HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wcsv2k@alfred.carleton.ca (Bill St. Arnaud)
Subject: Info wanted on nuclear proliferation, safety, etc
Summary: Info wanted on nuclear proliferation, safety , etc
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:03:09 GMT

Wanted network services like GOPHER, ARCHIE, WAIS etc on all sorts of
nuclear related issues like nuclear proliferation, safety,
international agreements, etc


Interested in news groups, mailing lists, site addresses etc

Angus Laidlaw                          Internet:wcsv2k@ccs.carleton.ca
Atomic Energy Control Board            X.400: C=CA; A=TELECOM.CANADA;
203-294 Albert St.                             O=VISION2000; DDA:ID=V2K.EMS
Ottawa CANADA                           Voice: +1 613 567-2000  
K1P 6E6                                 Fax:   +1 613 567-4730
From: 01crmeyer@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu (Craig Meyer)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: A Compressed-Air Car -- Possible?
Date: 9 Nov 92 20:59:36 GMT
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's

I'm looking into the concept of running an automobile off of compressed air.

According to my calculations (based on a Gast airmotor catalogue), such a
vehicle would need air tanks that could hold 100,000 psi.

Is that at all possible?

Thanks for your help,

CM

-- 
       Craig Meyer                 01CRMEYER@LEO.BSUVC.BSU.EDU
       Indiana Academy for Science, Mathematics, and Humaities.
       Muncie, IN  47306                          317-285-7433

       Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not necessarily
       shared by the Indiana Academy.
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: "barry ross" <barry.ross@canrem.com>
Subject: california gas pumps
Reply-To: "barry ross" <barry.ross@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: sci
Date: 5 Nov 92 09:15:23 EST

KW>The flexible neoprene/plastic sleeve that fits over the filler port on the
KW>car that is used to prevent excess gasoline vapors from going into the
KW>atmosphere, how does that thing work?  Are the vapors that are pushed out
KW>while filling, forced back into the storage tank, or are they somehow remixed
KW>into the gasoline being pumped into the car??  If they are forced back, how
KW>does this occur?

I will give you my best educated guess.  One it can be  condensed 
out and just dripped into the main tank.  The temperature of  the 
condensing  unit  would have to be very low with a water  or  ice 
separation device due to the ice formed from freezing the ambient 
water  vapour.  There maybe a way of filtering with  a  catalytic 
device that my allow higher temperatures but still remove most of 
the  vapourized gasoline.  Taking hose vapours and bubbling  them 
through  the gasoline in the tank would not be effective, due  to 
the large volumes of air mixed with gasoline vapour.

KW>Also, the last station that I used said that oxygenation was in effect from
KW>Oct to March to reduce carbon monoxide emissions, but the attendent didn't
KW>know what it meant.  How does one oxygenate a liquid fuel?  Chemically? or
KW>have the fuel companies developed a way to mix air/oxygen into solution without
KW>much loss?

Oxygen  in  gas form can be added to the liquid gasoline  to  the 
saturation point and this would most definitely improve  ignition 
and reduce pollution. Also would reduce the vapourization of  the 
gasoline  itself  in the tank, but do not hold a flame  over  the 
underground  tank filler pipe because it most definitely will  be 
the last time you would do so.  It takes two components to make a 
bomb  and of course they are fuel and an oxidizer.  Mixed  oxygen 
gas and gasoline vapours in the upper section of the holding tank 
would fill this bill. 

I  find  the above solutions fascinating and would like  to  hear 
comments from others more knowledgeable.

