TheEEStory.com

News, Reviews and Discussion of EEStor Inc.
439 Posts
 
Mon, 19 Mar 2012, 6:02pm A supercapacitor in your optical drive: DVD-RW used to burn graphene capacitors »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Eenigma wrote:

DGDanforth wrote:

Here is a little more information about the capabilities of the graphene supercapacitor.

Graphene supercapacitors are 20 times as powerful, can be made with a DVD burner

Now, beyond the novel manufacturing process — the scientists are confident it can be scaled for commercial applications, incidentally — the main thing about LSG capacitors is that they have very desirable energy and power characteristics. Power-wise, LSG supercapacitors are capable of discharging at 20 watts per cm3, some 20 times higher than standard activated carbon capacitors, and three orders of magnitude higher than lithium-ion batteries. Energy-wise, we’re talking about 1.36 milliwatt-hours per cm3, about twice the density of activated carbon, and comparable to a high-power lithium-ion battery.

Doug
It looks to me like something is way off. Lithium ion ED is about 600 milliwatt hours per cm3 .

Energy wise they are talking 1.36 milliwatt hours per cm3 ???????

Someone has got their units confused 1.3 watt hours >= 2* 0.6 watt hours? So who is it?

Offline


Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 11:42pm OT Politics: you can discuss politics in this thread...but only here »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

energy investor wrote:

Hi Guys,

Lets get to serious stuff here. You Americans should talk to Australians about racial tolerance.

We kiwis are still annoyed that you Americans claim the Wright Brothers were the first to fly, yet we know it was Richard Pearce. But we were not prepared to start a war over it.

We have always known that Phar Lap was a kiwi race horse and that lamingtons and pavlova were invented in New Zealand, and even that "thongs" were invented in New Zealand and called Jandals. We didn't go to war over that.

We didn't go to war over the claim that Russel Crowe was an Aussie.

But fair suck of the sav. !

This article about Manuka honey that we have been using in medicine and exporting around the world, has suddenly been "discovered" in Australia.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/honey-i-killed-...

Now if those Little Aussie Battlers (aka bastards) try to steal this one, it will be war. I am telling you war!!

We may even secede as the seventh state of Australia.

Wot they haven't annexed us yet? That is only because they are too busy doing unmentionable things to sheep.

Just between us (confidentially) our parents were of good ancestry who emigrated here to kiwiland at our own cost. They were exported as prisoners.

Breeding does out doesn't it?

:-)


kind regards
ei

PS I am bored with this American political commentary...

Why don't you just steal all rights and liabilities to Rubert Murdoch (Actually you can have the whole family) then we'll call it even. If that's not enough we could throw in a few mining magnates and even some soap/reality celebrities.

PS No war until we fix our submarines

As for sheep I'm still trying to forget WCushmans contribution to that topic.

Offline
Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 5:16pm OT Politics: you can discuss politics in this thread...but only here »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Futureman Almighty wrote:

Reposting this wonderful film for all to see!

Great video, what a contrast to the Repelicans, none of the current alternates are any where near the Presidents level of intelligence or morality or just basic humanity.

Offline
Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 8:39am Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

cechilders wrote:

I think we do not have enough Global Warming threads. Please start more!

I promise no more, once we have a PR from EEStor.

Offline
Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 6:04am Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Lensman wrote:

EricOlthwaite wrote:

Lensman wrote:

That's what I find most puzzling the Catastrophic Anthropic Global Warming alarmists. It seems as though all they ever want to do is argue over the causes of global warming,

Why should this be puzzling, it is most important that the cause of the current warming is resolved as the denial that this is related to human GHG emissions is being used as a reason for the US not taking any meaningful action to reduce GHG emissions.

No industrialized nation is going to ruin its own economy by taking draconian action to limit carbon emissions. This will become even more true as the kindergarten-level argument that CO2 is the "cause" of global warming continues to be eroded, and discredited even more than it already has been.

Kindergarten-level physics tells us that CO2 is a GHG and now the sceptics are starting to accept that the basic physics tells us that the increase in C02 levels are responsible for at least a part of the present warming.

