Do you want sustainablilty? Then think outside the box.

Thinking outside the box means thinking things that you have been led to believe are not helpful.   That is why you need to take a second look at nuclear power.  

There are ways to do nuclear which are much better than the conventional way.  The conventional way leads to much higher costs and is too inefficient to be cost effective.  A molten salt reactor, which was proven in concept over 40 years ago, can improve upon this greatly.  It hasn't been adopted due to the unwillingness of the system to look at innovative ways of solving the energy problem.

Nuclear power isn't something that people should be inordinately afraid of.  Like all power sources, it must be respected.  Although it can definitely cause harm, if properly managed, it can produce a lot more benefits than costs.  The risk can be managed.

So much for the soap box.  Here is a tweet that supports the viewpoint of this blog.

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) January 26, 2018

Tesla hacked into a Hesla

Maybe you could use your own waste to power your fuel cell car.  Might sound like a dumb idea.  Also an expensive one.

Anyway, you could use pyrolysis to obtain the hydrocarbons from the waste, and then a steam reformer to remove the hydrogen.

It would be one way to make clean water, electricity, and a substitute for sanitation facilities.

Anyway, this company hacked a Tesla so that it can run on hydrogen.  It appears to run on its own battery, but they added a fuel cell to increase its range to over 600 miles.

Here's the tweet from Twitter:

A Company Hacked a Tesla So It Drives on Hydrogen https://t.co/Yx69LRftmB via @Futurism

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) January 25, 2018

How to dig a hole in the desert

Saw this on the Sierra Blanca Facebook page.  It is a closed page, by the way.

One option for my cabin is to make "footers", which are meant to be for a foundation.  The other option is to pour a foundation.  Of the two options, making footers seems to be the easier way, but that gets an argument from my house building brother.  He's looking at it from his own point of view.  My point of view is that I can take as long as I want to make a footer.  When you get that concrete truck out there, you cannot stop until you are finished.  I want to be able to stop if I need to.

The webpage shows how to dig a hole for planting fruit trees.  So, I figured I can use the same method to make my footers.

If I want to plant fruit trees later, well, I will know how to do it, won't I?

No, you cannot have my sandwich

Sandwiches cause global warming.

Guess I can't fart, either.

Millenials hate Trump because .... climate change?

OMG.


On the Limbaugh show, a discussion of this phenomenon took place.  A millennial called and told Rush that he believed all of what was told to him by this modern culture.

One of those things seems to revolve around this idea of "sustainability".  Evidently, the young generation seems to think that resources are limited.  There is no other explanation for why they believe this than what the left wing has drilled into everybody's head.

The leftists seem to believe in drilling after all.  Just not for oil.  Nor for truth either, regardless of what they may say to the contrary.

There is one thing that is limited though, and that is life itself.  Life is limited because it can be wiped off the face of the Earth.  But the Earth itself is not subject to human's destructiveness.  It would take a lot more than what humankind can do in order to destroy the Earth itself.  As of this writing, no Death Star has been invented yet.

Even a very basic science education can remove some of this grandiosity.  For instance, all chemistry derives from the actions of electrons.  The nucleus of an atom is not affected.  Hence, if you restore an atom to its original state through the manipulation of electrons, so it can be recycled.  No matter can be destroyed through chemistry.

Now nuclear reactions do indeed change matter.  But the energy released is of such magnitude, that the amount of matter is not very significant.  That is the advantage of nuclear energy-- it consumes so little matter.  Thus, there is virtually a limitless supply of energy and matter, through recycling via nuclear energy.  Resources are virtually unlimited.  The only limits are the ones that are self-imposed.

The millennials must not be getting very much of an education.  That is the problem, and the solution is obvious.

However, it is easier said than done.  People do not change easily.  The leftists have found a way to get to people though, and there needs to be a better response from the conservatives.  The one pursued so far does not seem to be working.

It may take a war to free humanity from the left.  Look around the world.  Once they get into power, they do not relinquish it easily.

Release The FISA Memo – Lunch Alert!

Release The FISA Memo – Lunch Alert!



comment:



Morris is suggesting that people sign a petition that he has ( I haven't checked it out ).



If Congress needs a petition for this, they are in pretty sad shape.  If they really are in this bad of a shape, what good will a petition be?



I don't think I will sign it.  It is not because I disagree with its release.  It is that I am sick and tired of these people refusing to do what is right.  If they are going to talk about it, which they have, then they better damn well do something about it.

AGW discussion 103

The Coyote blogger posted something that I'd like to discuss here.

The proposition is why doubt the experts, especially if you are not an expert yourself.  It is not exactly the terminology used, but I think it is an adequate paraphrasing.

People might get the idea that to do so is a bit presumptuous of me, or of anyone else who might dare challenging the experts.

To respond to that, if it were to ever be posed to moi, which it hasn't, I would say the following:

• Who decides that somebody is an expert?  Who decides that somebody is not an expert?
• Why depend upon experts when you have a mind of your own?
• Why discuss things like the weather, when anybody can dispute it?  The discussion goes nowhere.
• Who defends science?  Who is attacking science?
• In short, what are your assumptions?  What are your premises for believing what you believe?
• To put it even shorter, how do you know what you know?  ( There is a word used in philosophy, which I cannot remember at the moment.  It is the study of knowledge and how we know what we know.----- epistemology!)

Yet another way of putting it is why the hell not challenge the experts?  Science has advanced on that very front of resistance.  If you cannot challenge the current wisdom, we would all still be stuck in the Dark Ages, and that is a fact.