We  really  must go to the renewable methyl alcohol  and  burn  a 
little  liquid  sun  shine and easily  reduce  pollution  by  two 
thirds.   It  only means putting a we bit better  engine  in  our 
automobiles.   Some  manufacturers have already  got  automobiles 
with  the  necessary changes to their engines.  We  in  the  cold 
north Toronto, Ontario Canada have a (ONE) methyl alcohol service 
station. 
---
  DeLuxe 1.12 #10554  I tried the rest but bought the best!!!!
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: ghg@en.ecn.purdue.edu (George Goble)
Subject: Re: A Compressed-Air Car -- Possible?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 20:06:37 GMT

In article <BxIEqA.L0z@Novell.COM> steveo@mobius (Steve Olson) writes:
>>According to my calculations (based on a Gast airmotor catalogue), such a
>>vehicle would need air tanks that could hold 100,000 psi.
>
>The nitrogen and oxygen in air liquify at a much lower pressure than
>100,000 psi. 
>I think around 1200 psi. This makes it impossible to reach a higher pressure 
>because liquids do not compress very well.
>
>Maybe your idea would work with 1000 psi. You might need a bigger tank than
>anticipated but 1000 psi in a 100 gal tank represents a good deal of energy.
>
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Steve Olson

Nitrogen and Oxygen have a critical temp well below room temp,
(around -200F, I don't have the data in front of me).. above critical
temp, a gas will not liquify, no matter what the pressure.  So 
100,000 psi is possible for air at room temp, assuming you could find
something to compress it and something to hold it._
--ghg
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Subject: Re: Where to get Electric Car kits?
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:23:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.200422.5865@michael.apple.com> ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:
>Shouldn't have.  It isn't THAT complicated  (I've looked in the 
>guts of several Ecars.  Nothing even came close to the tuner section
>of a decent SW radio or an IF strip ... not to mention the switching
>power supplies and motherboard of a PC ...  I've built or fixed  one 
>or more of each.)

If you do it for high efficiency, then you are essentially constructing
a VERY LARGE switching power supply which can also take energy back
(when braking). He used something like 120 large power devices.
(FETs?)

If you want 100 horsepower, that's about 75,000 watts. At 100 volts,
750 amps. Probably 10-15 horsepower is enough, but we're still talking
serious power electronics. Got any 75 amp relays?

>BIG power electronics, yes.  But fancy?  A 120 VDC battery stack could 
>be charged from a large bridge rectifier and a resistor (with a LOT of 
>personal monitoring!).  The 'power electronics' CAN be as simple as a set of 
>relays to cut in more or less of the battery stack.  (DUMB way to do it,

Well, you could do that. Might be interesting. You wouldn't get the
absolute best efficiency but it might be good enough.

-- 
My opinions are my own.
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: kk881595@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu (kevin knappmiller)
Subject: Re: Where to get Electric
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:28:00 GMT
Reply-To: kk881595@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu
Organization: Colorado State U. Engineering College

In article <1992Nov6.200613.8930@michael.apple.com>, ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:


|> The fuel cell, though, makes it a fuel powered vehicle, not an
|> electric in the classical sense.  One could argue, by your logic,
|> that an onboard diesel/electric generator driving an electric motor
|> made an 'electric car'...

I guess one 'could'.  We don't though because a diesel is
an "engine".  Conventional usage is that a fuel cell is an
electricity storage device, similar "linguistically" to
a battery.  Therefore its use in conjunction with an electric
motor in a car is termed an 'electric car'.  No problem :-)


|*>The reason we don't have mass
|*>production of such a clean, efficient, electric vehicle is strictly
|*>political.

|> Nope.  Mostly market driven.  The vast majority of folks just
|> don't want a car they can only get 100 miles out of per day 
|> and that has to have its battery water checked weekly and that
|> has to have a new set of expensive batteries every couple of years.
|> 
|> And they don't want to pay $10k extra for exotic batteries when gas
|> is $1.20/gallon ...
|> 

Who really knows whether the hold up is political or market
driven?  If the holdup is political we can only hope that the
workings of the free press expose it.  If it is market driven
(which I hope is the case) then the market needs to wake up.

