Random Politics & Religion #07

TO BE FAIR.

That's really no different from people who wouldn't have voted at all previously voting for their favorite reality TV star, Donald Trump.

This argument always kills me.

DON'T FIGHT BACK!!! THAT'S JUST WHAT THE JIHADISTS WANT US TO DO!!!

Go buy a tiny house.

Good thing nobody is making the argument of "don't fight back."

I'll put it on my property next to the big house. It'll be like my house has a pet.

Adorable.

But let's get real.

This:


Is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is don't advocate war crimes as a solution because 1) it gives them the holy war they solution and 2) unilateral action defying various international agreements (like those from the freaking GENEVA CONVENTIONS) tend to be frowned upon by the global community and, in fact, would actually feed the ranks of the enemy by proving (in the eyes of their recruitment pool, at least) how terrible we infidels are.

Fighting back is the right thing to do.

Fighting back like Chuck Bronson on a bender...not so much.

Energy density is a huge issue and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Physics is an unforgiving *** of a master, there is no magic "blue power" that mysteriously generates energy from nothing. Hydrocarbon fuel is just energy stored from sunlight that's had a few millions years to concentrate it. Batteries just convert electrical energy into chemical energy for storage and then reverse the process during discharge. There is a hard limit to what you can do with that before you create a bomb.

Which goes into another point, the dangers of short circuits and the resulting instantaneous thermal discharge. Despite what movies would have us believe, Hydrocarbon fuel doesn't instantaneously explode. It needs to be vaporized and mixed with oxygen first. Batteries on the other hand are a different matter. When a battery is shorted, it starts discharging it's stored chemical energy as electricity which then starts ohmic heating the various components around the discharge circuitry. Eventually insulation is burned away which cause's all the stored energy to be discharged instantaneously as thermal energy. Basically it creates a huge *** fireball. The amount of thermal energy released is exactly the same as the chemical energy stored. Thus a high capacity "super battery", if shorted, would explode any destroy anything near it, while a low capacity battery would just cause a fire.

That is very important because an automobile crash could induce a short circuit and thus cause any extreme density super batteries to release all their energy as a thermal discharge, killing any human around them in the process. Those super Electric drag cars have to deal with this and have the battery compartment designed to vent thermal explosions out the back in the case of a short. As these aren't street legal they don't have to worry about killing people in the cars behind them.

Yes, well. "Evolution" is the key word there.

I'm not a physicist, I just understand some basic principles. I do understand at this point that the batteries in hybrid/electric cars are not precisely the most eco-friendly things. And I understand there are challenges.

I'm just saying I suspect there's room to grow and problems that could be solved. Biofuels and Hydrogen-powered vehicles also are of interest.

Or maybe we discover something new entirely!

Science is fun and exciting, even when you're just an observer.

"Biofuels" are just hydrocarbons by another name. Instead of extracting the raw Oil from the ground and refining it, we take waste from crops and refine that. The problem of course is that it's lacking the few million years of compression that gravity provides to make the fuel dense, so you get far less energy densit unless you refine it further to compress it, which in turn costs more. Example is Ethanol only has about half the energy density of regular gasoline. Hydrogen is even worse. You can get plenty of Energy if you burn it (H2 + O2 = H20 and a *** ton of thermal power) but storage and transportation is extremely dangerous. A tank of pure H2 is literally a bomb. Fuel Cell usage is a little different though, less direct chance at explosion though you still need to store and transport a large quantity of Hydrogen gas. The cell itself is using an expensive catalyst (usually Platinum) to enable the chemical reaction that's energy output is in potential difference (it separates a material into Ions and electrons) instead of direct thermal heating.

Video of what happens when a small lithium battery short circuits

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMy2_qNO2Y0

Now imagine that multiplied by a few thousand or so.

We'll be using Hydrocarbons for a very long time. They are simply too energy dense with a low requirement to implement. The good news is just because we use Hydrocarbons doesn't mean they need to originate from refined crude oil. We can create Hydrocarbon fuel easily enough from the raw ingredients of Carbon, Hydrogen and some Oxygen. The Ocean has far more then enough dissolved Carbonic Acid or Bicarbonate (that's the EVIL Carbon the Ocean's storing) to use as Carbon feed stock. Hydrogen is even more plentiful in that same Ocean. The only missing ingredient is energy, lots of energy. We need to spend slightly more energy then the hydrocarbon fuel will store due to inefficiencies in the process. This energy would come from an extremely high capacity source similiar to what Aluminum plants need. Because of this requirement Nuclear plants are particularly appealing as they need a large source of H2O nearby for cooling purposes. Basically we turn the power from the nuclear plant into stored chemical energy that's transported and released upon combustion. Hydrocarbon as a liquid battery.

Funniest part is that it's "carbon neutral". The CO2 released from the combustion eventually goes back into the Ocean where it's extracted again as Carbonic acid. It's a giant circle. The US Navy's already researched and developed the technique including a demo reactor. They plan on using it to fuel the Navy without needing large tanker ships to transport all that fuel around. Large ships already have Nuclear reactors on board so they plan on using excess base load power to create this fuel and storing it for use in fighter aircraft or fueling a nearby conventional ship.

Now hear all the regressive liberals gnash their teeth about such a solution.

Here is a link for the Navy's fuel synthesis program, just to demonstrate it.

https://www.rt.com/usa/navy-fuel-conversion-ship-197/

No waiting on "magical blue power" to save us.

I'm interested in limiting the emission of greenhouse gasses and pollutants that damage the environment and people. I'm not nearly as worried about things like nuclear, as we've discussed before. Especially as they get more and more advanced.


*shrug*

Ultimately I think my thoughts on the subject are that we need to divorce ourselves from oil in general without simply destroying our own continent's environment to tear what we have out of the ground. There's a future for different sources, it will just require a cultural/technological/infrastructure shift that will take time, so the sooner we get started...

Combined two thoughts there and bungled it!

I wonder if trump picked mike pence just because it sounds a lot like 'fence'.

overtly covert subliminal messaging? you tell me.

I'm surprised no one has posted about Turkey yet?

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/15/asia/turkey-military-action/index.html

"We will not allow anyone to disrupt democracy" said Yildirim.

So about Erdogan then? <_<

Hostages apparently

There seems to be an information black out outside of the reports of military aircraft and vehicles moving through Istanbul. Only report I've heard is the coup is being done by a small faction within the Turkish Military.

They've just blocked twitter in Turkey.

Google DNS is entirely futile against the blocks against Twitter and YouTube. Facebook is still online.
Rumor Snapchat is also down now

Sky: TRT (state broadcaster) has gone off-air.

Kerrey's words bother me though. Feel like it's totally downplaying the fact that stabilized Turkey is a buffer between the EU and the Middle East. Turkey in chaos potentially means no more buffer.

NP Russia will be right there to "care of it".

*take care

Somewhere they'll find a russian tourist in need of help.

I'm sceptical this will work out. My information says that Erdogan is not even in Turkey because he is on holiday.

He IS in turkey. He's in a hotel

Speaking of Turkey and Russia, didn't they just kiss and make up?

Lots of conflicting reports. I don't want to post more about it because of the conflicting information and lack of good source. (Internets being taken down

https://www.reddit.com/live/x9gf3donjlkq

For those interested.