<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_21_1856207</id>
	<title>Berkeley Engineers Have Some Bad News About Air Cars</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1258831860000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>cheeks5965 writes <i>"We've <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/08/11/09/0817254/Compressed-Air-Car-Nears-Trial">argued before</a> <a href="http://slashdot.org/story/08/02/22/1543232/100-MPG-Air-Powered-Car-Headed-To-US-Next-Year?art\_pos=15">over compressed air vehicles</a>, a.k.a. air cars. Air cars are an enchanting idea, providing mobility with zero fuel consumption or environmental impacts. The NYTimes' Green Inc. blog reports that <a href="http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/study-says-air-cars-are-inefficient/">the reality is less rosy</a>. New research from UC Berkeley and ICF International puts a period at the end of the discussion, showing that  <a href="http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1748-9326/4/4/044011/erl9\_4\_044011.html">compressed air is a very poor fuel</a>, storing less than 1\% of the energy in gasoline; air cars won't get you far, with a range of just 29 miles in typical city driving; and despite appearing green the vehicles are worse for the environment, with twice the carbon footprint as gasoline vehicles, from producing the electricity used to compress the air. Given these barriers, manufacturer claims should definitely be taken with a grain of salt."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>cheeks5965 writes " We 've argued before over compressed air vehicles , a.k.a .
air cars .
Air cars are an enchanting idea , providing mobility with zero fuel consumption or environmental impacts .
The NYTimes ' Green Inc. blog reports that the reality is less rosy .
New research from UC Berkeley and ICF International puts a period at the end of the discussion , showing that compressed air is a very poor fuel , storing less than 1 \ % of the energy in gasoline ; air cars wo n't get you far , with a range of just 29 miles in typical city driving ; and despite appearing green the vehicles are worse for the environment , with twice the carbon footprint as gasoline vehicles , from producing the electricity used to compress the air .
Given these barriers , manufacturer claims should definitely be taken with a grain of salt .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cheeks5965 writes "We've argued before over compressed air vehicles, a.k.a.
air cars.
Air cars are an enchanting idea, providing mobility with zero fuel consumption or environmental impacts.
The NYTimes' Green Inc. blog reports that the reality is less rosy.
New research from UC Berkeley and ICF International puts a period at the end of the discussion, showing that  compressed air is a very poor fuel, storing less than 1\% of the energy in gasoline; air cars won't get you far, with a range of just 29 miles in typical city driving; and despite appearing green the vehicles are worse for the environment, with twice the carbon footprint as gasoline vehicles, from producing the electricity used to compress the air.
Given these barriers, manufacturer claims should definitely be taken with a grain of salt.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30200468</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1258975860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Prius cars don't use lithium. They use nickle and hydride</i></p><p>Nickle is quite bad for the environment.  Lithium isn't really, it just takes a lot of energy to extract.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Prius cars do n't use lithium .
They use nickle and hydrideNickle is quite bad for the environment .
Lithium is n't really , it just takes a lot of energy to extract .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prius cars don't use lithium.
They use nickle and hydrideNickle is quite bad for the environment.
Lithium isn't really, it just takes a lot of energy to extract.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250</id>
	<title>No kidding?</title>
	<author>Brett Buck</author>
	<datestamp>1258794420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a surprise to someone?  Who ever though this *could* work? Certainly not anyone with any knowledge of thermodynamics. The only compressed -gas systems that even have a chance of working are those that store the working fluid as a liquid, meaning it has to be able to be liquified at room temperature at a reasonable pressure (few hundred PSI at most). Otherwise the tanks are huge and heavy (meaning it will barely move under power)  or they are small and heavy (meaning it has no range). Two excellent working fluid for this purpose are - wait for it - CO2 and Freon!  Oops.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Brett</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a surprise to someone ?
Who ever though this * could * work ?
Certainly not anyone with any knowledge of thermodynamics .
The only compressed -gas systems that even have a chance of working are those that store the working fluid as a liquid , meaning it has to be able to be liquified at room temperature at a reasonable pressure ( few hundred PSI at most ) .
Otherwise the tanks are huge and heavy ( meaning it will barely move under power ) or they are small and heavy ( meaning it has no range ) .
Two excellent working fluid for this purpose are - wait for it - CO2 and Freon !
Oops .           Brett</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a surprise to someone?
Who ever though this *could* work?
Certainly not anyone with any knowledge of thermodynamics.
The only compressed -gas systems that even have a chance of working are those that store the working fluid as a liquid, meaning it has to be able to be liquified at room temperature at a reasonable pressure (few hundred PSI at most).
Otherwise the tanks are huge and heavy (meaning it will barely move under power)  or they are small and heavy (meaning it has no range).
Two excellent working fluid for this purpose are - wait for it - CO2 and Freon!
Oops.
          Brett</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191722</id>
	<title>Re:There are other ways to compress the air.</title>
	<author>awerby</author>
	<datestamp>1258921500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any time you switch from one form of energy to another, you have losses, their magnitude depending on the efficiency of the conversion, storage, and transmission systems used. In the paper we're commenting about, there was a buried aside noting that while they didn't see compressed air as a particularly efficient primary propulsion mechanism for cars, hybrid electric/pneumatic vehicles hold some promise. Certainly a regenerative braking system can be utilized that compresses air directly, which is probably at least as efficient as generating electricity with it, assuming the propulsive power of the air can be harnessed directly to power the car.


As has been pointed out, the study assumed that automotive air bottles would be filled using electricity generated by burning hydrocarbons. But air can be compressed by various carbon-neutral means. The directly-compressive windmill mentioned previously is one; rather than relying on batteries, an isolated windmill can pump up manifolded pressure vessels until they're full. Then an (air-powered) truck can collect them and convey them to a filling station. An air infrastructure like this would not require exotic metals for batteries, or obtrusive power transmission lines. Other means of directly compressing air include harnessing tidal and hydro forces.


Electric power, while convenient, is transient - one must use it or lose it. Batteries don't really mitigate that basic fact very much. But compressing air is a way of storing energy that has a lot of shelf-life. Air compression technology hasn't advanced much in the last 50 years or so, but then it hasn't had much attention focused on it either. With a little technological rethinking, such as the development of stronger, lighter pressure vessels, or more efficient pumps, this basically benign and powerful source of portable power might prove a valuable ally in our efforts to build the clean and carbon-neutral vehicles of the near future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any time you switch from one form of energy to another , you have losses , their magnitude depending on the efficiency of the conversion , storage , and transmission systems used .