I WANT a good cheap electric car to commute in.  I want the
dependability that will come with the technology.  If the electric
car industry was the size of the current automobile industry I 
think that the vehicle would be significantly less expensive
than current gasoline powered vehicles.  The whole system is
just much simpler.  (If there is a 'political' motivation I think
it might come from the big automobile 
companies seeing this  and not wanting to lose this profit.
But GM is not what you call profitable now so I don't think that
is the case.) 

The limited range that comes with electric vehicles (at least in
the near future) may be a boon.  I would really prefer only to OWN
a single car that served a majority of my needs, and have a much
more widespread car rental industry available to meet those other
needs. (ie pickup truck, 4 wheel drive car for traveling into the
mountains in the winter, larger car for taking long trips with
more than two people, etc.)  

Kevin Knappmiller
Solar Lab
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO  80523
(303)491-8215
kk881595@longs.lance.colostate.edu
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: akerson@deimos.af.mil (Pete Akerson - akerson%srg@uunet.uucp)
Subject: More chatter on electric vehicles ...
Organization: Arinc Research Corp.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 18:40:55 GMT
Keywords: electric school busses ?


      
  As a filthy black cloud farted out of the school bus ahead
of me on my way to work, I wondered 
"Why arent those things electric ?"

Think about it :
Very low mileage fixed routes.
Maximum speed need not be 55 mph.
Time to recharge in the middle of the day.
Huge vehicle size to carry big heavy (lead?) batteries.
and use an old gas buss for occaisional field trips.
From: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: U.S. Renewable Research E
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:36:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: SPACE BBS - Menlo Park, CA - 10 Lines + 4gB - 415-323-4193
Reply-To: howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith) 

JW>An article in a recent issue of _Nuclear Canada_ (not well known for
JW>supplying adequate references), lists the following figures for federal
JW>R&D expenditures in the cumulative period 1976-1992 in the U.S.:

JW>Nuclear energy:  $3.2 billion  ($800 million for LWR's, $2.4 billion for
JW>(22% of supply)                 reactor safety and advanced designs)

JW>Coal energy:     $3.2 billion  (for advanced technology, combustion systems,
JW>(54% of supply)                 and magnetohydrodynamics)

JW>Renewable energy:  $4 billion  ($1.7 billion for photovoltaic systems,
JW>(0.5 percent)                   $1.5 billion for solar thermal, $800 million
JW>                                for wind systems)

JW>Note that the last category does not include hydraulic power, as it shouldn'
JW>in such comparisons.

These numbers don't add up. The DOE budget for R&D this next year alone
is $38 billion with the biggest portion going to nuclear. The totals
for the years 1976 - 1992 are probably more like $100 billion each
for nuclear and coal and $4 billion for renewables.

---
 . SLMR 2.1a . This tagline is umop apisdn
                        
Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Operator)
Subject: Re: More chatter on electric vehicles ...
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 23:23:38 GMT

Raul Essig (lizard@cats.ucsc.edu) wrote:
: 
: Just to offer a positive example:  The University of Calif. at Santa Cruz
: has shuttle busses that circle the campus all day ( and some at night )
: and many of these run off of propane.  Many of the work crew pickups
: as also fueled by propane.  Being a member of the work crew this last
: summer I had an in depth discussion with one of the people whose truck
: was converted.  According to her, when the truck was converted
: ( the successfull second time ) she could not determine any kind of
: performance difference whatsoever.  And considering that the cost of the
: propane is effectively HALF that of gasoline in California, they are
: saving quite a bit of money in the end.  This is part of an alternative fuel
: program that is a UC Santa Cruz/ UC Berkeley (I think) joint project.  
: I hear that according to the studies the propane engines are putting out 
: somewhere between 15 and 20 percent of the pollutants of internal combustion
: engines.  The only difference I ever witnessed ( I never actually drove one ) 
: was that it sounded "kinda funny".  It was a little quiter than a convention
: truck, but in a wierd kind of way.  It's difficuly to describe.  
: Mass transit seems to me to be crying out for alternative fuel programs.
: 


Fuel consumption is about 15% higher.  A liter of propane doesn't get you as 
far. (Not as dense either)  

Power is significantly reduced, but you would only notice that the performance
is a bit sluggish.  

