Snarkpit's geographics

i suppose he could have done the continents... then frag could have been in Asia, with a few other people as well I believe (?)

Gwil said:
i suppose he could have done the continents... then frag could have been in Asia, with a few other people as well I believe (?)

That's what I was thinking too... Doesn't matter much anyway.

Gwil said:
He did say it was done by probable majority.. besides, what happens in India apart from tea drinking and cricket?!

Oh wait thats britain! :dorky: Arf..

Having said that I did see a nice piece on the news about India and Pakistan restarting cricket matches and relations... all good considering they were ready to come to blows not too long ago :smile:

Don't forget the cows!

Oh, and the cricket thing is always good, considering how important these matches are "supposed" to be. Any peace is good peace though.

Don't forget the cows!

don't take this wrong frag, but here in arkansas, people who don't eat cows, usually have them stump broke for other duties.. i would hope that, india doesn't worship cows like some of our native arkansans do

/runs

Orpheus said:
don't take this wrong frag, but here in arkansas, people who don't eat cows, usually have them stump broke for other duties..

don't know what "stump broke" means. I'm not sure I want to know either. So I suppose you're accused from the Heinous crime you just committed (or whatever). :razz:

without going into detail, i am sure you know what a tree stump is, and its approximate height it renders you if stood upon.. i am also sure you can extrapolate the rest, if you have cows facing north, and you are on the southern end with your stump.

anywhos, its a running joke around here, to own your own stump broke bovine :smile:

jokes that involve religious objects from other countries, sometimes go astray, so i was posting it with some trepidation fragman :smile:

'tis okay... I'm not the religious sort myself. Oh,and that's why I said I didn't want to know... your reputation preceeds you here :razz:

*Edit: My rating just dropped a point.... Come out and fight like a man you coward-who-rated-me-a-3 !

Gwil said:
i'm sure gimpinthesink lives in the next city along..

Not far just the other side of the A38 and MansfieldI live about 1/2 a hour away from the Major Oak by car or bus I takes me about 2 hours to walk it.

*Edit: My rating just dropped a point.... Come out and fight like a man you coward-who-rated-me-a-3 !

See, that's what I was talking about earlier that confused everyone. A magic 0 just up and appeared on my rating, I assumed in response to this thread :razz:

fraggard said:
'tis okay... I'm not the religious sort myself. Oh,and that's why I said I didn't want to know... your reputation preceeds you here :razz:

*Edit: My rating just dropped a point.... Come out and fight like a man you coward-who-rated-me-a-3 !

most here would prolly be shocked to see, just how many people i cherish (if thats the proper word cause respect just doesn't seem important enuff to me), and rate 5's

many, whom i argue with most, all possess noteworthy 5's :smile:

[edit] consider how hard it is for me.. i lost a 10th of a point.. devided 57 ways, thats a noteworthy drop

Gwil said:
i suppose he could have done the continents... then frag could have been in Asia, with a few other people as well I believe (?)

Yea, I thought about that, but then I chose the biggest agglomerations of english speaking people. I forgot about India being part of the common wealth; sorry Fraggard... and it's weird, no one's from Australia.

There was an australian female member I believe, named Lil, but she's gone...

Theres a coupple from australia I know Des and Diablo are and theres a coupple more I just carnt remember who.

wil5on, diablo, desplesda.. 2dmin/2-bits (sorry, your names are easy to confuse) - are all australian as well I think.. yeah...

Just voted to make it even.

USA all the way, bitches.

USA, USA, Give-Oregon-Back-Their-Water-And-Electricity-Because -It-Drove-Up-The-Unemployment-Rate , USA...

lol, sorry.

Bitching about BPA are we?

Damn California!

im from australia too

Am I the southernmost member here? I'm at 42? 53' south.

Tracer Bullet said:
Damn California!

Leave us alone! Arnold's doing the best he can... Which isn't saying much. But, uh, hey; Los Angeles has the most gun-related deaths a year! We rock! :smile:

I'm rather suprised that we Americans outnumber the brits!

CJ, I'm against most southwestern states on general scientific/environmetnal principle. It simply does not make any sort of sense to put huge cities in the middle of the deasert.... of course.. I'm very glad you all don't live up here :biggrin:

the saddest part TB is, wind powered electric generation could be a mint out there, but the fools won't build them.

the wind never stops blowing in certain locations of the south west.

i have never understood why either

Orpheus said:
the saddest part TB is, wind powered electric generation could be a mint out there, but the fools won't build them.