In the paper we 're commenting about , there was a buried aside noting that while they did n't see compressed air as a particularly efficient primary propulsion mechanism for cars , hybrid electric/pneumatic vehicles hold some promise .
Certainly a regenerative braking system can be utilized that compresses air directly , which is probably at least as efficient as generating electricity with it , assuming the propulsive power of the air can be harnessed directly to power the car .
As has been pointed out , the study assumed that automotive air bottles would be filled using electricity generated by burning hydrocarbons .
But air can be compressed by various carbon-neutral means .
The directly-compressive windmill mentioned previously is one ; rather than relying on batteries , an isolated windmill can pump up manifolded pressure vessels until they 're full .
Then an ( air-powered ) truck can collect them and convey them to a filling station .
An air infrastructure like this would not require exotic metals for batteries , or obtrusive power transmission lines .
Other means of directly compressing air include harnessing tidal and hydro forces .
Electric power , while convenient , is transient - one must use it or lose it .
Batteries do n't really mitigate that basic fact very much .
But compressing air is a way of storing energy that has a lot of shelf-life .
Air compression technology has n't advanced much in the last 50 years or so , but then it has n't had much attention focused on it either .
With a little technological rethinking , such as the development of stronger , lighter pressure vessels , or more efficient pumps , this basically benign and powerful source of portable power might prove a valuable ally in our efforts to build the clean and carbon-neutral vehicles of the near future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any time you switch from one form of energy to another, you have losses, their magnitude depending on the efficiency of the conversion, storage, and transmission systems used.
In the paper we're commenting about, there was a buried aside noting that while they didn't see compressed air as a particularly efficient primary propulsion mechanism for cars, hybrid electric/pneumatic vehicles hold some promise.
Certainly a regenerative braking system can be utilized that compresses air directly, which is probably at least as efficient as generating electricity with it, assuming the propulsive power of the air can be harnessed directly to power the car.
As has been pointed out, the study assumed that automotive air bottles would be filled using electricity generated by burning hydrocarbons.
But air can be compressed by various carbon-neutral means.
The directly-compressive windmill mentioned previously is one; rather than relying on batteries, an isolated windmill can pump up manifolded pressure vessels until they're full.
Then an (air-powered) truck can collect them and convey them to a filling station.
An air infrastructure like this would not require exotic metals for batteries, or obtrusive power transmission lines.
Other means of directly compressing air include harnessing tidal and hydro forces.
Electric power, while convenient, is transient - one must use it or lose it.
Batteries don't really mitigate that basic fact very much.
But compressing air is a way of storing energy that has a lot of shelf-life.
Air compression technology hasn't advanced much in the last 50 years or so, but then it hasn't had much attention focused on it either.
With a little technological rethinking, such as the development of stronger, lighter pressure vessels, or more efficient pumps, this basically benign and powerful source of portable power might prove a valuable ally in our efforts to build the clean and carbon-neutral vehicles of the near future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</id>
	<title>Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258836000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and despite appearing green the vehicles are worse for the environment</p></div><p>
Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy.  The energy could come from solar panels on your garage.  It compresses the air.  The air powers you car.  Zero emitions.<br> <br>
This is opposed to batteries which really aren't good for the environment, but all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.<br> <br>
Hydrogen is yet another method of storing energy.
<br> <br>
Just compressing air from solar, wind power, etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1\% or 100\%</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and despite appearing green the vehicles are worse for the environment Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy .
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage .
It compresses the air .
The air powers you car .
Zero emitions .
This is opposed to batteries which really are n't good for the environment , but all those Prius owners do n't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs .
Hydrogen is yet another method of storing energy .
Just compressing air from solar , wind power , etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1 \ % or 100 \ %</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and despite appearing green the vehicles are worse for the environment
Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy.
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage.
It compresses the air.
The air powers you car.
Zero emitions.
This is opposed to batteries which really aren't good for the environment, but all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.
Hydrogen is yet another method of storing energy.
Just compressing air from solar, wind power, etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1\% or 100\%
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187918</id>
	<title>Twice the carbon - in the US maybe</title>
	<author>vik</author>
	<datestamp>1258798620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US produces 80\% of its power from fossil fuels, and the cars are twice as bad as burning fossil fuel direct. BUT in more enlightened places 70\% of the power is from renewables, so only 30\% can be from fossil fuels max. So the production of compressed air is over twice as efficient, and these vehicles start to make sense. Said country (take New Zealand as an example) doesn't need to import massive quantities of expensive batteries to power the cars. Beware US-centric energy statistics; they only apply to a tiny fraction of the world's population.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US produces 80 \ % of its power from fossil fuels , and the cars are twice as bad as burning fossil fuel direct .
BUT in more enlightened places 70 \ % of the power is from renewables , so only 30 \ % can be from fossil fuels max .
So the production of compressed air is over twice as efficient , and these vehicles start to make sense .
Said country ( take New Zealand as an example ) does n't need to import massive quantities of expensive batteries to power the cars .
Beware US-centric energy statistics ; they only apply to a tiny fraction of the world 's population .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US produces 80\% of its power from fossil fuels, and the cars are twice as bad as burning fossil fuel direct.
BUT in more enlightened places 70\% of the power is from renewables, so only 30\% can be from fossil fuels max.
So the production of compressed air is over twice as efficient, and these vehicles start to make sense.
Said country (take New Zealand as an example) doesn't need to import massive quantities of expensive batteries to power the cars.
Beware US-centric energy statistics; they only apply to a tiny fraction of the world's population.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186972</id>
	<title>Newest entry in Google's index:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258835640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>dompressed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>dompressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dompressed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188108</id>
	<title>Time to fish out the calculator</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1258799940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Compressing air can be done with any source of mechanical energy. Put a windmill on your roof, gear it down, and have it drive the compressor directly</i> </p><p>Translate this into practical terms.</p><p> Give me an estimate of the air car's speed, range, weight of cargo, weight of passengers.</p><p>Tell me how long it will take to refill the tank.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressing air can be done with any source of mechanical energy .
Put a windmill on your roof , gear it down , and have it drive the compressor directly Translate this into practical terms .
Give me an estimate of the air car 's speed , range , weight of cargo , weight of passengers.Tell me how long it will take to refill the tank .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressing air can be done with any source of mechanical energy.
