Big Brother is watching!
- Thread starter todd_k
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
BrewProject
Well-Known Member
HurricaneFloyd said:
page 5...
both are interesting subjects, but i am more concerned about the domestic spying at the moment.
Bu$h has chose to stretch the limits of the laws until challenged. by that time, he gets away with what he wants. the courts tell him to stop, he appeals and continues.
it's gonna catch up with him... :rockin:
Fatabbot
Well-Known Member
HurricaneFloyd said:
Ah, it's all in good fun. I'm more of a numbers/facts/logic type guy, so I like to debate
Cheesefood
Well-Known Member
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/ethanol-frequently-asked-questions.html
In the near term, the largest potential for oil savings comes from improvements in the fuel economy of new vehicles, and greater fuel efficiency will help lower the costs of an ethanol future. For this reason, government should continue to support research into cellulosic ethanol and other alternative fuels, but not at the expense of concrete steps to implement proven, cost-effective, near-term solutions such as improving fuel economy over the next 10 years.
...
The long-term potential for ethanol production from products such as grasses, wood chips, rice straw, and the corn plant itself (called cellulosic ethanol) is significant. However, some key breakthroughs are needed for it to play a significant role. In particular, further advances are needed in order to cost-effectively liberate cellulose from the plant material and convert it into fermentable sugars. Aggressive scenarios for the deployment of cellulosic ethanol production indicate that it has the potential to replace nine billion gallons of gasoline in 2025 and upwards of 100 billion gallons in 2050. While this is a very large number, it is important to realize that our gasoline demand by 2050 could be nearly 300 billion gallons if we do not take steps to improve fuel economy and slow growth in travel demand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioethanol
Fuel economy (measured as miles per gallon (MPG), or liters per 100km) is directly proportional to energy content [11]. Ethanol contains approx. 34% less energy per gallon than gasoline, and therefore will get 34% fewer miles per gallon [12] (see also "Alternative Fuel Efficiencies in Miles per Gallon" [13]). For E10 (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline), the effect is small (~3%) when compared to conventional gasoline, and even smaller (1-2%) when compared to oxygenated and reformulated blends [14]. However, for E85 (85% ethanol), the effect becomes significant. E85 will produce approximately 27% lower mileage than gasoline, and will require more frequent refueling. Actual performance may vary depending on the vehicle. For the EPA-rated mileage of current USA flex-fuel vehicles, see [15].
This reduced fuel economy should be considered when making price comparisons. For example, if regular gasoline costs $3.00 per gallon, and E85 costs $2.19 per gallon, the prices are essentially equivalent. If the discount for E85 is less than 27%, it actually costs more per mile to use. For USA price comparisons, see [16].
Some researchers are working to increase fuel efficiency by optimizing engines for ethanol-based fuels. Ethanol's higher octane allows an increase of an engine's compression ratio for increased thermal efficiency [1]. In one study, complex engine controls and increased exhaust gas recirculation allowed a compression ratio of 19.5 with fuels ranging from neat ethanol to E50. Thermal efficiency up to approximately that for a diesel was achieved. [17]. This would result in the mpg of a dedicated ethanol vehicle to be about the same as one burning gasoline. There are currently no commercially-available vehicles that make significant use of ethanol-optimizing technologies, but this may change in the future.
As for bailing out the airlines, if you have a Masters in Economics than use it! What are the potential economic impacts of the unemployment caused by reducing the number of airlines? How would the remaining airlines react to the existing demand for off-peak travel times? How would they accomodate the influx of passengers?
What if a plane can only hold 300 people, but 400 need to get from Chicago to LA on the average weekday morning? You have to open up another route or you'll lose business. Explain to me again how less competition is better for consumers? As for the pilots and their pensions, let me ask you this: would you rather lose your job completely, or take a paycut?
In the near term, the largest potential for oil savings comes from improvements in the fuel economy of new vehicles, and greater fuel efficiency will help lower the costs of an ethanol future. For this reason, government should continue to support research into cellulosic ethanol and other alternative fuels, but not at the expense of concrete steps to implement proven, cost-effective, near-term solutions such as improving fuel economy over the next 10 years.
...
The long-term potential for ethanol production from products such as grasses, wood chips, rice straw, and the corn plant itself (called cellulosic ethanol) is significant. However, some key breakthroughs are needed for it to play a significant role. In particular, further advances are needed in order to cost-effectively liberate cellulose from the plant material and convert it into fermentable sugars. Aggressive scenarios for the deployment of cellulosic ethanol production indicate that it has the potential to replace nine billion gallons of gasoline in 2025 and upwards of 100 billion gallons in 2050. While this is a very large number, it is important to realize that our gasoline demand by 2050 could be nearly 300 billion gallons if we do not take steps to improve fuel economy and slow growth in travel demand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioethanol
Fuel economy (measured as miles per gallon (MPG), or liters per 100km) is directly proportional to energy content [11]. Ethanol contains approx. 34% less energy per gallon than gasoline, and therefore will get 34% fewer miles per gallon [12] (see also "Alternative Fuel Efficiencies in Miles per Gallon" [13]). For E10 (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline), the effect is small (~3%) when compared to conventional gasoline, and even smaller (1-2%) when compared to oxygenated and reformulated blends [14]. However, for E85 (85% ethanol), the effect becomes significant. E85 will produce approximately 27% lower mileage than gasoline, and will require more frequent refueling. Actual performance may vary depending on the vehicle. For the EPA-rated mileage of current USA flex-fuel vehicles, see [15].
