Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Whoops! The Atlantic Makes Trump Look EPIC In Cover Intended as a
 Smear
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 13:03:26 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <vf8lsu$1ikrj$2@dont-email.me>
References: <20240913a@crcomp.net> <vd1td8$3qtr8$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdmtmu$3s32s$1@dont-email.me> <vdn1t8$3sog6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vdn6l6$fip$1@panix2.panix.com>
 <d2fcdce9a5ab4287e89d38f4e7f48ba5@www.novabbs.com>
 <vf6u8i$15atn$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 19:03:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f1386b8598bea1ad61c4df96933a863d";
	logging-data="1659763"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18s8xO/fmj/4AsS+GoK3C1ZD071bICZayc="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZZ9j8o11KIt7HJHL1GZICrgfMo8=
In-Reply-To: <vf6u8i$15atn$10@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3076

On 10/21/2024 9:13 PM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 10/21/24 13:32, quadibloc wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 22:42:46 +0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> The problem is that if you want to turn CO2 into solid carbon that can
>>> be readily stored, it takes as much energy as you got from burning the
>>> carbon into CO2 in the first place.  Assuming 100% efficiency, which you
>>> don't even come close to.
>>
>> That's true. But cars burn gasoline because it's a very efficient
>> portable
>> source of energy. Carbon capture plants don't have to be portable. So
>> they can use nuclear power from the grid. Only if the carbon capture
>> plants had to run on fossil fuels would this make things worse
>> instead of better.
>>
>> John Savard
> 
> Why not power from less dangerous sources, Such as Solar Power or Wind
> or Tidal power plants. Of course you may be a nuclear power promoter
> careless of the storage of fuel and the radioactive contamination that
> may lead from such devices. Or maybe because you have not experience
> adverse effects from such you may have forgotten the possibility.
> 
>      Solar power with suitable batteries in isolated areas
> could handle the conversion to another form of carbon releasing
> oxygen hopefully in the process.
> 
>      Gasoline was very useful due to it high energy content
> but batteries are approaching the same energy density.

Batteries are not a power source - they are a power store.

When you burn hydrocarbons, you are exploiting energy trapped
millions of years ago, and have that available to use.

A battery can only supply the energy you put into it recently.

I get annoyed when I see people advertising battery systems as
'generators'.

pt