tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11693538.post111972228959858846..comments2024-02-19T05:14:41.739-05:00Comments on The Auto Prophet: The 500MPG TrickAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12108992620883563299noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11693538.post-49035532514450505332007-01-07T08:14:00.000-05:002007-01-07T08:14:00.000-05:00The 500mpg performance benchmark is a round figure...The 500mpg performance benchmark is a round figure that represents the fringe of currently realistic mechanical design objectives. Educational funding of such design is speculative and based on the notion that a dramatic and sustained rise in energy prices might make such technology economically viable for large scale production and consumption within a time frame that is near enough to make the present funding economically sensible. It is more than simply a long shot investment. It serves as insurance against a worst case scenario where, conceivably, personal transportation manufacturers and consumers would have otherwise had to wait considerable time, in the wake of an energy price shock, before getting vehicles designed with a virtually optimum tradeoff of efficiency verses other factors. Such design also serves as an extreme from which to interpolate a broader spectrum of practical compromises.<br /><br />Aside from such flattery of government misappropriation, it does seem to be a deviance related to a demonic forbiddance of certain types of foods (read energy). Cross reference 1 Timothy 4:1-5.<br /><br />So let us pray, "Father, we thank you for the heavenly energy of nuclear power."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11693538.post-1119995478075274032005-06-28T16:51:00.000-05:002005-06-28T16:51:00.000-05:00Nuclear power may not be the answer - fuel enrichm...Nuclear power may not be the answer - fuel enrichment is terribly energy-intensive. Breeder reactors provide a solution to that problem, but everyone's scared stiff of them because they make P239 (kinda the whole purpose of a "breeder"). Scratch that one off the list.<BR/><BR/>ANWR's a drop in the bucket compared to our overall needs. Check out this graph: http://energy.senate.gov/legislation/energybill/charts/chart8.pdf<BR/><BR/>I don't know if I qualify as a "greenie", but I see energy as being one of the world's biggest problem moving forward into the next few decades. Bringing a few billion people up to our standard of living will not be sustainable. This is going to require some radical changes in transportation technology. I don't wish to see personal transportation go away, which is exactly why I'd like to see some alternative ideas presented. If the only solutions on the table are nukes and ANWR, we're not going to make it very far. Conservation cannot be yet another issue that's lost to this really f*ckin' stupid left-vs-right mentality, or else we're in for a world of hurt.The Angry Engineerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10928046249269361604noreply@blogger.com