SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mannie who wrote (1265)7/26/2005 4:58:59 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 24213
 
Dead...
Cardboard Cowboy
Friend of the Devil
Jack Straw
Mexicali Blues
Stagger Lee
El Paso
Deal (Poker, several more like The Wheel))

Weir
"Big Iron": Marty Robbins
I'm sure there are more.



To: Mannie who wrote (1265)7/30/2005 2:10:26 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24213
 
Ensuring reliable power now and in the future

By Steve Reynolds

Special to The Times

Our economy just keeps changing.

Twenty-five years ago, forest products and airplanes created most of the jobs and very few of us had heard of computer software. Today, Microsoft has surpassed many older companies as a linchpin to the state's economy.

But one thing that hasn't changed is the role that plentiful, reliable and affordable energy plays in the region's economy. It was key in the past, is critical today, and will be even more so in the future.

Software developers, data centers and biotechnology research labs all need both affordable electricity and highly reliable service. A power blip of even a few seconds can be significant to a company that relies on uninterruptible power for data security or exacting environmental controls. Even our homes, with their computers and sophisticated appliances, are growing increasingly dependent on highly reliable power.

The region's ability to provide this needed power will directly affect our ability to provide jobs for our children and grandchildren.

At Puget Sound Energy, we have two important challenges: meeting our customers' power needs today and planning for those needs tomorrow. We have a great team that keeps electricity and natural gas reliably flowing to Washington homes and businesses today. It takes a lot of hard work to do this, but it's much more straightforward than trying to make plans for 20, 30, 50 years down the road.

In the Northwest, we've had it better than most other parts of the country. Half of our power comes from dams on the region's rivers. The rest we get from Canadian dams or from natural gas or coal-fired generation plants in the region. Hydropower is a cheap and renewable resource, but it has also reached its limit. So while it's our preferred power source today, it's not likely more dams will be built to supply power for tomorrow.

We have to make some tough choices about where we'll get the power for the next generation. And these choices may well determine the economic future of our region.

It would be the best of all worlds if conservation and renewable options like wind power could fill the gap until fuel cells and other new environmentally friendly technologies reach commercial viability. That would be nice, but it's wishful thinking. PSE believes — and has invested heavily — in both conservation and renewable sources like wind energy, but our experience has taught us that these options can't come close to filling the projected energy gap by themselves.

Over the next two decades, our region's power needs will grow by the equivalent of five cities the size of Seattle. We know the growth is coming. What we don't know yet is where the additional energy will come from to support this growth, or which form of generation the region will embrace.

The only way to fill the resource gap is to pick from options that today many people find less desirable. Given our region's history with nuclear power, discussion of that resource is generally a non-starter. The more likely options are natural-gas-fired plants, which currently are expensive to operate, or the new clean-technology coal plants that are under development elsewhere. Another way to help stabilize natural-gas-fired generating costs would be to develop a liquefied natural gas (LNG) port somewhere on the West Coast. This would allow the Northwest to utilize existing resources in Alaska and elsewhere that currently go unused.

No matter which generating choices we make, they're not likely to be located close to the Central Puget Sound corridor, where the bulk of our growth is occurring. So we also will need to upgrade the region's electric-transmission system to move the power safely, reliably and efficiently from where it's generated to where it's used.

None of the options I've outlined are going to be easy or particularly popular. The easy approach would be to do nothing, and pretend that conservation and wind power can fill the gap until new technologies are deployed. But as someone whose job is to keep the power on, I realize that we need solid, reliable energy infrastructure, not wishful thinking.

These are regional issues and we need a coherent regional strategy to address them. We need to make tough decisions and wise investments today, because choices will only get tougher the longer we delay. It takes time to bring new generating resources and expanded transmission capacity on line. The longer we wait, the fewer options we'll have and the more expensive they will be.

Expect to hear a lot more discussion about these issues in the coming months. We will be inviting other utilities, elected officials, businesses and citizens to join us in a dialogue to chart a course designed to provide a secure energy supply.

It may not feel like it when you open your bill, but electricity in the Northwest is still a very good deal. Even with the rate increases of the last few years, our region's electric rates average about 25 percent less than most other areas of the country.

We have to act today to preserve our advantage for the next generation.

Steve Reynolds is chairman, president and CEO of Puget Sound Energy, headquartered in Bellevue.

seattletimes.nwsource.com



To: Mannie who wrote (1265)7/31/2005 10:22:15 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24213
 
A scientific model for personal powered propulsion in the post carbon era...
The Science of Lance Armstrong: Born, and Built, to Win

Stefan Lovgren
for National Geographic News

July 22, 2005
As Lance Armstrong cruises to a probable seventh consecutive victory in the Tour de France, the world's premier road cycling event, most of us are left to marvel: How does the man do it?

