How much are materials to build a shed,how to be a football coach uk,positive attitude quotes of the day success - PDF Review

Author: admin, 12.03.2014. Category: The Power Of Thinking

Defying Western stigma and school-age angst over wearing braces, some Asian teens are reportedly buying fake braces as a status symbol. This orthodontia oddity has flourished in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia, according to outlets. Kids are forking over $100 for the black-market fashion braces to fool observers into thinking they can afford the authentic -- and expensive -- mouthworks, AFP reports. Mickey Mouse and Hello Kitty are among the popular designs, but whimsical themes aside, the braces can also be dangerous. In 2009 -- yes, this trend has some bite -- CBS reported on the Thai government's concern that parts could come loose and choke wearers, and that some of the braces contained lead. Humor site the Chive ran a pictorial, remarking that among all the supposedly crazy crazes, this one was, well, surprising. The same reports also said that TLC NAND is slower than MLC and SLC (single-level cell), even though it can store more data per cell. Images from the benchmark tests follow below, with the full report available at the source link.
That there may be some environmental benefit in Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles (tackling green house gas emissions) regardless of the use of natural gas. That the short term use of natural gas to produce hydrogen may be a bridge to the emergence of economically viable renewable hydrogen production to displace natural gas long term.
That hydrogen for fuel cells in transportation is a relatively benign and economically constructive use of US natural gas that serves the interests of US energy independence from foreign oil. If you have not yet been exposed to authoritative-looking green marketing for hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles, you will be. There are no such environmental benefits attributable to hydrogen either now or in any foreseeable future economic reality. Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles are marketed as green to environmentalists and policy makers by comparison to a 23 mpg gasoline vehicle. The following chart therefore references the 23 mpg EPA Lexus and compares it to variety of modern technology choices from Fuel Cell Vehicles, Diesel, Gasoline and Gasoline-Hybrids to Plug-in Hybrids and pure Battery Electric Vehicles.
A Closer Look at Directly Comparable Vehicle Technologies without the reference to either the arbitrary US fleet average or very old or very high power vehicle technologies.
Fact: The EPA tested 2014 134hp Toyota Prius Gasoline Hybrid offers a 60% GHG WTW emissions reduction verses the Average Fuel Cell Vehicle tested by the definitive DOE NREL long term study. The heavy conversion loss from electricity to chemical fuels drastically impacts the distance that can be travelled per unit of energy depending on source. This is everything the reader needs to know about why the fossil fuel and auto industries are pushing so hard for hydrogen despite, no in fact because it makes no environmental sense. It is important for any person concerned with environmental protection or simply wishing to avoid being mislead as a consumer, an investor, an editor or a public servant, to be mindful of well funded and extremely widespread misuse of publicly available data regarding Hydrogen production and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles. Hydrogen represents the limit of fossil fuel refining which results in the maximum hidden well to tank emissions of any fossil fuel and the maximum overall GHG emissions per unit of useful energy. In California, the CARB ZEV mandate permits fossil fuel vehicles (if the fossil fuel is hydrogen) to qualify instead of EVs while the copious green house gas emissions to produce hydrogen for them are released in California just down the road at Air Products Inc., or at the gas station instead of on the street.
This document contains minimal interpretation (the data is derived wherever available directly from official EPA and NREL records). The data demonstrates that unless a consumer wishes to purchase a low performance vehicle to replace a very old, a very large or very a high performance vehicle, Hydrogen FCVs offer no net Green House Gas reductions versus any other low performance vehicle. Unlike the optimal economic synergy of plug-in EVs and Renewables, the economics of hydrogen strongly prevents renewables from competing to power an FCV fleet either now or in the future. Hydrogen from Natural Gas is currently posing a considerable threat in terms of diverting State and Federal budgets ostensibly intended for environmental improvement to fossil fuel based hydrogen infrastructure where at best very large amounts of public funds are at risk of going to waste assuming consumers do reject low-performance FCVs. Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles and their infrastructure are a case in which the cost to the many should perhaps be considered to outweigh the benefit to the few. Naturally there is unlikely to be a market for Fuel Cell Vehicles outside the demographic of environmentally conscious consumers targeted and duped by false advertising. Of course the most decisive action environmentally concerned consumers can and must take in order to prevent the displacement of solar and wind energy in transportation by fracked natural gas is simply to refuse to lease or to buy a Fuel Cell Vehicle regardless of incentives or public funds wasted on hydrogen infrastructure. Naturally it would be preferable for CARB to anticipate such a response and to resume the role of forcing the focus of auto makers in the direction of more constructive instead of destructive approaches to the environment.
For details of public participation and input into California Energy Commission programs including the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (ARFVTP) Investment Plan, a contact is Alana Mathews, Public Advisor, at 916-654-4489. To dig deeper or if the reader is technically minded and inclined to double check the logic, there are some open source details of the calculations and accompanying notes and references that resulted in the information above. For those unfamiliar with hydrogen production, here is a highly recommended brief and accessible click-through animation.
This number takes into consideration only actual CO2 gas and EPA estimated CH4 emissions and EPA estimated GHG potency of CH4. Note also, this is a best case figure from large-scale industrial SMR (steam methane reforming) which benefits from efficiencies of scale.
As an authoritative external frame of reference this is the NREL well to wheel calculation. Well To Wheel Gasoline emissions are 11.132 Kg CO2 for the production and burning of 1 Gallon of Gasoline.
For electric equivalence to produce the same 11.132Kg CO2 as a gallon of gasoline there are published figures available for CO2 per KWh. Now we can take a hard look at a sample of similarly performing vehicles including Fuel Cell Vehicle and also look at both similar and very much more powerful PHEVs and EVs.
While direct compatibility with renewable electricity strongly favors a continuing trend towards an emissions-free transportation in the case of Electric Vehicles, chemical energy for transportation, hydrogen included, inevitably favors the economics of chemical feedstocks. Some calculations to illustrate the economic specifics of FCV vs EV energy costs via renewable vs fossil fuel pathways.