Put a windmill on your roof, gear it down, and have it drive the compressor directly Translate this into practical terms.
Give me an estimate of the air car's speed, range, weight of cargo, weight of passengers.Tell me how long it will take to refill the tank.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187044</id>
	<title>You should use two measures of electric vehicles</title>
	<author>presidenteloco</author>
	<datestamp>1258836180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The significant fact about electric (or hydrogen fuel cell), or electrically compressed air vehicles<br>is that electricity (and hence hydrogen via electrolysis, or compressed air tanks) can be generated<br>in all manner of relatively or completely "green" ways, whereas fossil-fuel transportation is<br>at least presently restricted to getting its fuel by digging up stored carbon from the Earth at<br>unsustainable rates.</p><p>So electric vehicles (or hydrogen fuel cell, or even relatively inefficient compressed air) vehicles,<br>are stepping stones on the path to a non-GHG producing future energy system.</p><p>So the "green-ness" or carbon footprint of these electrically based technologies should be<br>measured with two separate baselines:</p><p>1. What would their carbon footprint be if all electricity was generated with carbon-neutral generation<br>methods such as wind/solar/geothermal/hydro/wave/nuclear.</p><p>2. What is the carbon footprint assuming the US continues to maintain arguably the most carbon-dirty<br>electrical generating mix in the world.</p><p>Measured in this light, it can be seen that the complete issue is changing the electrical power source for the<br>US, in parallel with adopting one or multiple forms of transportation technology that is electrically based.<br>Either change without the other does not work. Both are necessary for effective improvement in emissions<br>reduction of transportation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The significant fact about electric ( or hydrogen fuel cell ) , or electrically compressed air vehiclesis that electricity ( and hence hydrogen via electrolysis , or compressed air tanks ) can be generatedin all manner of relatively or completely " green " ways , whereas fossil-fuel transportation isat least presently restricted to getting its fuel by digging up stored carbon from the Earth atunsustainable rates.So electric vehicles ( or hydrogen fuel cell , or even relatively inefficient compressed air ) vehicles,are stepping stones on the path to a non-GHG producing future energy system.So the " green-ness " or carbon footprint of these electrically based technologies should bemeasured with two separate baselines : 1 .
What would their carbon footprint be if all electricity was generated with carbon-neutral generationmethods such as wind/solar/geothermal/hydro/wave/nuclear.2 .
What is the carbon footprint assuming the US continues to maintain arguably the most carbon-dirtyelectrical generating mix in the world.Measured in this light , it can be seen that the complete issue is changing the electrical power source for theUS , in parallel with adopting one or multiple forms of transportation technology that is electrically based.Either change without the other does not work .
Both are necessary for effective improvement in emissionsreduction of transportation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The significant fact about electric (or hydrogen fuel cell), or electrically compressed air vehiclesis that electricity (and hence hydrogen via electrolysis, or compressed air tanks) can be generatedin all manner of relatively or completely "green" ways, whereas fossil-fuel transportation isat least presently restricted to getting its fuel by digging up stored carbon from the Earth atunsustainable rates.So electric vehicles (or hydrogen fuel cell, or even relatively inefficient compressed air) vehicles,are stepping stones on the path to a non-GHG producing future energy system.So the "green-ness" or carbon footprint of these electrically based technologies should bemeasured with two separate baselines:1.
What would their carbon footprint be if all electricity was generated with carbon-neutral generationmethods such as wind/solar/geothermal/hydro/wave/nuclear.2.
What is the carbon footprint assuming the US continues to maintain arguably the most carbon-dirtyelectrical generating mix in the world.Measured in this light, it can be seen that the complete issue is changing the electrical power source for theUS, in parallel with adopting one or multiple forms of transportation technology that is electrically based.Either change without the other does not work.
Both are necessary for effective improvement in emissionsreduction of transportation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30193068</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258902960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just just "Berkeley Engineers".  Any engineering student could tell you that an air car is not a practical vehicle and will never be, because of the laws of thermodynamics.  Even with all the components being "ideal" components (IE 100\% isentropic efficiency in the air motor and in the compressor) they are a losing proposition, never mind real components.  Generally if a device is not a winner using the best components that thermodynamics will allow, it will be even less of a winner with real components.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just just " Berkeley Engineers " .
Any engineering student could tell you that an air car is not a practical vehicle and will never be , because of the laws of thermodynamics .
Even with all the components being " ideal " components ( IE 100 \ % isentropic efficiency in the air motor and in the compressor ) they are a losing proposition , never mind real components .
Generally if a device is not a winner using the best components that thermodynamics will allow , it will be even less of a winner with real components .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just just "Berkeley Engineers".
Any engineering student could tell you that an air car is not a practical vehicle and will never be, because of the laws of thermodynamics.
Even with all the components being "ideal" components (IE 100\% isentropic efficiency in the air motor and in the compressor) they are a losing proposition, never mind real components.
Generally if a device is not a winner using the best components that thermodynamics will allow, it will be even less of a winner with real components.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Kymermosst</author>
	<datestamp>1258795020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy. The energy could come from solar panels on your garage. It compresses the air. The air powers you car. Zero emitions.</i></p><p>Okay, smart guy.  Explain to us the zero-emissions process for manufacturing those solar panels, your air compressor, and your air car.</p><p>We're waiting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy .
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage .
It compresses the air .
The air powers you car .
Zero emitions.Okay , smart guy .
Explain to us the zero-emissions process for manufacturing those solar panels , your air compressor , and your air car.We 're waiting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy.
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage.
It compresses the air.
The air powers you car.
Zero emitions.Okay, smart guy.
Explain to us the zero-emissions process for manufacturing those solar panels, your air compressor, and your air car.We're waiting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187142</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>MoellerPlesset2</author>
	<datestamp>1258836840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>&lt;blockquote&gt;Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy. The energy could come from solar panels on your garage. It compresses the air. The air powers you car. Zero emitions.&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br><br>It said 'worse for the environment'. Using more energy is worse for the environment and will continue to be until ALL our energy comes from clean sources.<br><br>&lt;blockquote&gt;This is opposed to batteries which really aren't good for the environment, but all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br><br>A ridiculous argument - As opposed to your air canisters which aren't made out of mined metals at all? Besides which, that's a whole different environmental issue.<br><br>&lt;blockquote&gt;Hydrogen is yet another method of storing energy. &lt;/blockquote&gt;<br><br>And a vastly more efficient one, making this technology pointless.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy .
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage .
It compresses the air .
The air powers you car .
Zero emitions.It said 'worse for the environment' .
Using more energy is worse for the environment and will continue to be until ALL our energy comes from clean sources.This is opposed to batteries which really are n't good for the environment , but all those Prius owners do n't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.A ridiculous argument - As opposed to your air canisters which are n't made out of mined metals at all ?
Besides which , that 's a whole different environmental issue.Hydrogen is yet another method of storing energy .
And a vastly more efficient one , making this technology pointless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy.
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage.
It compresses the air.
The air powers you car.
Zero emitions.It said 'worse for the environment'.
Using more energy is worse for the environment and will continue to be until ALL our energy comes from clean sources.This is opposed to batteries which really aren't good for the environment, but all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.A ridiculous argument - As opposed to your air canisters which aren't made out of mined metals at all?
Besides which, that's a whole different environmental issue.Hydrogen is yet another method of storing energy.
And a vastly more efficient one, making this technology pointless.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30193232</id>
	<title>It's all about heat</title>
	<author>mcalwell</author>
	<datestamp>1258904400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Compressing gasses generates huge amounts of heat, which if not captured, is waste heat. Similarly decompressing gases loses heat - that is why aerosols are cold, and is how refrigeration works.

Compressed air as a means of energy storage is a bad idea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressing gasses generates huge amounts of heat , which if not captured , is waste heat .
Similarly decompressing gases loses heat - that is why aerosols are cold , and is how refrigeration works .
Compressed air as a means of energy storage is a bad idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressing gasses generates huge amounts of heat, which if not captured, is waste heat.
Similarly decompressing gases loses heat - that is why aerosols are cold, and is how refrigeration works.
Compressed air as a means of energy storage is a bad idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187956</id>
	<title>I was greatly disappointed by the lack of hovering</title>
	<author>Cormophyte</author>
	<datestamp>1258798860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...Air Cars" is an amazingly deceptive headline<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...Air Cars " is an amazingly deceptive headline : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...Air Cars" is an amazingly deceptive headline :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186966</id>
	<title>"Dompressed air" you say?</title>
	<author>sys.stdout.write</author>
	<datestamp>1258835640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187110</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>mrboyd</author>
	<datestamp>1258836660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just compressing air from solar, wind power, etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1\% or 100\%</p></div><p>Well it does matter if we need to cover 3 football field with solar panel for every person who wants to commute in an air car. We're going to run out of space. Anyway, 2010 is around the corner and my flying car running on recycled garbage should theoretically be available shortly.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just compressing air from solar , wind power , etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1 \ % or 100 \ % Well it does matter if we need to cover 3 football field with solar panel for every person who wants to commute in an air car .
We 're going to run out of space .
Anyway , 2010 is around the corner and my flying car running on recycled garbage should theoretically be available shortly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just compressing air from solar, wind power, etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1\% or 100\%Well it does matter if we need to cover 3 football field with solar panel for every person who wants to commute in an air car.
We're going to run out of space.
Anyway, 2010 is around the corner and my flying car running on recycled garbage should theoretically be available shortly.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188692</id>
	<title>Study Validity Questions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258803960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1] How did they figure the energy payback?<br>2] What were the assumptions they made in creating the compressed air?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2.1, Did the compressed air power study include liquefied nitrogen which has a higher energy density than compressed air and uses the same expansion motor technology?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2.3 Did the study compare zeolite or other adsorption storage rather than compressed gas tankage?<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 2.2, Were alternate energy sources such as direct mechanical conversion of wind and wave power to compressed air considered?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ] How did they figure the energy payback ? 2 ] What were the assumptions they made in creating the compressed air ?
        2.1 , Did the compressed air power study include liquefied nitrogen which has a higher energy density than compressed air and uses the same expansion motor technology ?
        2.3 Did the study compare zeolite or other adsorption storage rather than compressed gas tankage ?
        2.2 , Were alternate energy sources such as direct mechanical conversion of wind and wave power to compressed air considered ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1] How did they figure the energy payback?2] What were the assumptions they made in creating the compressed air?
        2.1, Did the compressed air power study include liquefied nitrogen which has a higher energy density than compressed air and uses the same expansion motor technology?
        2.3 Did the study compare zeolite or other adsorption storage rather than compressed gas tankage?
        2.2, Were alternate energy sources such as direct mechanical conversion of wind and wave power to compressed air considered?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188024</id>
	<title>Oh thank [insert deity here],</title>
	<author>kothmac</author>
	<datestamp>1258799280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought this was going to be a story crushing my hopes of owning a flying car.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought this was going to be a story crushing my hopes of owning a flying car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought this was going to be a story crushing my hopes of owning a flying car.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188632</id>
	<title>Re:There are other ways to compress the air.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258803540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm waiting for the first infomercial for an exercise device that produces electricity, hydrogen or compressed air. I can just hear the Chuck Norris: "Guaranteed to firm your butt, tone your abs and pay for itself in energy savings alone in 3 months or your money back." Fat people, healthnuts and greenies combined into one demographic; this thing will sell like gangbusters!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm waiting for the first infomercial for an exercise device that produces electricity , hydrogen or compressed air .
I can just hear the Chuck Norris : " Guaranteed to firm your butt , tone your abs and pay for itself in energy savings alone in 3 months or your money back .
" Fat people , healthnuts and greenies combined into one demographic ; this thing will sell like gangbusters !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm waiting for the first infomercial for an exercise device that produces electricity, hydrogen or compressed air.
I can just hear the Chuck Norris: "Guaranteed to firm your butt, tone your abs and pay for itself in energy savings alone in 3 months or your money back.
" Fat people, healthnuts and greenies combined into one demographic; this thing will sell like gangbusters!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195144</id>
	<title>Clean energy is bad for environment</title>
	<author>woolio</author>
	<datestamp>1258918560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>It said 'worse for the environment'. Using more energy is worse for the environment and will continue to be until ALL our energy comes from clean sources.</b></p><p>I think it is not even that simple.</p><p>Any use of energy invaribly causes a change (or prevents a change).</p><p>Using "clean" energy in copious amounts will change the environment whether we like it or not:</p><p>Let's say the world (with infinite money, resources, etc) goes to 100\% clean geothermal energy... The Earth's core gets cooled at a far greater rate than normal, and is an effect that is very likely irreversible.   Let's say everyone uses clean wind energy...  Air flow patterns disrupted and climate change results.</p><p>(And I'm not even including the manfacturing costs associated with extracting the clean energy either!)</p><p>Using "clean" energy in copious amounts will change the environment whether we like it or not!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It said 'worse for the environment' .