Not only are pollutants decreased, but crud in the oil drops down too.  I've
heard of people who use synthetic oil and routinely go 25,000 miles without 
changing.

One taxi driver I talked to in California said that it was worth the conversion
just in the reduced maintainance.  He put an additional 300,000 miles on his
engine since the conversion with nothing but routine oil changes.

--
=> Sherwood Botsford                   sherwood@space.ualberta.ca <= 
=> University of Alberta         Lab Manager, Space Physics Group <=         
=> tel:403 492-3713                             fax: 403 492-4256 <=
From: lizard@cats.ucsc.edu (Raul Essig)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: More chatter on electric vehicles ...
Date: 13 Nov 1992 10:27:21 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Nov12.142358.5255@ee.gatech.edu> wung@puttgen.ee.gatech.edu writes:
>So what was the capital cost in converting these things to propane?
>Have they figured out the return on investment?  How about factory
>built propane burning vehicles?  How much are they?
>
>Just curious.
>
>*Peter Wung			Email:wung@ee.gatech.edu	   * 

Well, actually, I have no idea what the cost of conversion was, but
I can find out.  Right now I am sick as a dog, so it might be a few
days before you get a reasonable response.

-Raul Essig
From: 01crmeyer@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu (Craig Meyer)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Info on the GM SE-101 Steam Car
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:34:26 GMT
Organization: Ball State University, Muncie, In - Univ. Computing Svc's

This is Craig Meyer, the one that asked the question about External-Combustion
cars, and if they were possible.

Well, I went to the library and found out about a steam car that GM built in
the early 70's.  Basically, they took the V8 out of some big, ugly T-Bird like
car and put this engine in:

The Gm SE 101 Steam Car:
Took 30-45 seconds to warm up.
101 cubic inch 4-cylander piston steam engine
  160 hp.
Steam generator with two vortex burners and about 430 feet of finned tubing. 
  Produced 800 psi steam at 700 degrees F.
Condenser
  3 times the size of a regular radiator

Problems:
Couldn't make a big enough condenser--lost water on hot days
The water would freeze, and antifreeze harmed efficiency.
Lubrication was difficult.  Lubricants had to be mixed with the steam at
  elevated temperatures and pressures.  They had to be removed before the steam
  was condensed or the oil would damage the boiler.
    [car engines don't have that problem!  Can someone help explain?]
It wieghed 450 pounds more than the engine it replaced, and produced half the
  power.  It was huge.

It WAS clean, though.

Comments?

CM

-- 
       Craig Meyer                 01CRMEYER@LEO.BSUVC.BSU.EDU
       Indiana Academy for Science, Mathematics, and Humaities.
       Muncie, IN  47306                          317-285-7433

       Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not necessarily
       shared by the Indiana Academy.
From: ethanb@ptolemy.astro.washington.edu (Ethan Bradford)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: More chatter on electric vehicles ...
Date: 12 Nov 92 17:58:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: ptolemy.ETHANB.92Nov12095814
Organization: U. of Washington
To: akerson@deimos.af.mil (Pete Akerson - akerson%srg@uunet.uucp)

In article <1992Nov11.184055.7336@srg.srg.af.mil> akerson@deimos.af.mil (Pete Akerson - akerson%srg@uunet.uucp) writes:


>    As a filthy black cloud farted out of the school bus ahead
>  of me on my way to work, I wondered 
>  "Why arent those things electric ?"

>  Think about it :
>  Very low mileage fixed routes.
>  Maximum speed need not be 55 mph.
>  Time to recharge in the middle of the day.
>  Huge vehicle size to carry big heavy (lead?) batteries.
>  and use an old gas buss for occaisional field trips.