From these figures it is possible to calculate fundamental cost per mile economic break-even in either direction in three different hypothetical scenarios comparing a 100KW Chevy Spark EV to a 90KW 2015 Toyota FCV.
If EVs and FCVs co-exist in transportation allowing FCVs to take least-cost route (natural gas). We are within three to six years of it being cheaper to run an EV fleet on utility scale solar than it is to power an EV fleet via natural gas. The cost of hydrogen infrastructure must be free of charge to the fossil fuel industry (paid for by public funds). There must be no accounting for the cost of CO2 sequestration during the production of hydrogen – instead there must be a carte blanche license to pollute. These choices are of course within the remit of the California Energy Commission and similar bodies Nation wide and World wide at this moment. Ultimately, the defining advantage for hydrogen produced by natural gas for Fuel Cell Vehicles is the ability to pollute while claiming to be green.
Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.
An updated analysis published last month by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory suggests that the USA is just 39% energy efficient. As has been the case for decades, most of the economy’s energy waste stems from electricity generation (because most power plants are relatively inefficient) and the transportation sector (internal-combustion vehicles are also notoriously inefficient, but they are getting better). And some experts argue that even 39% efficiency is painting a rosy picture: defining energy as the “capacity to do useful work” (rather than strictly as a commodity measured by its energy content), physicist Robert Ayres and his colleagues estimate that the true energy efficiency of the US economy is closer to 14%. So how does Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s 2012 energy flow analysis compare to its analyses in recent years? Why? AJ Simon, a senior researcher at LLNL who leads the energy flow studies, told Opower that the increased waste number stems in part from updated assumptions about the end-use efficiency of vehicles and household appliances. Simon’s team now estimates that US cars, trains, planes and the like are on average 21% efficient (rather than 25%, as previously surmised) and US household energy uses like heating, cooling, and lighting are on average 65% efficient (rather than 80%). Since 1970, however, the substantial growth in energy use for electricity and transportation — sectors that, as mentioned above, are historically poor at turning fuel into work — has caused energy waste to gradually prevail over energy productivity. Fortunately, though, the nation is seeing a promising wave of technological advances, utility-sector innovation, behavioral science approaches, and policy breakthroughs that are helping to make energy productivity not just a serendipitous achievement in 1970, but an enduring reality for the decades ahead. It would be much easier to agree with your pronouncement if it didn’t include at least five blatant grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.
I like the graph – and find myself thinking of how to better organize the information. The American Renewable Energy Institute (AREI) brings together thought leaders and experts to foster climate change solutions. Various reports trying to explain the problem have identified the type of NAND memory chosen for these iPhone 6 models as the main culprit, with some suggesting that Apple is already considering moving from triple cell (TLC) NAND memory to multi-level cell (MLC) storage in future iPhone 6 versions. But a new report from Korean publication KBench shows benchmark tests for both TLC and MLC NAND memory modules used in 64GB iPhone 6 units, and they reveal that the latter offers a better performance than the former. One of the sleights of hand used in generating false comparisons is to include an exaggerated figure for carbon footprint of making propulsion batteries derived from an out-dated (2006) Argonne National Labs report. 95% of US production is from natural gas, most of the remainder from the gasification of coal and it will not change for the better.
However as a society we do not use renewable energy to chemically re-assemble gasoline from the exhaust fumes of gasoline vehicles (nor would we even if we had a convenient and abundant resource of concentrated fumes). The least cost pathway per mile for FCVs is so pronounced in favor of natural gas versus electricity from any source as to guarantee steam reforming trumps electrolysis, without CO2 sequestering and with no reason for the natural gas industry to fear cost per mile competition from renewables. Misrepresentation exists across vested interests and government agencies to paint a picture of this technology as an asset to global efforts to reduce green house gas emissions. It is therefore urgent from an environmental perspective that confusion on this topic is brought rapidly to a full stop. It is intended to provide a clear and directly accessible view of that data to serve a public right to know it (and to understand it) unmasked from false comparisons and pseudo-science and from political or marketing spin intent on forcing natural gas into the green energy economy. This best case is not even the typical case owing to difficulties in transporting hydrogen in bulk. At worst public funds will embolden the Natural Gas industry and Auto Industry to press for far-reaching delays in EV developments and even lobby for effectively the society-wide derailment of progress towards renewable energy in transportation.
In that regard I trust this document comes to the defence of the widest possible audience as it contains vital consumer education. According to the NREL long term fuel cell vehicle study on-site production (at the refueling station) is often deployed. 23*484 = 11,132g We can cross check this figure with a DOE study which shows 450g CO2 per mile for a 25mpg gasoline vehicle. According to H2USA ‘Recent development of the United States’ tremendous shale gas resources [is] helping to reduce the costs of producing hydrogen and operating hydrogen fuel cells’. But with an artificially imposed societal choice of FCVs, that goal is at risk of being pushed out by approximately 12 years of additional entrenchment in a fossil fuel transportation economy.
Amortizing that cost and risk of consumer rejection of FCV technology is never accounted for in the cost of Hydrogen. It is not good enough that images of celebrities drinking distilled exhaust emissions sets the standard of public education on such a pivotal societal choice.
Indeed, the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that achieving perfect thermal efficiency is as possible as unscrambling an egg. Strikingly, their findings suggest that 2012 was the most energy-wasteful year in more than a decade (and the third most profligate year since LLNL began producing these studies in the 1970s).
Specifically, a pair of recent analyses of overall energy consumption in the transportation and residential sectors prompted LLNL to adopt more realistic engineering estimates for 2012.


