Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist
Aerohead, once again I do not see any correlation between your responses and the posts to which you are responding. Please show us where Sendler said "Burn it all!"
Please explain how we are supposed to transition from carbon to renewable energy, using small words, and spaces after punctuation. Please explain how renewable energy is supposed to keep the poor warm in the winter in this country, let alone in third-world countries. Please explain how semis, ships, and planes are supposed to go electric.
Please stop telling people to earn a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering until you have a P.h.D. in environmental sciences.
Or why don't you stop hanging out with unwashed heathens and find some intellectual peers?
|
You'd transition off fossil fuel by utilizing any extant technology which would allow it.Rail(which you didn't mention,is already electric.A catenary line or 3rd rail could convert that.
EV Tractor trailers are in the wings.
Ocean vessels would lend themselves to electric propulsion.They need ballast anyway.
Aircraft are problematic.Texas is getting the Shinkansen.Much air travel will be supplanted by the bullet train.They can run on renewable-electricity,are just as fast,at lower cost,with a perfect safety record.Some aircraft have already flown on biofuels.That's not perfect,but is a starting point.
It's this inability for critical thinking which terrifies me.I'm not responsible if you can't make the connection/correlation.
The engineering education mandates a deep dive into thermodynamics and efficiency,chemistry,physics,electric/electronics,metallurgy,dynamics,statics,acoustics, advanced mathematics,computer programming,internal combustion and air pollution,ICE lab,fluid mechanics and a senior project.For electives you can look into economics,marketing,sociology,literature,etc.. I did.
As to a Ph.D. in Environmental Science,you'd have to be much more specific.As I understand it,this could cover a rather comprehensive range in multi-disciplinary areas of study.A neighbor is a Ph.D.in Environmental Science,from the University of North Texas.All he knows about are water issues. I'm in my 15th month reading Ph.D.papers,nearly on a daily basis,so I suppose in a way,they're my peers.I've also been watching the Great Courses,24-lecture series on Physics and Radio Astronomy.(more P.h.D.s)
As to keeping warm,I've done negative-30F with zero heat.I suppose they can do what I did.Well insulated structures are good.Super-insulated,passive solar,earth-sheltered has worked out okay for me.I recommend that.
82 mpg is fun,if they're on a tight mobility budget.They can just follow the Ph.D.s from 1922.I did.
Unwashed heathens.Nice touch.'didn't know you'd been so close by! If you really want to insult me and my network, get more creative.My professional peers will be amused at your language.Perhaps you could coin a new term,expletive.Something really creative,that would make your alma mater proud.
There's a lot of off-the-shelf technology in the public domain, which can,and is being used effectively to transition away from fossil-fuels.
I don't subscribe to the notion that we're locked into business as usual.My experience runs counter to it.