Is there something in the 33-year-old Texan's genetic makeup that makes him superhuman? Not if you ask Ed Coyle, director of the Human Performance Laboratory at the University of Texas at Austin.

Coyle has been testing Armstrong, who will retire from cycling after this Tour de France, for 13 years. The result is a rare comprehensive study of an athlete over his entire career. Coyle's findings were reported in a recent issue of the Journal of Applied Physiology.

Armstrong clearly has some great genetic advantages.

His oversized heart can beat over 200 times a minute and thus pump an extraordinarily large volume of blood and oxygen to his legs. His VO2 max—the maximum amount of oxygen his lungs can take in, an important measurement for an endurance athlete—is extremely high.

But other elite athletes have similarly powerful hearts and lungs. Instead, Coyle says, smarter training may have contributed to giving Armstrong an edge over his competitors.

Early in his career Armstrong showed only average muscle efficiency—the percentage of chemical energy that the muscles are able to harness to produce power. Higher muscle efficiency means greater production of power.

From 1992 to 1999, the year of his first Tour de France win, Armstrong was able to increase his muscle efficiency by 8 percent through hard and dedicated training. Coyle says Armstrong is the only human who has been shown to change his muscle efficiency.

"It was believed that muscle efficiency is something you're born with, that you can't change," Coyle said. "But we've documented that Armstrong has indeed changed it while training intensely."

By making his muscles 8 percent more efficient, Coyle said, "Armstrong is 8 percent more powerful on the Tour de France"—enough to get his competitors off his wheel.

Acid Test

To become a great athlete, a person must first fit the physiological requirements of a given sport. Great basketball players, for example, generally need to be tall.

"If I put Lance Armstrong in a wrestling contest at the Olympics, I doubt that he would do very well," said William Kraemer, a professor of kinesiology at the University of Connecticut in Storrs.

According to the University of Texas's Coyle, there are certain physiological traits that a person must have to excel in an endurance sport such as long-distance cycling.

"To be the best on the planet, you don't have to be superhuman in any of these components, but you can't be weak in any of them," Coyle said.

In addition to a high VO2 max, Coyle's components include low lactic acid levels, and Armstrong has the lowest levels Coyle has ever seen.

When people reach exhaustion, their muscles build up acid, which causes the muscles to stop contracting. But Armstrong's muscles produce about half as much acid as the average person's muscles do when they get fatigued. This allows him to recover much faster than other people.

"You can see when Armstrong races, he can attack better than anybody," Coyle said. "He makes a break, then backs off and then breaks again, wearing [the others] down until they can't recover, and then he just takes off."

Slow-Twitch Muscle Fibers

Though Armstrong had a genetic head start in some areas, he did not have an advantage in one area: muscle efficiency.

Our muscles work much like the cylinders in a car. When air is mixed with gasoline in the cylinders of a car, a small explosion occurs and energy is released. Likewise, the muscles burn the food we eat, they produce raw chemical energy.

The movement of an engine's pistons allows most cars to capture 5 to 8 percent of that raw energy. In our bodies little chemical motors known as muscle fibers allow us to capture 18 to 23 percent of the energy.

At 21, Armstrong had a distinctly average 21 percent muscle-efficiency rate. Seven years later that rate had increased to 23 percent, a huge leap.

Researchers suggest there may be two ways to improve efficiency through training.

One way is to train for higher maximum capacity—in other words, to increase the upper limit of performance (as a sprinter might). Another way is to train for greater submaximal capacity—to expend less energy for sustained performance (as a marathoner might).

Armstrong did both.

"We don't know exactly what accounted for Armstrong's muscular-efficiency change," Coyle said. But he suspects that Armstrong was able to convert fast-twitch muscle fibers to slow-twitch muscle fibers.

While fast-twitch fibers are good for sprinting, for example, slow-twitch muscle fibers are twice as efficient and are good for endurance sports.

With more slow-twitch muscle fibers, and increased muscle power, Armstrong is able to move his legs faster. As a result, his pedaling rate has gone up from 85 revolutions per minute to 105.

Surviving Cancer

During Coyle's study, Armstrong was diagnosed with cancer and underwent surgery and chemotherapy. Remarkably, Armstrong showed no ill effects from the cancer upon his recovery.

It has been suggested that Armstrong lost weight from the cancer, making him a leaner (and better) cyclist. But Armstrong's weight eight months after his chemotherapy was the same as before his cancer treatment, according to Coyle.

However, surviving cancer almost certainly made Armstrong a stronger athlete mentally. Sports scientists agree that Armstrong is one of the most disciplined and focused athletes in the world.