This reduced fuel economy should be considered when making price comparisons. For example, if regular gasoline costs $3.00 per gallon, and E85 costs $2.19 per gallon, the prices are essentially equivalent. If the discount for E85 is less than 27%, it actually costs more per mile to use. For USA price comparisons, see [16].
Some researchers are working to increase fuel efficiency by optimizing engines for ethanol-based fuels. Ethanol's higher octane allows an increase of an engine's compression ratio for increased thermal efficiency [1]. In one study, complex engine controls and increased exhaust gas recirculation allowed a compression ratio of 19.5 with fuels ranging from neat ethanol to E50. Thermal efficiency up to approximately that for a diesel was achieved. [17]. This would result in the mpg of a dedicated ethanol vehicle to be about the same as one burning gasoline. There are currently no commercially-available vehicles that make significant use of ethanol-optimizing technologies, but this may change in the future.
As for bailing out the airlines, if you have a Masters in Economics than use it! What are the potential economic impacts of the unemployment caused by reducing the number of airlines? How would the remaining airlines react to the existing demand for off-peak travel times? How would they accomodate the influx of passengers?
What if a plane can only hold 300 people, but 400 need to get from Chicago to LA on the average weekday morning? You have to open up another route or you'll lose business. Explain to me again how less competition is better for consumers? As for the pilots and their pensions, let me ask you this: would you rather lose your job completely, or take a paycut?
Cheesefood
Well-Known Member
BrewProject said:page 5...
both are interesting subjects, but i am more concerned about the domestic spying at the moment.
Bu$h has chose to stretch the limits of the laws until challenged. by that time, he gets away with what he wants. the courts tell him to stop, he appeals and continues.
it's gonna catch up with him... :rockin:
Bush is an idiot who's about to become a lame-duck president. I'd love for him to keep supporting the measure, it'll just make it that much more difficult to get another Republican in the White House.
I love Stephen Colbert's message at the White House Press dinner, when he looked Bush dead in the eye and said...
"Now, I know there are some polls out there saying this man has a 32 percent approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in 'reality'. And reality has a well-known liberal bias. ... Sir, pay no attention to the people who say the glass is half empty, because 32% means it's two-thirds empty. There's still some liquid in that glass, is my point. But I wouldn't drink it. The last third is usually backwash."
Isn't it! I'm actually enjoying reading it! I hope it continues in the cool collected way it started and has continued so far (which is a little strange for us here...)TxBrew said:Page four of a political thread and everyone has still kept their cool.
Good to see!
Edit - I'm sure it has to be locked soon though by a Mod......
BrewProject
Well-Known Member
Cheesefood said:
he has pretty much done in the GOP...
as Fatabot stated, Bu$h is no Republican/Conservative.
He stands for BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING and BIG INTRUSIVE GOVT (unwarranted wiretaps). These are two things the GOP of the past had absolutely no interest in....
i don't understand where he is coming from, unless it's for his buddies to make money through wars...
btw, why are we in IRAQ? beats me..., it's not to fight terrorism...
where is OBL?
i personally am a conservative when it comes to govt control and spending and a liberal when it comes to morals...
btw, here is a picture of Bu$h's followers.
Orpheus
Well-Known Member
BrewProject said:he has pretty much done in the GOP...
as Fatabot stated, Bu$h is no Republican/Conservative.
He stands for BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING and BIG INTRUSIVE GOVT (unwarranted wiretaps). These are two things the GOP of the past had absolutely no interest in....
i don't understand where he is coming from, unless it's for his buddies to make money through wars...
btw, why are we in IRAQ? beats me..., it's not to fight terrorism...
where is OBL?
i personally am a conservative when it comes to govt control and spending and a liberal when it comes to morals...
btw, here is a picture of Bu$h's followers.
Hmmm.. is that picture above supposed to turn us all on because we could relax, not worry, have a homebrew, pound a sheep from behind, and watch television?
Well I say, good day to you sir, your shameless promotion of bestiality will get you nowhere with us!
Dancing bananas, however, turn most of us on, I'm sure!
Fatabbot
Well-Known Member
Cheesefood said:
Are you trying to agree with me, or what?
Fatabbot said:
Cheesefood said:
Potential economic impact of weak airlines going out?
Short term: You'll have a temporary boost in unemployment.
Long term: You'll have a profitable airline industry, better wages at all levels within the industry, better, more streamlined access to travel for business customers and tourists, the bankrupt PBGC will no longer have to assume responsibility for under or nonfunded pensions, the list goes on....