Using more energy is worse for the environment and will continue to be until ALL our energy comes from clean sources.I think it is not even that simple.Any use of energy invaribly causes a change ( or prevents a change ) .Using " clean " energy in copious amounts will change the environment whether we like it or not : Let 's say the world ( with infinite money , resources , etc ) goes to 100 \ % clean geothermal energy... The Earth 's core gets cooled at a far greater rate than normal , and is an effect that is very likely irreversible .
Let 's say everyone uses clean wind energy... Air flow patterns disrupted and climate change results .
( And I 'm not even including the manfacturing costs associated with extracting the clean energy either !
) Using " clean " energy in copious amounts will change the environment whether we like it or not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It said 'worse for the environment'.
Using more energy is worse for the environment and will continue to be until ALL our energy comes from clean sources.I think it is not even that simple.Any use of energy invaribly causes a change (or prevents a change).Using "clean" energy in copious amounts will change the environment whether we like it or not:Let's say the world (with infinite money, resources, etc) goes to 100\% clean geothermal energy... The Earth's core gets cooled at a far greater rate than normal, and is an effect that is very likely irreversible.
Let's say everyone uses clean wind energy...  Air flow patterns disrupted and climate change results.
(And I'm not even including the manfacturing costs associated with extracting the clean energy either!
)Using "clean" energy in copious amounts will change the environment whether we like it or not!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187142</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187132</id>
	<title>twice the carbon footprint</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1258836780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't realize that nuclear powerplants were a 'carbon' problem. Or windmills, or the liquid salt solar panels on my roof...</p><p>However, i do agree that they are dreadfully inefficient. But they are cheap, reliable, and would shine in in-town commutes or grocery runs in the suburbs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't realize that nuclear powerplants were a 'carbon ' problem .
Or windmills , or the liquid salt solar panels on my roof...However , i do agree that they are dreadfully inefficient .
But they are cheap , reliable , and would shine in in-town commutes or grocery runs in the suburbs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't realize that nuclear powerplants were a 'carbon' problem.
Or windmills, or the liquid salt solar panels on my roof...However, i do agree that they are dreadfully inefficient.
But they are cheap, reliable, and would shine in in-town commutes or grocery runs in the suburbs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191236</id>
	<title>Technology transfers poorly from guitars</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1258828740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I own an air guitar and it's actually pretty sweet - I can make like I'm rocking out wherever I am.  Whereas an air car<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I don't see the market.  You're at a party and the music's pumping and you just decide to "air drive" to the shops?  Not cool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I own an air guitar and it 's actually pretty sweet - I can make like I 'm rocking out wherever I am .
Whereas an air car ... I do n't see the market .
You 're at a party and the music 's pumping and you just decide to " air drive " to the shops ?
Not cool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I own an air guitar and it's actually pretty sweet - I can make like I'm rocking out wherever I am.
Whereas an air car ... I don't see the market.
You're at a party and the music's pumping and you just decide to "air drive" to the shops?
Not cool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188608</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1258803420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy. The energy could come from solar panels on your garage. It compresses the air. The air powers you car.</p> </div><p>No matter where the power to compress the air comes from, it's still an inefficient way to store energy. Whenever you compress air (or any other gas), a significant portion of the energy gets converted into heat, which is then lost as the air cools down during storage.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy .
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage .
It compresses the air .
The air powers you car .
No matter where the power to compress the air comes from , it 's still an inefficient way to store energy .
Whenever you compress air ( or any other gas ) , a significant portion of the energy gets converted into heat , which is then lost as the air cools down during storage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressed air is just a medium in which to store energy.
The energy could come from solar panels on your garage.
It compresses the air.
The air powers you car.
No matter where the power to compress the air comes from, it's still an inefficient way to store energy.
Whenever you compress air (or any other gas), a significant portion of the energy gets converted into heat, which is then lost as the air cools down during storage.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190704</id>
	<title>Not really</title>
	<author>dj245</author>
	<datestamp>1258821360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are many problems with using steam to power automobiles.

One of the biggest is maintenance.  Steam turbines are very maintenance-intensive, and the maintenance is expensive.  If you use a piston engine, the weight is excessive and it is more complicated.  The boiler is also a problem.  It doesn't take much to overheat a tube.  Overheated tubes fail and are expensive to replace.

No instant-on.  It takes time to build up steam.  I think this is the biggest deal-breaker.

Plus then there's the fuel problem.  Natural gas is cleanest and less likely to give your boiler problems.  But it's not readily available for auto use and is usually more expensive than gasoline.  You could use Coal or biomass, but that takes a lot of time to build a fire and make steam.  If you use gasoline, your efficiency is less than a gasoline engine so why bother?

My company builds steam turbines in the range of 50MW to over 1000MW.  At some point I would love to build a steam turbine car for fun, but the technology just doesn't make sense for everyone to have one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are many problems with using steam to power automobiles .
One of the biggest is maintenance .
Steam turbines are very maintenance-intensive , and the maintenance is expensive .
If you use a piston engine , the weight is excessive and it is more complicated .
The boiler is also a problem .
It does n't take much to overheat a tube .
Overheated tubes fail and are expensive to replace .
No instant-on .
It takes time to build up steam .
I think this is the biggest deal-breaker .
Plus then there 's the fuel problem .
Natural gas is cleanest and less likely to give your boiler problems .
But it 's not readily available for auto use and is usually more expensive than gasoline .
You could use Coal or biomass , but that takes a lot of time to build a fire and make steam .
If you use gasoline , your efficiency is less than a gasoline engine so why bother ?
My company builds steam turbines in the range of 50MW to over 1000MW .
At some point I would love to build a steam turbine car for fun , but the technology just does n't make sense for everyone to have one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are many problems with using steam to power automobiles.
One of the biggest is maintenance.
Steam turbines are very maintenance-intensive, and the maintenance is expensive.
If you use a piston engine, the weight is excessive and it is more complicated.
The boiler is also a problem.
