well as position it.

Crazy impossible Sci-Fi ? Hardly. Compared to the Strategic Defense Initiative slow moving Solar Shields are strictly low tech. And their construction is so light, I'm estimating a section fifty miles across could be lifted with a single Space Shuttle.

And the cost ? I'll bet it would be far less than what we've spent in Iraq.

- Collapse -
Electrical cars will overload our current grid sytem
May 6, 2007 12:07PM PDT

all those cars charging. The grid can't handle it.

- Collapse -
charge at night
May 8, 2007 11:27AM PDT

Most people will be out during the day and recharging at night. The grid load drops by 2/3ds at night

- Collapse -
A race!
May 12, 2007 8:22AM PDT

I have a great idea to promote the battery improvement, performance and just the idea of electric cars: a no-holds barred 500 lap race with a large reward for the top three.

Electric cars can go just as fast as gas, but the batteries need work. However, lithium polymer and eventually, nano-capacitors will improve to the point of being affordable and effective.