For the next two questions, I'll again point out that no airline except for discount, cattle herder airlines are running anywhere near full capacity. So in the end, you'll end up with fewer flights carrying the same number of people. Which, even if fares stay stagnant, will allow airlines that are actually economically viable to produce profits for their shareholders and counter the stagnation of wages in the aviation industry. This influx of passengers will not happen in the U.S. We have had a great excess of capacity over the last decade, which completely negates your points about passenger traffic or not having capacity. If this wasn't the case, then maybe you have a point. As it is, we're helping airlines to fly half empty planes around the country. Makes sense.....
As far as the pilots go, (if I was one...) I'd obviously prefer to keep my job. However, that has little to do with the big picture. Sure, it'd be great if no one lost their job. However, sometimes the market adjusts itself. Thousands more lost their jobs due to the burst of the IT bubble than would due to a couple of airlines going under. The gov't didn't need to step in then.....
My daddy taught me to not throw good money after bad. Didn't even need to go to college to understand that one. We can either make sure the airline industry is never competitive and profitable so we can sleep better in the short term, or we can let the market work it out.
Long term it will cost us billions less if we cut the fat. Capacity will remain sufficient and some of those flight attendants might get a raise instead of a slap on the butt from that annoying first class passenger.
Fatabbot
Well-Known Member
Cheesefood said:
About to be? He's been a lame duck for years. What a worthless leader. At least we can agree on that one
BrewProject
Well-Known Member
Orpheus said:Hmmm.. is that picture above supposed to turn us all on because we could relax, not worry, have a homebrew, pound a sheep from behind, and watch television?
Well I say, good day to you sir, your shameless promotion of bestiality will get you nowhere with us!
Dancing bananas, however, turn most of us on, I'm sure!
dancin nanners are good...
now, get your head out of the gutter, no beastiality here brother
BrewProject
Well-Known Member
Fatabbot said:About to be? He's been a lame duck for years. What a worthless leader. At least we can agree on that one
yep, i gotta agree he has been a lameduck almost since he called for a mandate after barely winning the election...
Fatabbot
Well-Known Member
BrewProject said:yep, i gotta agree he has been a lameduck almost since he called for a mandate after barely winning the election...
Yeah, he had tons of "political capital"....
BrewProject
Well-Known Member
Fatabbot said:
he lives in his own world, that's for DAMN sure...
gotta run play guitar with friends and drink some beer... been good talking politics with you guys... :rockin:
Fatabbot
Well-Known Member
BrewProject said:
Have a good one. I'm about out the door, too.
ROFLMAO
This is something I would expect to see on the other board I go to www.WTFsoup.com Budbo is a moderator over there . It started out as a gaming site way back in the day but since most of us no longer game as much as we used to the most active forum is the political one. It's basicly anything goes. Pop on over if you're interested, Budbo and I use the same names there as we do here.
This is something I would expect to see on the other board I go to www.WTFsoup.com Budbo is a moderator over there . It started out as a gaming site way back in the day but since most of us no longer game as much as we used to the most active forum is the political one. It's basicly anything goes. Pop on over if you're interested, Budbo and I use the same names there as we do here.
Ize
...
LOLOLOLOLOL....
I just ended a great evening with both of my neighbors stomping off towards their homes shouting profanities at each other. The night started out great and ended ugly. The reason for the argument? Property taxes. I just shut my garage and came inside...
In the end, W has NOTHING to do with my property taxes, but those elected officials in my own town and county DO. And those are the ones I'll be keeping my eye on TYVM.
So.
Argue all you want about Oil and Ethanol, War or Peace, Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative, in the end, unless you're paying attention to what is REALLY going on in your own state/county/city/town/village/burg /hamlet Your rights are going to erode no matter what if you're not paying attention. It all starts on the homefront folks, and don't ever forget it....
Ize (not a hippie, just drunk)
And in case I haven't mentioned it in a while,
THIS PLACE ROCKS! :rockin: :rockin:
I just ended a great evening with both of my neighbors stomping off towards their homes shouting profanities at each other. The night started out great and ended ugly. The reason for the argument? Property taxes. I just shut my garage and came inside...
In the end, W has NOTHING to do with my property taxes, but those elected officials in my own town and county DO. And those are the ones I'll be keeping my eye on TYVM.
So.
Argue all you want about Oil and Ethanol, War or Peace, Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative, in the end, unless you're paying attention to what is REALLY going on in your own state/county/city/town/village/burg
/hamlet Your rights are going to erode no matter what if you're not paying attention. It all starts on the homefront folks, and don't ever forget it....Ize (not a hippie, just drunk)
And in case I haven't mentioned it in a while,
THIS PLACE ROCKS! :rockin: :rockin:
Don't get me started on property taxes..."It's going up 20% to reflect 100% of fair market value as mandated by state law. "The mill rate will go down to reflect the increase"....So what's with the 32% increase???
Similar threads