It's not practical, Orph. Maybe for small villages, but for miles upon miles of urban and suburban sprawls, it's really not good. You would have to build countless wind-powered generators to even match the output of any modern powerplant (nuclear?) today. And in the end, it's all about profit. Wind-power won't make any money.

Didn't Simcity teach you anything?

I hear ya Orph, but there are some serious issues with wind power. I think they ought to just build themselves some breeder reactors like they use in france. bingo no more energy problem.... only issue is, they produce weapons grade plutonium, and have a much higher potential for meltdown than american designs :sad:

Only 15 years until we are using fusion reactors isn't it? They start work on the prototype in either japan or france sometime soon, which they expect to have finished in 10 years, after which they can make a production version.

I was always a bit worried though about the idea of a fussion reactor losing containment and burning off our atmosphere... not sure if it's a real possibility or not though? (I'm looking at you when I ask that, TB :smile: )

I'm very glad you all don't live up here:D

So am I. :smile:

Here's a question, why won't they produce Hydrogen Fuel Cell Plants?? I mean, the car using water was patented by some oil company, so that's why GM and Ford are looking at ways to burn Methonal. But, why wont they (government, companies, so on so forth) develop this further so it can be more efficient then it is already?

I think a power generator that takes Hydrogen produces no heat and has no moving parts is a damn good generator ... but that's just me lol.

Profit has nothing to do with product efficiency, only production efficiency. Car manufacturers in particular are notorious for inefficient designs that force you to continue purchasing new products.

Campaignjunkie said:

Orpheus said:
the saddest part TB is, wind powered electric generation could be a mint out there, but the fools won't build them.

It's not practical, Orph. Maybe for small villages, but for miles upon miles of urban and suburban sprawls, it's really not good. You would have to build countless wind-powered generators to even match the output of any modern powerplant (nuclear?) today. And in the end, it's all about profit. Wind-power won't make any money.

Didn't Simcity teach you anything?

hmmm you live in california, but seem unaware of the millions of wind generators already in place out your back door?

i suggest you take a drive up I-15 bud..

Cash Car Star said:
Profit has nothing to do with product efficiency, only production efficiency. Car manufacturers in particular are notorious for inefficient designs that force you to continue purchasing new products.

why does this sound familiar?

oh yeah, video games :wink:

http://www.jigsawlounge.co.uk/kungfu/world/america.gif
Old i know, but so very very relevant.

cue rant

rofl.

http://stedoyle.com/USGeography-Theo.jpg

Maybe an imitation, but slightly more "contemporary" :razz:

so if you make something that everyone wants, and you make it so it last's forever, then you wont get any return customers.

best to make it so that it works good, but breaks after a while, then you'll get return customers.

damn sneaky 'thing makers'

Wait a sec, US own that crappy piece of land next to canada?! I thought Canada owned all that ex-Russian land (they bought it ages ago for like $1,000,000 didn't they?)

No the us has had it for 100 odd years

Didnt the Soviet Union sell Alaska to the USA for like $50 million or something?

It was USSR to USA though... Canada keep themselves to themselves generally :razz:

I dont think it was the bolchviks that sold it cos I think that the US got it neer the end of the 19th centuray

the USA got alaska from russia. for pocket change, something like 6 cents an acre :rolleyes:

Seward's Folly, or Steward's, something like that. It came out cheaper than the Gadsen Pruchase; who knows why we spent so much on just a small portion of new mexico and arizona.

In the video games/car comparison - I don't think that programmers are intentionally creating inferior engines to sell more video games. In fact, it runs on a very fast cycle of obsolescence where the old technology is constantly being surpassed, thus prompting gamers to purchase new games. On the other hand, very few significant improvements have occured on car engines within the past twenty years to make them more fuel efficient or resistant to wear and tear so that they last longer - completely the opposite problem with very little obsolescence happening at all. In fact, due to the rise of SUV's, overall gas mileage for the entire US-purchased automobile fleet has been on the decline since 1987 (I did a report on this two weeks ago, the date is right).

