the_craterian

It's only politics. Two years ago a winding down Swiss glacier has brought to light an Alpine pass from the times of the ancient Romans (2 thousand years ago) when there weren't greenhouse gases. It's a visible test: Alpine pass from a melted swisse glacier. This planet'd burn if politicians aren't correct about global warming. Only science can help the planet. This's science for sure: biomass energy comes from solar energy and it takes energy away from the Environment because of the Law of Energy Conservation. It's the correct starting point to help the planet from global warming...

My opinion is that compressed air is good combined with a combustion engine because it could exploit the heat of the exhaust gases. I'm a fan of a futuristic hydrogen combustion engine h2 -> turbogas system(combustion + steam power) -> clean exhaust gases(for a combined compressed air engine)... It'd can be more performing(power, efficiency)/green than fuel cells...

We'd can consider the Earth-Sun system about absorbed energy in order to explain a part of solar energy is transformed to biomass energy etc...

The first law of thermodynamics(the law of energy conservation) states that total energy of an isolated system is constant, energy can neither be created nor be destroyed but can only be transformed from one form to another. If we consider the Earth-Sun system an isolated system we can say that the biomass gets energy from solar energy and that biomass production deducts energy from the environment. So when wood etc... burns or decomposes, it returns energy to the environment. Now wood production(oil palm trees, wooden furnitures, etc...) contrasts global warming, so greens may be in favor to use palm oil for diesel, forestry crops to produce industrial wood combined with the breeding of animals that feed on leaves(goats for example). It's clear we can really contrast global warming with the law of energy conservation. What do you think about?

Today a hundred off-shore 15mw wind turbines have the capacity to produce the equivalent of a good oil well(about 500e3 t. a year). I think the best way to use this energy potential is to produce ammonia on site from which to produce h2 for cars, etc... Today wind energy'd be cheap... (about 40 $/Mwh -> 10 kwh, the energy equivalent of 1 l. of diesel's about 0.4$), but H2 electrolysis's very expansive.

Salt, Sun and Time is an instrumental song and the fifth full-length album by canadian singer-songwriter Bruce Cockburn released in 1974. The same singer wrote 'dust and diesel' to try to help the environment. He didn't say the reason of 'Salt, Sun and Time', it sounds pretty good for sure! The fact is that the common salt(NaCl) can store a lot of solar energy with its fusion(heat of fusion: about 30 kj/mol -> 300 kwh/m3. T.fusion: about 800°C). In addition NaCl is cheap, widely available and its extraction doesn't pollute. So do you think that humans're not free to devolop cheap, green and available alternative energies?(NaCl fusion'd can store the energy of ah hurricane!!!)