As we have discussed before the more mature level argument is over the quantities of positive feedback that are a part of our climate system, this is definitely not a Kindergarten-level discussion. This is a just an attempt to belittle the discussion.

Again I post this
http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lectu...

Now again I ask where is the evidence that CO2 levels are not relevant to our climate system? Where is the science to show this, where are the models that can show this?

I continually see shifting arguments (plant not warming now it is), misrepresentation of the published studies, misleading statements (COS2 is a harmless colourless gas etc), hidden agendas (Heartland Institute) and other nonsense but never any solid evidence that the sun cycles, galactic motions or anything else is responsible for the current warming.

And then there are the Sceptics with credentials such as this:

Richard S. Lindzen

sourcewatch.org wrote:


On Tobacco

In a 2001 profile in Newsweek, journalist Fred Guterl wrote that Lindzen "clearly relishes the role of naysayer. He'll even expound on how weakly lung cancer is linked to cigarette smoking."[14] James Hansen recalls meeting Lindzen whilst testifying before the Vice President's Climate Task Force: "I considered asking Lindzen if he still believed there was no connection between smoking and lung cancer. He had been a witness for tobacco companies decades earlier, questioning the reliability of statistical connections between smoking and health problems. But I decided that would be too confrontational. When I met him at a later conference, I did ask that question, and was surprised by his response: He began rattling off all the problems with the date relating smoking to helath problems, which was closely analagous to his views of climate data."

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rich...

Lensman wrote:

Your singling out the USA here is wholly inappropriate. Some EU countries have agreed to limit carbon emissions, but this has proven to be just lip service. Germany and Denmark have discovered, the hard way, what happens when you actually try to use solar and wind power as a significant part of electrical grid power. Reality has finally sunk in, as was inevitable (and predicted by me), so they are now cutting back on their reliance on those unreliable power sources.

No industrialized country has made significant inroads into reducing CO2, and boom growth countries such as China and India are rapidly increasing their CO2 output.

Any serious discussion of reducing air pollution (whether or not that is a significant contributor to climate change) has to take into account that people will never voluntarily give up their refrigerators, televisions, and electric shavers.

It is entirely appropriate to single out the US in this debate, the US is still the worlds largest economy and has a greater influence than any other single economy. Their simply will be no world wide coordinated action without the US. However if the US were to lead most of the worlds nations would be willing to take part in a global response.

That's Kindergarten over for tonight.

Offline
Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 4:24am Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Lensman wrote:

EricOlthwaite wrote:

...go nuclear in countries that can be relied upon to handle the industry safely and have the financial resources to properly decommission the plants and safely store the waste for the required time periods.

Some advanced economies can at this time be trusted to do this. Can you say the same for countries on your border ie Mexico? that's not even approaching the middle east.

Nukes will have to be a part of the answer for some countries however this is not a desirable solution in many other countries outside of the US.

I agree that fission power is not an ideal solution, especially in politically unstable countries, but 4th generation thorium reactors can be constructed in such a way that will minimize the amount of nuclear weapons-grade fissionables created by the reaction. Of course this still doesn't make them really safe, but considering the effect on worldwide public health over the decades since commercial nuclear power was first used, nuclear power plants have proven much, much safer than coal-fired power plants.

Yes in some countries, we do not differ too much here.

Offline
Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 2:14am Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Lensman wrote:

WalksOnDirt wrote:

Replace coal power plants with nuclear. Encourage the adoption of EVs.

That's a plan I'd be very happy to support!

That's what I find most puzzling the Catastrophic Anthropic Global Warming alarmists. It seems as though all they ever want to do is argue over the causes of global warming,

Why should this be puzzling, it is most important that the cause of the current warming is resolved as the denial that this is related to human GHG emissions is being used as a reason for the US not taking any meaningful action to reduce GHG emissions.

Lensman wrote:

instead of being advocates for things that practically everyone would support-- like measures to reduce pollution and transition to power from Green sources, such as nuclear.

I'm fine with that, go nuclear in countries that can be relied upon to handle the industry safely and have the financial resources to properly decommission the plants and safely store the waste for the required time periods.

