Sometimes, especially from the professional liar, pretending as if the energy transition is not a consequence of the oil production peak, but necessary for ecological reasons. If this were the case, however, it would be the many, inexpensive, yet no attention measures Take place only those with which one can still only make cash. Would it be necessary or possible to turn a man-made, global warming, then we would never of carbon dioxide (the amount in the atmosphere anyway almost not at all be influenced by humans), but instead mainly by carbon tetrafluoride, sulfur hexafluoride, Trichlormethylschwefelpentafluorid (all zigtausendmal as climate effect such as carbon dioxide), but also talk about water vapor (two hundred times as climate-effective as carbon dioxide, but probably not influenced by man), nitrous oxide (at least twenty times as effective as air carbon dioxide) and methane. The climatic impact of methane graded one, strangely enough, year after year down further, from an original of the sixty times the carbon dioxide effect on the fifty times, the dreiundzwanzigfache (incidentally, an interesting note), ten times, and now sometimes even to the seven times, six times or even five times the carbon dioxide effect. This can only be because that could harm the climate of the methane gas by combustion of it very quickly to eliminate carbon dioxide as good as, if one of the sixty-fold effect of methane compared to carbon dioxide proceeds. But the rationale for the transformation of energy we can actually not care because we know that we have already taken place because of the excess of global oil production peak must participate in this transformation. We have not even save energy, but we could and quite easily.
For example, we will be happy to air passengers in the pillory, because many allegedly dismissed aircraft emissions in the ozone layer. In fact, forcing you to fly airplanes by the bureaucrats in corridors that follow the rolling courses. Were flying it as straight as they could do and was in some air spaces already tried experimentally without any difficulties, they would consume only a fraction of today's fuel consumption and correspondingly lower emissions blowing into the atmosphere. But how could that lead to to airlines and passengers firmly to the checkout asks? On the contrary, the airlines would thus save even more fuel costs. So go the environmentalists do that. Similarly absurd is to develop the Gotham String Israeli scientists, the piezo-electric roads. They should draw electrical energy from the energy of the moving cars on them. Cars can of course do not produce energy, but they get the fuel with which it has fueled it. If one of the moving cars from an additional type of energy than usual, then you have the extra energy in accordance with a previously higher Amount of fuel into fill in the cars. The piezo-electric roads lead is nothing more than a higher fuel consumption in road transport and thus a corresponding increase in exhaust emissions. If one were to actually do something about the exhaust emissions from road transport, then piezo-electric roads would be extremely counterproductive, holding a sign that civil coup. If this is the Israeli scientists, led by Jewish scholars, Jews will either have not yet fifteen percent intelligence advantage (as claimed by Sarrazin) or is activated only in conjunction with the German language. The latter theory may sound far-fetched, But it would explain informally why the German language (native language of most Jews, including scientists such as Albert Einstein and all the Jewish victims of the Third Reich) is fought by people who only want bad things to the world. With Piëzoëlektrizität but you can also do useful things. There are people who celebrate the outdoors and for that, because even as ecological, electrical power about bicycle dynamo to generate the music. It must always find people who enter into the pedals and keep the not for long. That there was a piezo-electric dance floor the more sensible alternative. If you no gradient available has to rain to turn into water power, then you can convert the energy of falling out of the rain through the piezo-electric method in electric power instead of giving them just lost.
Potential energy of gravity (potential energy) is stored not only in the rain, but also in the flying aircraft. A plane crashes down, then the ends disastrously for the aircraft and passengers. What is the plane and all aboard doomed, nothing is wrong other than energy used! The crash of it is converted into deformation energy at the successful landing gradually into frictional heat. Both are, strictly speaking, a waste. No one wants to crash, but must land is it? Yes, that must be and the energy wasted in the process, the aircraft would be taking off for the next plane to good use, but instead it has to consume more fuel. One must only consider how to transfer the energy from the aircraft landed directly on the blasting. A mechanical transmission through a sort of Ferris wheel or Riesenkarussel or a giant seesaw should fail at the required dimensions for the construction, electrical and magnetic transfer forms are eliminated because of the danger to passengers and the electronics. For once, we know it today actually has not, we could build to solve the problem. But would you ever want to solve the problems of the modern aviation instead of getting much more to cash, then you could well build appropriate structures and they were already present at each airport. A transfer of the kinetic energy of a landing operation of moving parts in rotational energy would have to make today. But this leads nunmal not directly related to cash in from ecologically-hypocritical reasons.
There are of course ways to work today to save energy. Way you can do now heat storage in the open air where the wind sweeps over it. In other countries this is done already at least specifically as described on the linked web page . Only in German-speaking, of course. Why not? Now, how should result in direct cash in the polls and the mob human milk cows? Another way to massive savings would be the renunciation of the memory loss and the loss of transmission of electrical energy. Hang on, it should be abandoned simply can? But yes. How is this possible? By switching to compressed air. You can already start with the wind turbines and wind without transform into electric power conversion losses instead of in air ( describes how the web page linked here about the middle ), then used the air lines also store energy. Already, there are tools that work with compressed air and are preferred by some as auto mechanics, but the air pressure must now be first produced by engines. By switching to compressed air lines that exist within some buildings already, because you need air in many areas, would be the use of air-operated machines much cheaper and almost without energy losses are possible. There is little that one could not switch from electricity to compressed air and most of what can not move, you do not actually. Already a ninety percent conversion, however, would mean a significant energy savings. Of course, you could cash in only for the installation of air lines again, and then people would go there again difficult. So it is not on air. It could even run cars with compressed air, as the French engineer Guy Negre for many years proves. Why drive his cars around for many years, not everywhere? Why do you try instead nonsense, like electric cars and hydrogen engines? Things are very clear. Abassi for air, who would make up with it? But electric cars and hydrogen powered vehicles are therefore automatically nonsense? They are not so, but they are for a reason other nonsense. As always, the nature of human technology to millions of years ahead. It produces even electrical power from sunlight. This occurs in the chloroplasts of all plants. Because the've been doing this for millions of years so they know best how to save electricity. They do not save, because there is no viable method for it. It is always better to convert them into other forms of energy, if you want to save energy. In the chloroplast is divided for the purpose of water into oxygen and hydrogen. Nature has developed many millions of years before man of the hydrogen technology! So it is worth the hydrogen technology? No present-day organisms store pure hydrogen, and there is a reason. It is far too dangerous! The first mass extinction on Earth was not on oxygen due as is sometimes claimed (which was the second mass extinction) and certainly not to influences from space, but entirely on the hydrogen production. Even today, some cyanobacteria share free hydrogen. They are even used by the human followers of hydrogen technology for hydrogen production. It is these cyanobacteria which release hydrogen without any physiological sense, the proof that Nature is experimenting with hydrogen technology has. But all living things, which had set out, are extinct. Even the people who bet on extinction, to be sure, the explosion despite the protestations of supposed experts . Ensure This one needs to look only from today's plants, such as hydrogen is used correctly and not dangerous, unless one of a hydrogen technology is going to give. The plants bind the hydrogen chemical fertilizer plant in the most important of all substances, namely carbon dioxide they remove from the atmosphere. This results in the hydrocarbons. Carbon dioxide and hydrocarbons are portrayed as evil, like today, but without it all men were long dead! Who wants to get away from hydrocarbon combustion can, only to air out. But as for cash in air? And why is the Schüttelbatterie (can be any time by shaking again Electricity Charge) - at least in German-speaking - just a theoretical concept?
0 comments:
Post a Comment