It doesn't take much to overheat a tube.
Overheated tubes fail and are expensive to replace.
No instant-on.
It takes time to build up steam.
I think this is the biggest deal-breaker.
Plus then there's the fuel problem.
Natural gas is cleanest and less likely to give your boiler problems.
But it's not readily available for auto use and is usually more expensive than gasoline.
You could use Coal or biomass, but that takes a lot of time to build a fire and make steam.
If you use gasoline, your efficiency is less than a gasoline engine so why bother?
My company builds steam turbines in the range of 50MW to over 1000MW.
At some point I would love to build a steam turbine car for fun, but the technology just doesn't make sense for everyone to have one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187204</id>
	<title>oooooo science says its true, must be</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258794060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Science, religion, what's the difference, it both requires faith to believe in the world they propose.<br>How strange that every green technology has some american scientific with research "proving" that trees are dangerous to the environement, that gasoline is green, that coal is clean, that unpolluted water will affect the ocean population that air cars are worst than gasoline cars...</p><p>Science will be used by anyone to try an convince you off any bullshit they want, if you forget details, discard information you will come to any conclusion, like this one.</p><p>Of course data manipulation NEVER happens in science<br><a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2009m11d20-ClimateGate--Climate-centers-server-hacked-revealing-documents-and-emails?cid=exrss-Climate-Change-Examiner" title="examiner.com" rel="nofollow">like this article point out pretty well</a> [examiner.com] </p><p>especially not regarding climate change or fuel...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Science , religion , what 's the difference , it both requires faith to believe in the world they propose.How strange that every green technology has some american scientific with research " proving " that trees are dangerous to the environement , that gasoline is green , that coal is clean , that unpolluted water will affect the ocean population that air cars are worst than gasoline cars...Science will be used by anyone to try an convince you off any bullshit they want , if you forget details , discard information you will come to any conclusion , like this one.Of course data manipulation NEVER happens in sciencelike this article point out pretty well [ examiner.com ] especially not regarding climate change or fuel.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Science, religion, what's the difference, it both requires faith to believe in the world they propose.How strange that every green technology has some american scientific with research "proving" that trees are dangerous to the environement, that gasoline is green, that coal is clean, that unpolluted water will affect the ocean population that air cars are worst than gasoline cars...Science will be used by anyone to try an convince you off any bullshit they want, if you forget details, discard information you will come to any conclusion, like this one.Of course data manipulation NEVER happens in sciencelike this article point out pretty well [examiner.com] especially not regarding climate change or fuel...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187286</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258794720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is opposed to batteries which really aren't good for the environment, but all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.</p></div></blockquote><p>

That's because they know there's no lithium in the Prius batteries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is opposed to batteries which really are n't good for the environment , but all those Prius owners do n't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs .
That 's because they know there 's no lithium in the Prius batteries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is opposed to batteries which really aren't good for the environment, but all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines while patting themselves on their backs.
That's because they know there's no lithium in the Prius batteries.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187646</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258796880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To power the air compressors, you'd need more power plants. Many more, since compressed air isn't efficient. Moreover, the compressors themselves would be dirty, so "free A/C" would be unhealthy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To power the air compressors , you 'd need more power plants .
Many more , since compressed air is n't efficient .
Moreover , the compressors themselves would be dirty , so " free A/C " would be unhealthy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To power the air compressors, you'd need more power plants.
Many more, since compressed air isn't efficient.
Moreover, the compressors themselves would be dirty, so "free A/C" would be unhealthy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192574</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>ILongForDarkness</author>
	<datestamp>1258896660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>AC? I personally would use the cooling to keep my beer cold.</htmltext>
<tokenext>AC ?
I personally would use the cooling to keep my beer cold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AC?
I personally would use the cooling to keep my beer cold.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190840</id>
	<title>Re:You should use two measures of electric vehicle</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1258823160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if I don't give a crap about carbon footprints? There are very good reasons why gasoline is the transportation fuel of choice for many personal vehicles. It stores a very large amount of energy in a compact space at atmospheric pressures and temperatures and it provides large quantities of energy very quickly on demand. Until alternative vehicle power sources can beat gasoline internal combustion in both performance and range at a comparable market price, I will be keeping my gasoline internal combustion vehicle.</p><p>The problem with environmentalists is that they are always trying to sell us "hair shirt" austerity solutions to problems that many of us regard as neither particularly serious nor pressing. Why should I make do with less so that someone else can enjoy the benefits? Nah, they can go ahead and drive glorified golf carts if that soothes their guilty conscience, but I will continue driving my car.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if I do n't give a crap about carbon footprints ?
There are very good reasons why gasoline is the transportation fuel of choice for many personal vehicles .
It stores a very large amount of energy in a compact space at atmospheric pressures and temperatures and it provides large quantities of energy very quickly on demand .
Until alternative vehicle power sources can beat gasoline internal combustion in both performance and range at a comparable market price , I will be keeping my gasoline internal combustion vehicle.The problem with environmentalists is that they are always trying to sell us " hair shirt " austerity solutions to problems that many of us regard as neither particularly serious nor pressing .
Why should I make do with less so that someone else can enjoy the benefits ?
Nah , they can go ahead and drive glorified golf carts if that soothes their guilty conscience , but I will continue driving my car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if I don't give a crap about carbon footprints?
There are very good reasons why gasoline is the transportation fuel of choice for many personal vehicles.
It stores a very large amount of energy in a compact space at atmospheric pressures and temperatures and it provides large quantities of energy very quickly on demand.
Until alternative vehicle power sources can beat gasoline internal combustion in both performance and range at a comparable market price, I will be keeping my gasoline internal combustion vehicle.The problem with environmentalists is that they are always trying to sell us "hair shirt" austerity solutions to problems that many of us regard as neither particularly serious nor pressing.
Why should I make do with less so that someone else can enjoy the benefits?
Nah, they can go ahead and drive glorified golf carts if that soothes their guilty conscience, but I will continue driving my car.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187262</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>DarkOx</author>
	<datestamp>1258794480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your are correct but its pretty tough though I think possible to get enough energy for transportation out of storage.  In general, and this has been known for a long long time, so I am not sure why this is news compressed gas is a poor energy store.  I am referring to compressed gas where the recovered energy will be from allowing it to expand not from a fuel gas like liquidated natural gas or something.</p><p>Because solar is only so productive if its going to be the input energy for transportation than the storage medium can't be very lossy.  It appears at this time that photo-eclectic where the electric of that transaction is either stored in a battery or converted to its final mechanical use immediately via the motor powering your vehicle are likely to be the most practical options.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your are correct but its pretty tough though I think possible to get enough energy for transportation out of storage .