"[He] is on top of the cycling world because of the combination and interaction of his genetic endowment, years of incredible training, competitive experience, and obsessive drive to achieve and persevere," said Phillip B. Sparling, a professor of applied physiology at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta.

It's a combination that's made Armstrong a rarity among men, but still just a man. "Most athletes are happy to perpetuate the myth of the superhuman," Coyle said. "But now that Lance is retiring, I think he'd be the first one to admit that he's not superhuman at all."
news.nationalgeographic.com



To: Mannie who wrote (1265)8/3/2005 8:45:42 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24213
 
Fuel Cell Motorbike to Hit U.S. Streets

John Roach
for National Geographic News

August 2, 2005
A sleek, almost silent, nonpolluting fuel cell-powered motorcycle is set to begin gliding down U.S. streets by the end of 2006.

The bike is dubbed the ENV (pronounced "envy"), short for Emissions Neutral Vehicle. The London-based company Intelligent Energy decided to develop the bike itself after years of cool reception to its fuel cell technology from manufacturers.

"We wanted to show how good the technology is right now and basically build what we thought would be a technical example, albeit an example that's wonderful and stimulates interest," said Andy Eggleston, ENV project director.

Since its unveiling earlier this year, the ENV has generated enormous interest—proof that the public is ready to embrace fuel cell technology, Eggleston said.

The motorcycle has a top speed of 50 miles an hour (80 kilometers an hour) and can run for 100 miles (160 kilometers) or up to four hours on a tank of compressed hydrogen. A fill-up costs about four dollars (U.S.).

ENV makes no more noise than a home computer and emits only heat and water.

Users have compared riding the nearly silent motorbike to skiing, sailing, surfing, and glider flying.

"If you go for a ride in the countryside, as you ride through it, you can smell the countryside, hear the birds singing, and you are not disturbing nature," Eggleston said. "Birds will not fly out of the way because they are terrified of the noise."

Intelligent Energy plans to sell the motorbike for between U.S. $6,000 and $8,000. The company believes the ENV will appeal to both urban commuters and recreational riders.

Core Technology

At the heart of the hydrogen-fueled motorbike is a compact, proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell. The cell converts the chemical energy of hydrogen and an oxidant (in this case, oxygen) to generate electricity.

Air ducts in the ENV's handlebars supply the fuel cell with oxygen, while hydrogen stored in a pressurized bottle serves as the gas tank. The fuel cell itself is composed of layers of metal plates fitted with membranes and electrodes.

The fuel cell "separates the hydrogen atom into protons and electrons, and the electrons are then collected to form an electric current to power the motor," Eggleston explained. "The protons recombine with the oxygen in the air that's also flowing through the fuel cell and is then expelled as water vapor."

Electricity produced by the fuel cell is routed to a stack of batteries and an electric motor, which provides the bike's propulsive power. A cooling fan emits the fuel cell's only noise

Intelligent Energy's fuel cell, called the Core, generates a kilowatt of electricity. By pairing the cell with a battery pack, the bike achieves a maximum load of six kilowatts to provide added punch during acceleration.

Eggleston notes that the Core is detachable from the bike and can be used to power a home or anything else, as long as a hydrogen supply is available.

Cell for the Future?

NASA embraced fuel cell technology in the 1960s to power spacecraft, but fuel cells have largely eluded the general marketplace.

High material costs, such as those of platinum catalysts (which facilitate the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen), have prevented widespread commercialization of fuel cells, said Douglas Nelson. Nelson is a mechanical engineer and director of the Center for Automotive Fuel Cell Systems at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute in Blacksburg.

However design refinements are beginning to lower fuel cell costs, Nelson says. "People are getting better and using less and less platinum, and membrane costs have come down too," he said, adding that mass production would further reduce costs.

Nelson has not seen the ENV but is familiar with the concept. He says the biggest hurdle Intelligent Energy must clear to successfully sell their technology is a lack of hydrogen infrastructure—gas pumps, if you will.

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. But the element is usually found as part of other compounds, such as fossil fuels, plant material, and water.

Canisters of pure hydrogen are readily available from hydrogen producers. But roadside hydrogen stations are few and far between.

To overcome this hurdle, Intelligent Energy is currently developing devices called reformers that extract hydrogen from biodiesel fuels (typically made from vegetable oils or animal fats) and ethanol (generally made from grain or corn). The units would sell for around U.S. $1,500 and could produce enough hydrogen to fill up the ENV for about 25 cents per tank, Eggleston said.

The process, he added, contributes no more atmospheric emissions than plant-based raw materials of biodiesel or ethanol would emit if left to rot on the ground.

"So you can get on the ENV motorbike and, for a quarter, do one hundred miles of silent, emissions-free biking," Eggleston said. "That to me is a compelling thing."
news.nationalgeographic.com