On fusion: <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>

1. I think it is much further off as a commercial power source than 15 years. Yes ITER is a big step in the right direction, and they do expect it to exceed the break-even point, but I don't think it is considered to be a viable design. it is still just a research prototype.<o:p></o:p>

2. There is absolutely no potential as far as I know for seriously destructive accidents with fusion plants. the amount of hydrogen being fused at any one time is far to little for a runaway reaction, and if containment failed, all that would happen is that parts of the reaction chamber would be vaporized by the escaping plasma. I'm pretty sure the fusion would cease almost instantly. This is in contrast with a fission plant where if the control system fails (impossible, or nearly so in an American design) the fuel can run away in a chain reaction.<o:p></o:p>

Even if there was potential for an explosion A complete failure of one of these plants would be nowhere near as destructive as a small thermonuclear weapon in any case, and last time I checked, all those tests in the 50s and 60s did nothing more than vaporize a few islands and spread fallout over New Mexico and Nevada.... we still have an atmosphere.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>

On Fuel Cells:<o:p></o:p>

Basic thermodynamics: cars cannot use water for "fuel" there is no chemical energy to be had. You can electrolyze water and use the resulting hydrogen as fuel, however, this VERY inefficient process. People have been working for years to obtain efficient catalysts for this process and so far have met with only failure. However, even if this was efficient, you still have to get the energy from somewhere. You cannot get out more energy than you put in? there is nothing magic about fuel cells. Think of them as batteries which have a continuous flow of the required chemicals.<o:p></o:p>

The main question for fuel cells becomes where do you get the fuel? If you reform petroleum to produce hydrogen or methanol they are no better than the systems we already have. They produce just as much CO2, although I suppose you might cut down on NOX emissions.<o:p></o:p>

The only sensible solution is to produce the fuel from biological sources. if the fuel is made form corn or some such source, then any CO2 we put into the atmosphere is then taken out again by the plants which produce the fuel. this is sort of an ideal system, however Fuel Cell technology simply has not reached the point where they are viable for mass power production. The place you will see them first is as replacements for batteries. won?t it be fantastic when your laptop has essentially unlimited run time? Toshiba is supposed to introduce fuel cell powered models sometime next year :smile:

A fuel cell for use as a battery replacement would be fantastic. The only question is reusability - would a fuel cell, like lithium-ion cells, suffer from a form of memory effect?

cars cannot use water for "fuel" there is no chemical energy to be had. You can electrolyze water and use the resulting hydrogen as fuel, however, this VERY inefficient process. People have been working for years to obtain efficient catalysts for this process and so far have met with only failure. However, even if this was efficient, you still have to get the energy from somewhere. You cannot get out more energy than you put in? there is nothing magic about fuel cells. Think of them as batteries which have a continuous flow of the required chemicals

....that's why MIT was able to convert a focus into a hyrdogen fuel cell car which evaporated water for energy? Which wasn't as efficient as a current car, however it wasn't bad.

I never said there was anything magic about fuel cells lol.

I just think they're the most economiclly and echologically sounds answer for power we've had yet, even if it's not as efficient it is more renewable then oil.

Tracer Bullet said:
2. There is absolutely no potential as far as I know for seriously destructive accidents with fusion plants.

But what about nuclear wastes? I believe this is the greatest disadvantage of nuclear power; leaving radioactive material, who stay like that for maybe a hundred years. You can get cancer if you touch this stuff...

I think they should exclusively use wind mills and solar energy. We'd have a cleaner planet... but maybe a slower one.

The most dangerous waste fusion produces is tritium (H-3) which has a half-life of 12.3 years and can be used in further fusion. In addition tritium is a comercialy valueable substance in and of itself and decays into a stable isotope of helium, so even if you just had to store the stuff, it would become completely harmless within 120 years.

Fission plants on the other hand tend to produce long-lived high-level waste such as Pu-239 which has a halflife of 24,110 years. at this rate of decay you would need to store the stuff for ~240,000 years! an impossible feat for todays engineering practices.

If most radioactive waste from fission decayed within 100 years, it would be a nearly perfect energy source! that is an incredibly short period of time. Hence, Fusion is a perfect energy source from every point of view.

1. limitless fuel

2. zero polution

3. huge ammounts of energy per unit fuel

In fact, you would only need 437 metric tons of duterium to meet the worlds energy demand for a year.... that is absulutly awsome!

edit/

Sorry for the attitude about fuel cells Crono. I have the sense that the general public has a terribly unrealisitc impression of how they work and what they are capable of. That little diatribe wasn't really directed at you.

What I really love is the paranoia about fuel cells induced by the Hindenburg. "OMG my car will explode!!!"

Damn the humanity anyway, it's not the same method of using hydrogen! We don't need to float our cars around :biggrin: though a helium filled car would make those long rides a joyous time...

Yes, and we don't coat our cars with rocket fuel the way the hindenberg was...

Minor detail. We should, really. That'd make it go fast, right...? :biggrin:

It would at least make fender-benders more interesting