[shortonsense]

I found this guys arguments just fascinating. The combination of everything from the 2nd Law of Therm to a backward view of Jevons paradox was simply wonderful.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/1213/116.html

[mcgowanjm]

Just like yeast, humans will make nature's greatest beer/bread.

[shortonsense]

Just like yeast, humans will make nature's greatest beer/bread.

Yeah..uummmmm..somehow I think you missed the point.

[mcgowanjm]

Just like yeast, humans will make nature's greatest beer/bread.

Yeah..uummmmm..somehow I think you missed the point.

Nope. And I knew almost exactly what Forbes would say, cause
I was reading it when Shark eyes Forbes daddy Malcolm was flying
around in all of those weird shaped balloons.

But I read the article anyway. Sounds just like yeast. And exactly like yeast, it (the group) dies not from running out of sugar/refined
grain, but because it can't get rid of it's waste product fast enough.

And I bet that in the last year, US citis have grown, the worst possible thing to happen:

Energy is different. Once you turn the energy content of a few million bushels of grain into a pyramid, say, by using the grain to feed workers who cut and haul the stones, that energy is gone, and you cannot turn the pyramid back into grain; all you can do is wait until the next harvest. If that harvest fails, and the stored energy in the granaries has already been turned into pyramids, neither the market economy of goods and services or the abstract system of distributing goods and services can make up for it. Nor, of course, can you send an extra ten thousand workers into the fields if you don't have the grain to keep them alive.

The peoples of agrarian civilizations generally understood this. It's part of the tragedy of the modern world that most people nowadays do not, even though our situation is not all that different from theirs.

[shortonsense]

Just like yeast, humans will make nature's greatest beer/bread.

Yeah..uummmmm..somehow I think you missed the point.

Nope. And I knew almost exactly what Forbes would say, cause
I was reading it when Shark eyes Forbes daddy Malcolm was flying
around in all of those weird shaped balloons.

Well...okay..but it wasn't Forbes who was saying it.....you did catch that didn't you...and are now just pretending its somehow Forbes fault for it being published?

Energy is different. Once you turn the energy content of a few million bushels of grain into a pyramid, say, by using the grain to feed workers who cut and haul the stones, that energy is gone, and you cannot turn the pyramid back into grain; all you can do is wait until the next harvest.

Yeah...I think you missed the point. The continued ability to do what you have described..only better and more efficiently each time, was more the point than any phantom disappearance of energy, certainly the First Law of Thermodynamics pretty much excludes your idea that energy is actually "gone".

[like_the_dinosaurs]

For any othe crazy peak oiler's here who doubt the words written in this article then please go to your local library(remember to drive your hummer and not ride a bike. Also, throw petrol out of your window while you drive to help the cause) and borrow

Huber, Peter; Mark P. Mills (2005). The Bottomless Well: The twilight of Fuel, The Virtue of Waste and Why we will Never Run Out Of Energy

Rock on cornies. YEEE HAAAA

Once again I question why are you here........................

I dont hang around morman forums and post charles darwin links so why post this stuff here..........

[shortonsense]

Huber, Peter; Mark P. Mills (2005). The Bottomless Well: The twilight of Fuel, The Virtue of Waste and Why we will Never Run Out Of Energy

Rock on cornies. YEEE HAAAA

Once again I question why are you here........................

I dont hang around morman forums and post charles darwin links so why post this stuff here..........

Thats the guy. The reason I referenced it is because its a fabulous concept. Use more! Because otherwise, the cheap supply of known oil over the next 100 years will limit the ability to achieve price parity with the more efficient use of any and all other energy forms. And if you need or want THOSE, then the solution is you must find a way to dispose of the easy and available stuff...so WASTE IT.

Uses the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and Jevons paradox in combination in a quite interesting way. I'm going to have to get the book now just to see what other examples he might have.

[like_the_dinosaurs]

Once again you and oily avoid the question presented. So it's the mute button for you.

