"Ambrose Nankivell" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dave wrote:
> > "stephen pridgeon" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
> >
news:[email protected]...
> >> "Tony W" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:<
[email protected]>...
> >>> "AndyMorris" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>>
news:[email protected]...
> >>>
> >>>>> 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:
>
>
http://www.ilea.org/lcas/macleanlave1998.html
>
> It's still 5 units (driving it) to 1 (making it) after these costs are
taken
> into account
>
> >>> 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.
>
>
http://www.bpf.co.uk/bpf/industry_issues/general_issues/environment/sustaina
> bility/
>
>
> >> 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
> 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.