The fraction of energy converted into energy of useful motion is set by the equations derived by Carnot in 1824.
Selling fashion braces now carries a punishment of up to six months in prison and a $1,300 fine, according to the report. Nevertheless Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles are without equal when it comes to misdirection and as a tool for extracting public funds from officials only too ready to be blind-sided by pseudo-science and the lobbying of vested interests in a nation struggling to triage the cost of foreign oil and consumer environmental concerns while newly awash with abundant cheap Natural Gas from hydraulic fracturing of shales. A 23 mpg is also a ‘GREET 1b’ definition of a ‘mid sized family car [of average age of fleet]’. The green bars are emissions reduction and purple is performance reduction vs the 23 mpg gasoline vehicle. EV batteries on any significant scale are now known to be produced and planned for production without a significant carbon footprint and with very considerable cycle life, second use in storage and end of life recyclability. It is for exactly the same reason that we will not as a society electrolyze H2o (the exhaust of fuel cells) even though abundant water is often available. Accordingly should FCVs be adopted, natural gas will prevail economically long into the future, and long after the date by which EVs could be operated economically on 100% clean renewables on a large scale to the exclusion of fossil fuels. Mistaking fossil hydrogen from the hydraulic fracturing of shales for an environmentally sustainable energy pathway threatens to encourage energy policies that will dilute and potentially derail global efforts to head-off climate change due to the risk of diverting investment and focus from vehicle technologies that are economically compatible with renewable energy. There is no reason to imagine that a future 306hp FCV will not pollute far more than the current 306hp gasoline V6 Lexus when the average FCV tested by NREL already produces 73.5% of the emissions with less than half of the power. Replacing an EV, PHEV, HEV (or even a small-engined diesel or gasoline vehicle) with this FCV will represent an environmental set-back.
Hence the on-site (distributed) production from natural gas at fueling stations that suffers lowered efficiencies of scale.
90% of the Californian Energy Commission hydrogen infrastructure budget has been earmarked for non-sequestered fossil fuel production of Hydrogen in return for lip service of future environmental benefits that can never be forthcoming. Figures originating at Argonne National Laboratory and republished in graphical form by hydrogen fuel cell lobby group Californian Fuel Cell Partnership arrive at 62% efficiency inclusive of transportation.
Ford, a participant in the NREL study refers to it as distributed natural gas steam reforming. This is a 100KW (134hp) EV, which provides direct comparison with typically 100KW (134hp) FCVs.
Methane from natural gas contains the energy potential for self-disassembly into Hydrogen and CO2 via the process of steam methane reforming and as a result it is the simplest, cheapest and most economically unassailable source of hydrogen, that is best equipped to see off meaningful competition from electrolysis, biofuels and waste-stream reformation – so long as vehicles are chemically and not electrically powered.
This is a potential disaster for renewable energy in transportation and for the environment that PON-13-607 and initiatives like it encourage at the public expense assuming consumers cooperate in the purchase of FCVs.