Also: Frequent stops, which can use regenerative braking.
  Lots of time spent idling (waiting for kids).
  Much of the idle time spent in a cluster of buses near many kids
    (poisoning their young lungs).
From: tgorb@rrc.chevron.com (Joe Gorberg)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: Notch another one up for the Greennazi
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:41:17 GMT
Reply-To: tgorb@rrc.chevron.com
Organization: Chevron, Richmond, California

>They tried to get between the plutonium ship and its escort, got
>bumped and accused the Japanese of brutality or something
>like that.  I assume the reporters on Greenpeace boat will tell
>the story the Greenpeace way.
 


Today's WSJ (Nov 9) presented the story of a collision between the greenpeace 
boat and the escort.  There were no accusations, assumptions, or slant towards
one side or another (IMHO).  It said authorities are investigating.  There was
some damage to the greenpeace boat.


Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz)
Subject: Re: nuclear waste
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 03:06:44 GMT

In article <3988.1017.uupcb@spacebbs.com> howard.smith@spacebbs.com (Howard Smith)  writes:

>The document DOE/EIA-0455(90), published June 1992, on page 14 states
>that the "average generation expenses for nuclear plants owned by
>major investor-owned electric utilities" for the year 1990 was 5.97
>cents per kiloWatt-hour. The EPRI Journal, June 1990, describes a
>project between the company US Windpower and EPRI to develope a "nickel
>wind turbine". The variable-speed machine, the US windpower 33M-VS, is
>now in field test in various parts of the country. The DOE has
>recently called for proposals to develope four cent machines and
>there is talk of 3 cent machines before the year 2000.


You are comparing apples and oranges!  The average installed cost of
existing, operating nuclear power plants is being compared against the
projected cost of a prototype wind turbine.  If you compare the costs
of installed wind turbines against installed nuclear plants, or
against the best nuclear plants (rather than lumping the badly
mismanaged ones in with the well managed ones) the comparison would
not be nearly so favorable.


> The installed cost of the new machine is about $1.3/Watt. Nuclear
> installed costs generally run greater than $2/Watt.

This conveniently ignores the capacity factors for the machines.  A
well run nuclear plant can generate its rated capacity 80% of time.
Wind turbines can average perhaps 20%.  Moreover, the downtime for the
nuclear plants can in general be scheduled during seasons of low
demand.

	Paul F. Dietz
	dietz@cs.rochester.edu


Newsgroups: sci.energy
From: pngai@adobe.com (Phil Ngai)
Subject: Re: A Compressed-Air Car -- Possible?
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:07:01 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.155936.11659@bsu-ucs> 01crmeyer@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu (Craig Meyer) writes:
>According to my calculations (based on a Gast airmotor catalogue), such a
>vehicle would need air tanks that could hold 100,000 psi.

Considering that CNG vehicles operate around 3,000 PSI and it
seems to generally be considered a pain, (pain: defined as expensive)
particularly in the area of personal compressors, I would say
100,000 PSI, if possible, would be extremely expensive.

Furthermore, I'd hate to be anywhere near you if you get
involved in a collision. I'd rather ride in a Ford Pinto.

-- 
My opinions are my own.
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: Re: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
Date: 12 Nov 1992 23:09:45 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <T6R8RAC@zelator.in-berlin.de>, leo@zelator.in-berlin.de (Stefan Hartmann) writes:
=If you wanna see a working free energy machine, just log via ftp to:
=phoenix.oulu.fi (130.231.240.17)   and get  in  
=pub/bigflis     perpetu4.exe
=
=This is a selfextracting animation, which displays in SVGA quality on
=a PC the Methernitha free energy machine lightning a bulb....

Stefan, WHEN are you going to learn that a computer animation of what a
videotape of a free-energy machine might look like if either the videotape or
the free energy machine actually existed (you ARE the one who, every time you
go to look at the actual machine, it's been shut down so that it can be moved,
or something like that, aren't you?  Have you ever seen the purported machine
in action?) is NOT evidence?  Hell, if one accepts something like that as
evidence, we really ought to go to Warner Brothers to find out what's at the
forefront of physics!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.