Some advanced economies can at this time be trusted to do this. Can you say the same for countries on your border ie Mexico? that's not even approaching the middle east.

Nukes will have to be a part of the answer for some countries however this is not a desirable solution in many other countries outside of the US.

Offline
Fri, 16 Mar 2012, 1:51am Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Lensman wrote:

I guess you didn't get the memo. Even Al Gore now admits that's not true.

I dont hear much from Al Gore, What we haven't got anywhere is any serious science to show that this is not the case.

Offline
Thu, 15 Mar 2012, 8:42pm Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Lensman wrote:

Okay, the earth is warming. Presumably you think that is bad, altho climate change is a constant part of human history, and it's sensible to suggest we should adapt to change as we have in the past.

But presuming you think we should try to stop nature from doing what's natural, do you have a suggestion as to what to do to stop or slow global warming? Or are you just...

http://secretagentman.squarespace.com/storage/dead%20horse.gif?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1288565097090

I know you have accepted that the planet is warming there are others who still refuse to believe that this is happening.

Suggested Action:
Cap and trade or GHG tax in conjunction with making the research for alternatives a top priority, as CO2 is the primary driver for dangerous climate change.

Offline
Thu, 15 Mar 2012, 8:37pm Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Fibb :) wrote:

http://www.theeestory.com/topics/9939

Thanks I was looking for that

Offline
Thu, 15 Mar 2012, 6:50pm Framing the Climate Debate »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

The climate is changing, according to a new report from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) and the CSIRO. Days and nights are getting hotter, sea levels are rising, rainfall patterns are changing. Yawn. Heard it all before

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-14/phillips-...

Repetition is the key to remembering information and CSIRO and the BoM seem to have taken that message to heart. (So have I)

Offline
Thu, 15 Mar 2012, 6:43pm Climategate 2.0 emails are out »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

An interview with Michael Mann where he discusses some of these issues.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-15/climate-s...

Offline
Thu, 15 Mar 2012, 6:27am Rossi Low Energy Nuclear Reaction confirmed? »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

seslaprime wrote:

I dont think anyone is that passionate about it. It is what it is and nothing else. no one has any control one way or the other regarding Rossi and his ventures.

on the contrary, it is an interesting story, nothing more.

then there are those People who for some reason Need to feed their ego, by making it their "Mission" on this blog to get any believers to change sides and join the "pointless" campaign to say the word scam as many times as possible.

it is humorous at best. but after a while it gets too repetitious and has no meaning any longer.
Scam, scammer, fraud, crook, what ever. it is meaningless. it adds nothing to the discussion.
Now we all just skip over those meaningless posts and move on to the meat of the discussion.

Exactly

Offline
Wed, 14 Mar 2012, 7:02pm Japan: 5 Nucs in Trouble »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Tepco the plants owners seemed to think that the plant was in such a dangerous state that they had decided to evacuate all of their workers. This would most certainly have led to massive releases of radiation as the cooling ponds and reactors overheated and caught fire.

This then threatened the very existence of Japan as a viable nation. This is the opinion of the Japanese prime minister.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-14/former-ja...

It was only the prime ministers insistence that Tepco leave the workers to repair the cooling systems that prevented this from happening.

I think the people of Japan are right to be extremely concerned and should consider carefully what changes are required to make the industry safer and if this is even possible in Japan.

As Japan is heavily committed to nuclear power and the alternatives are also not attractive there is no easy answer.

Offline
Mon, 12 Mar 2012, 6:28am Rossi Low Energy Nuclear Reaction confirmed? »
EricOlthwaite
EElevated
Avatar2
Registered: Sep, 2009
Last visit: Mon, 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 439

Lensman wrote:

Yes, it's all a conspiracy to discredit Rossi, a conspiracy by Big Oil and the electric companies. Rossi is really a completely honest inventor and entrepreneur, one who has never ever lied or scammed in his life.

I couldn't imagine for a minute that Big Oil etc are involved in any conspiracy to discredit Rossi, he seems to be well capable of doing that himself.

The successful commercialisation of the promised EESU technology would no doubt be a challenge to many very powerful corporations, how do we expect they will react to this?

Offline