In general , and this has been known for a long long time , so I am not sure why this is news compressed gas is a poor energy store .
I am referring to compressed gas where the recovered energy will be from allowing it to expand not from a fuel gas like liquidated natural gas or something.Because solar is only so productive if its going to be the input energy for transportation than the storage medium ca n't be very lossy .
It appears at this time that photo-eclectic where the electric of that transaction is either stored in a battery or converted to its final mechanical use immediately via the motor powering your vehicle are likely to be the most practical options .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your are correct but its pretty tough though I think possible to get enough energy for transportation out of storage.
In general, and this has been known for a long long time, so I am not sure why this is news compressed gas is a poor energy store.
I am referring to compressed gas where the recovered energy will be from allowing it to expand not from a fuel gas like liquidated natural gas or something.Because solar is only so productive if its going to be the input energy for transportation than the storage medium can't be very lossy.
It appears at this time that photo-eclectic where the electric of that transaction is either stored in a battery or converted to its final mechanical use immediately via the motor powering your vehicle are likely to be the most practical options.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187412</id>
	<title>Early prototype</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1258795680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember early prototypes of this when I was a kid, called <a href="http://www.virtualtoychest.com/a/airjammer/airjammer.html" title="virtualtoychest.com">Air Jammers</a> [virtualtoychest.com]. You'd pump them up, then give them a push and a one-cylinder engine would move them along. Of course being a budding Slashdotter, I removed the air motor and connected it to a can of Freon (when you could still buy it) and made it really run fast.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember early prototypes of this when I was a kid , called Air Jammers [ virtualtoychest.com ] .
You 'd pump them up , then give them a push and a one-cylinder engine would move them along .
Of course being a budding Slashdotter , I removed the air motor and connected it to a can of Freon ( when you could still buy it ) and made it really run fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember early prototypes of this when I was a kid, called Air Jammers [virtualtoychest.com].
You'd pump them up, then give them a push and a one-cylinder engine would move them along.
Of course being a budding Slashdotter, I removed the air motor and connected it to a can of Freon (when you could still buy it) and made it really run fast.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190642</id>
	<title>We know it works</title>
	<author>horza</author>
	<datestamp>1258820580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Enough journalists have had rides in the compressed-air powered cars to know it works. We also know the range isn't great. As mentioned above, one of the licensees is Tata of India. Mexico City has also apparently put in a big order. Why? Because the potential is to make a zero-emissions vehicle CHEAP. Technologically so simple people can fix it themselves. And in countries where real estate is as plentiful as the sunshine, and cost-per-unit is critical, this has a great potential market. It is niche, urban transit vehicles, but that is still a huge market. Think taxis, food/pizza delivery, school run, etc. Plus storing 1\% of the energy of gasoline is irrelevant if enough for its purpose, and the energy is potentially free.</p><p>Phillip.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Enough journalists have had rides in the compressed-air powered cars to know it works .
We also know the range is n't great .
As mentioned above , one of the licensees is Tata of India .
Mexico City has also apparently put in a big order .
Why ? Because the potential is to make a zero-emissions vehicle CHEAP .
Technologically so simple people can fix it themselves .
And in countries where real estate is as plentiful as the sunshine , and cost-per-unit is critical , this has a great potential market .
It is niche , urban transit vehicles , but that is still a huge market .
Think taxis , food/pizza delivery , school run , etc .
Plus storing 1 \ % of the energy of gasoline is irrelevant if enough for its purpose , and the energy is potentially free.Phillip .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enough journalists have had rides in the compressed-air powered cars to know it works.
We also know the range isn't great.
As mentioned above, one of the licensees is Tata of India.
Mexico City has also apparently put in a big order.
Why? Because the potential is to make a zero-emissions vehicle CHEAP.
Technologically so simple people can fix it themselves.
And in countries where real estate is as plentiful as the sunshine, and cost-per-unit is critical, this has a great potential market.
It is niche, urban transit vehicles, but that is still a huge market.
Think taxis, food/pizza delivery, school run, etc.
Plus storing 1\% of the energy of gasoline is irrelevant if enough for its purpose, and the energy is potentially free.Phillip.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189614</id>
	<title>Re:compressed air uses</title>
	<author>NF6X</author>
	<datestamp>1258810860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The newbies job was to empty the water and oil traps from the Air  Intake system. About 20 litres per day and about 200 mls of  oil like fluid(The atmosphere in the workshop back then was a haze of car fumes and dust).</p></div><p>I think the oil in the water condensate was mostly from the compressor's crankcase lubrication (usually splash oil lubrication) leaking past the piston rings, rather than stuff pulled out of the air. I also get a fair amount of oil in my compressor's condensate at home, but it's not exposed to a lot of petroleum fumes.

</p><p>Also, the water condensation in an air compressor happens in the high pressure side, not the intake side. The compressor shoves a whole bunch of air (including all of the water vapor in that air) into a tank, heating it in the process. As that compressed air cools down, much of the water vapor condenses out as liquid water. That's why workshop air compressors (whether electrically driven or engine driven, and whether they're little hardware store ones or large industrial-sized ones) have tank drains. And the filter/regulator units used near the point of use are almost always designed to separate and collect water, too. And when especially dry air is needed (for example, for spray painting as opposed to running plain old air tools), air driers which use desiccants or even powered refrigeration units are often used... but still on the high pressure side.

</p><p>I'm not sure how air drying is handled in applications like scuba tank air compressors, though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The newbies job was to empty the water and oil traps from the Air Intake system .
About 20 litres per day and about 200 mls of oil like fluid ( The atmosphere in the workshop back then was a haze of car fumes and dust ) .I think the oil in the water condensate was mostly from the compressor 's crankcase lubrication ( usually splash oil lubrication ) leaking past the piston rings , rather than stuff pulled out of the air .
I also get a fair amount of oil in my compressor 's condensate at home , but it 's not exposed to a lot of petroleum fumes .
Also , the water condensation in an air compressor happens in the high pressure side , not the intake side .
The compressor shoves a whole bunch of air ( including all of the water vapor in that air ) into a tank , heating it in the process .