PS When ever you decide to get that book promise me you will follow my instructions to the tee. You should of been around in the 30's.What a laugh that would of been. I guess 'waste not, want not' wouldnt apply to you.

By the way too ; The energy is lost forever(from our point of view) in the form of heat

Entropy – energy broken down in irretrievable heat

[yesplease]

Entropy – energy broken down in irretrievable heat

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

[Homesteader]

Entropy – energy broken down in irretrievable heat

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

Your physics teacher, if you had one, would be ashamed.

[yesplease]

Entropy – energy broken down in irretrievable heat

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

Your physics teacher, if you had one, would be ashamed.

So then, if not heat, what magical form of energy is released by combustion?

[yesplease]

Is yesplease confused, a bored troll, a oil-company plant, or a psycho? Strange times these

Shouldn't be you be endorsing some B.S. marketing study by GM, or replying to another forum member by describing how you're going to lock them in a room and kill them Peter? I mean, that is what you've done, isn't it?

[Quinny]

What's that about stopping digging?

Entropy – energy broken down in irretrievable heat

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

Your physics teacher, if you had one, would be ashamed.

So then, if not heat, what magical form of energy is released by combustion?

[Ludi]

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

After you have used that energy (heat) to run your power plant, how do you retrieve it?

The energy (heat) has been used for work. How do you now retrieve it? If you can not retrieve it, in what way is it not "irretrievable"? If it is retrievable, isn't that a perpetual motion machine? Where is the evidence of such a thing?

<<<< never took physics

[Quinny]

I wouldn't worry, it seems many who did, don't understand as well as you.

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

After you have used that energy (heat) to run your power plant, how do you retrieve it?

The energy (heat) has been used for work. How do you now retrieve it? If you can not retrieve it, in what way is it not "irretrievable"? If it is retrievable, isn't that a perpetual motion machine? Where is the evidence of such a thing?

<<<< never took physics

[yesplease]

Um, if energy broken down into heat was really irretrievable, we wouldn't have ICEs or power plants. They both burn FFs or whatever, turn them into irretrievable heat, and retrieve mechanical, then electrical power, in different proportions from that irretrievable heat.

After you have used that energy (heat) to run your power plant, how do you retrieve it?

That's just the problem, if it's irretrievable heat, as like_the_dinosaurs claimed, it can't be used in the first place, it's irretrievable after all.

The energy (heat) has been used for work. How do you now retrieve it? If you can not retrieve it, in what way is it not "irretrievable"? If it is retrievable, isn't that a perpetual motion machine? Where is the evidence of such a thing?

<<<< never took physics

Like I said before, if it's irretrievable, it can't be used for work, that's what irretrievable means. Then again, saying it's irretrievable is bunk. In general, the amount of work available depends on the difference in temperatures given whatever material limits are present. A saying like "irretrievable heat" is irrational nonsense, and seems to be indicative of this forums unfortunately. It's not about heat having some characteristic that makes it irretrievable, if it was, combustion (among other things) and the universe as we know it wouldn't exist. It's about what kind of difference in temperature we're looking at given whatever engine. Different engines are designed to work under different conditions, and so on... Practically speaking, the lowest temperature difference that can be exploited is a degree F or so.

[Quinny]

So where are these 100% efficient machines you're describing?

[shortonsense]

So where are these 100% efficient machines you're describing?

He didn't describe any of those.

Words really don't do the Laws of Thermodynamics justice, particularly when its being debated by those who use heat, energy and work near synonymously.

The beauty of the original article I quoted is that it attacks the problem from a different angle, breaking things up into that which has value, like energy contained within a particularly concentrated or useful form ( like a laser ), and the vastness of less concentrated energy forms ( like sunlight ).

CHP ( combined heat and power ) plants use the heat that would otherwise be wasted, much like a cars radiator, and does something useful with it instead. Such systems do not require, and certainly can't achieve ( as demonstrated by the Laws of Thermodynamics ) a 1:1 ratio of conversion. And certainly yesplease said no such thing about a 100% efficient machine. Why is that strawman necessary?