Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (85849)	8/20/2000 1:32:22 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Energy and its source is the issue. Electricity that comes from oil (put into batteries in a car) is not a lot better than burning gasoline cleanly and efficiently. The exhaust is no longer coming from your tailpipe - it's coming from a smokestack miles from your home. The problem is that fossil fuels are not part of a closed thermal system. Storing the energy of the sun in carbon and hydrogen bonds is not in itself a problem. Heck, if we had a solar still creating fermented hydrogen and alcohol, we could store the sunlight in these forms with the only pollutant being heat. It is the fact that we are using "old" sunlight and dumping the waste that is the problem. The only source of power that isn't stored sunlight is nuclear. And it's from other stars, so in a way, it is stored sunlight too. Just not our sun. Wind, water and every other power source we have is just stored solar. The only sustainable source of energy that produces the smallest change to the energy balance is solar - passive, active or processed, it doesn't really matter. We have an efficiency problem. That is my opinion. It is also an opinion very well supported by the physics of the universe.