Mashed up death cage

Tim Woodall said:

Unless you are in the black-country where they had the sense to site their iron and coal mines in
the same place :-)

AFAIAA there are no working coal or iron seams left BICBW.

In the black country? I think not. When I was studying geology, we went up to Notts. somewhere to
see an opencast working.

A

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dave said:

"stephen pridgeon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tony W" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

> "AndyMorris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> "]news:[email hidden]...
>
>>> 2 tonnes of metal and plastic vs. 30 tonnes of fuel.
>>>
>>> Ummm.
>>
>> Sounds borderline to me. Steel and alu production take an awfull lot of fuel, plus the cost
>> of making it the right shape and shipping it about.

Link posted in a diferrent part of this thread:

ilea.orgmacleanlave1998.htmlOpen ↗

It's still 5 units (driving it) to 1 (making it) after these costs are

taken

Quoted message said:

into account

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> The reason steel works are always near the coal fields and not near the iron ore mines is that
> it takes about 5 tonnes of coal and 1 tonne of ore to make steel. Trouble is I can't remember
> how much steel you get per tonne of ore. You might be right.
>
> T

It will depend on the quality of the ore I guess.

I haven't seen figures for; obtaining the fuel, obtaining the ore, smelting it, forging the
steel, transporting it, re-working the steel, producing the paint, transporting the paint,
producing the plastic, moulding the plastic (anyone got figures for how much fuel it takes to
make plastic?)

4% of the world's oil use. I imagine that's lots less than metal.

bpf.co.uksustainaOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

bility/

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I would have thought that the sum of all this energy comsumption / toxic byproducts would far
outweigh the environmental impact of actually running a well-serviced large car. I'm also
starting to think that nuclear power is going to be a necessity, rather than a "viable
option" :-((

SteveP

...nah, there is another energy source out there that we just haven't learned to utilise yet.
Infinite, indestructible and omnipotent and best of all, not harmful. Once we manage to link
into it, we won't need any other energy sources, least of all nuclear...ever. We just have to be
patient. But then again, I might just be insane, right ?

Go on, what is it? Wave power, offshore wind, solar roofing tiles? Coppicing for charcoal?
Biodiesel?

Or maybe a combination of all of these.

My guess is that we could fairly easily use just sustainable energy _if_

we

Quoted message said:

wished to, and the vested interests would go that way.

A

Ok, you asked for it.... It's the source energy, the energy that everything is of. You weren't
thinking big enough with your suggestions. It's just a matter of understanding how to use it / link
to it. See, told you I was insane 8-P Dave.