By LLNL’s historical calculations, the amount of energy wasted annually has hovered between 50-58% during the last ten years. It is just that the false promise of hydrogen is such a dangerous deception in environmental terms that it cannot be allowed to go undetected at the eleventh hour for the environment and on the eve of genuine progress with simultaneous break throughs in solar energy costs and Electric Vehicles capable of addressing the mid market.
Negative performance reduction denotes performance increase compared to the 23 mpg vehicle. The energy efficiency barrier is too high and electricity is too valuable to waste on essentially the un-burning the oxidation products of other fuels. Hydrogen is locked by the force of economics to natural gas and natural gas is increasingly locked by the same force to the practice of on-shore hydraulic fracturing of shales. Toyota for example, currently the world’s largest auto maker is the most active supporter of lobby groups in the US and world-wide in pushing for hydrogen while it has tragically sidelined its own efforts to produce EVs. This is a fact that cannot have escaped either Mercedes (Daimler) and Hyundai-Kia who were both NREL test subjects alongside Ford and GM, BP, Shell and Chevron. The real-world data attests to the fact that when installed in a hybrid electric vehicle the real-world energy conversion efficiency is insufficient to overcome the added GHG emission intensity of hydrogen production. Meanwhile marketers of FCVs actively and openly target Electric Vehicles (not gasoline or diesel vehicles) with claims of convenient access to lowered green house gas emissions similar to a pure Electric Vehicle. The answer is 1.49 US Cents per KWh to be competitive with natural gas or more than double the cost reduction to be competitive in an EV system. As soon as humankind invents new materials that can survive at the super high temperatures needed to improve heat engine efficiencies then we will have higher efficiencies. The Y axis gives the correct number for all bars be it a percentage or a number in MPGp (miles per gasoline gallon equivalent well to wheel pollution) or vehicle power in bhp.
Natural gas is a cheap and abundant resource that comes out of the ground with energy potential for self-disassembly into hydrogen and CO2.
Hence on any meaningful scale the production of hydrogen from water cannot ever compete in the open market with an abundance of energetic fuels direct from the ground.
Hydrogen is the Hydro in fossil HydroCarbons and hence hydrogen cannot be extracted from the ground without simultaneously extracting and disposing of carbon as CO2. Of this group, only Ford, to their credit, has publicly stated that there is no significant environmental benefit to Fuel Cell Vehicle Technology – all be it at the bottom of a web page discussing the merits of tackling climate change. There is no example of a 23 mpg Toyota branded sedan, for example the 3.5 liter Toyota Camry only gets 268 hp and as a result has an EPA combined gas milage figure of 25 mpg. Steam methane reforming is economically unassailable as a method of hydrogen production by clean but more complex methods. The larger the scale, the greater the percentage of fossil fuel use in the production of hydrogen.
Re-Capturing the carbon (sequestering CO2) costs about the same as the resulting hydrogen fuel and hence it is simply released to the atmosphere.



Laws of attraction online sa prevodom ceo
Positive affirmation box amazon


Comments to «How much are materials to build a shed»

  1. iblis_066 writes:
    Into step of our next victory and effective components because the far, far away?�you.
  2. KRAL_SHEKI writes:
    Sometimes all we need cARRY YOUR OWN LABORATORY OF SALVATION WITHIN running and.
  3. 10_SB_OO4 writes:
    With end up in this plus and other.
  4. Puma writes:
    That other people think if we are ever in doubt about.