As that compressed air cools down , much of the water vapor condenses out as liquid water .
That 's why workshop air compressors ( whether electrically driven or engine driven , and whether they 're little hardware store ones or large industrial-sized ones ) have tank drains .
And the filter/regulator units used near the point of use are almost always designed to separate and collect water , too .
And when especially dry air is needed ( for example , for spray painting as opposed to running plain old air tools ) , air driers which use desiccants or even powered refrigeration units are often used... but still on the high pressure side .
I 'm not sure how air drying is handled in applications like scuba tank air compressors , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The newbies job was to empty the water and oil traps from the Air  Intake system.
About 20 litres per day and about 200 mls of  oil like fluid(The atmosphere in the workshop back then was a haze of car fumes and dust).I think the oil in the water condensate was mostly from the compressor's crankcase lubrication (usually splash oil lubrication) leaking past the piston rings, rather than stuff pulled out of the air.
I also get a fair amount of oil in my compressor's condensate at home, but it's not exposed to a lot of petroleum fumes.
Also, the water condensation in an air compressor happens in the high pressure side, not the intake side.
The compressor shoves a whole bunch of air (including all of the water vapor in that air) into a tank, heating it in the process.
As that compressed air cools down, much of the water vapor condenses out as liquid water.
That's why workshop air compressors (whether electrically driven or engine driven, and whether they're little hardware store ones or large industrial-sized ones) have tank drains.
And the filter/regulator units used near the point of use are almost always designed to separate and collect water, too.
And when especially dry air is needed (for example, for spray painting as opposed to running plain old air tools), air driers which use desiccants or even powered refrigeration units are often used... but still on the high pressure side.
I'm not sure how air drying is handled in applications like scuba tank air compressors, though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187174</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190592</id>
	<title>Psst, buddy, you forgot to add the steam</title>
	<author>ImitationEnergy</author>
	<datestamp>1258819860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>STEAM. You forgot to add steam first, into the cylinder. That way the liquid air goes in full temperature minus 320, cancelled out by the hot steam. The explosion is a tornado. The steam collapses away from the super cold air as it expands, creating a rolling wall traveling the speed of lightning 186,000 miles per hour to slam the piston heads.  And have all the cylinders fire at the same time, multiplies the power. If ya can't figure it out write me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>STEAM .
You forgot to add steam first , into the cylinder .
That way the liquid air goes in full temperature minus 320 , cancelled out by the hot steam .
The explosion is a tornado .
The steam collapses away from the super cold air as it expands , creating a rolling wall traveling the speed of lightning 186,000 miles per hour to slam the piston heads .
And have all the cylinders fire at the same time , multiplies the power .
If ya ca n't figure it out write me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>STEAM.
You forgot to add steam first, into the cylinder.
That way the liquid air goes in full temperature minus 320, cancelled out by the hot steam.
The explosion is a tornado.
The steam collapses away from the super cold air as it expands, creating a rolling wall traveling the speed of lightning 186,000 miles per hour to slam the piston heads.
And have all the cylinders fire at the same time, multiplies the power.
If ya can't figure it out write me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187940</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Island Admin</author>
	<datestamp>1258798740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Very simple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Install a mini nuclear reactor in your garage<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... compress the air from "emission" free power source<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and there you go.

You didn't say it had to meet all the tree hugger requirements<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very simple ... Install a mini nuclear reactor in your garage ... compress the air from " emission " free power source ... and there you go .
You did n't say it had to meet all the tree hugger requirements : P ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very simple ... Install a mini nuclear reactor in your garage ... compress the air from "emission" free power source ... and there you go.
You didn't say it had to meet all the tree hugger requirements :P ....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187236</id>
	<title>Time for a new tagline</title>
	<author>heffrey</author>
	<datestamp>1258794300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot - news for idiots, stuff that's obvious</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot - news for idiots , stuff that 's obvious</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot - news for idiots, stuff that's obvious</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188022</id>
	<title>"New research"?</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1258799280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; New research from UC Berkeley and ICF International puts a period at the end<br>&gt; of the discussion...</p><p>New research my ass.  A back-of-the-envelope calculation by anyone who passed first year physics suffices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; New research from UC Berkeley and ICF International puts a period at the end &gt; of the discussion...New research my ass .
A back-of-the-envelope calculation by anyone who passed first year physics suffices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; New research from UC Berkeley and ICF International puts a period at the end&gt; of the discussion...New research my ass.
A back-of-the-envelope calculation by anyone who passed first year physics suffices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190908</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse?? NO SUCH THING</title>
	<author>fuzzylollipop</author>
	<datestamp>1258824180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you forget that something that creates pollution had to be used to create the solar panels or the wind turbines and all the wire that is used to transfer the energy to the compressor, which also used some pollution creating process to make it. There is no such thing as FREE energy!</htmltext>
<tokenext>you forget that something that creates pollution had to be used to create the solar panels or the wind turbines and all the wire that is used to transfer the energy to the compressor , which also used some pollution creating process to make it .
There is no such thing as FREE energy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you forget that something that creates pollution had to be used to create the solar panels or the wind turbines and all the wire that is used to transfer the energy to the compressor, which also used some pollution creating process to make it.
There is no such thing as FREE energy!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187640</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Gordonjcp</author>
	<datestamp>1258796880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The energy could come from solar panels on your garage. It compresses the air.</i> </p><p>How big is your garage?  A 1kW solar panel is about 2.5m by 1.5m, or about the size of two slightly taller than standard doors.  My compressor draws 3kW from an ordinary wall socket, so by the time you add in the inefficiency of the inverter you're probably looking at four such panels - an area 5m by 3m - to comfortably run that.  I suspect that my compressor, with its 200-litre receiver that it can get up to about 150psi before the motor starts to struggle, would just not be enough to power this car for very long.  Oh, and don't forget that you could only run the compressor during the day, when you probably will want to use the car.  If you're going to store the power in a bank of batteries, why not put the batteries in the car?</p><p>The "air car" websites seem a little light on specifics, but they don't seem to mention how large the receiver is or what kind of pressure it holds.  I'm betting it's very non-trivial to fill that, safely, without consuming a lot of power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The energy could come from solar panels on your garage .
It compresses the air .
How big is your garage ?
A 1kW solar panel is about 2.5m by 1.5m , or about the size of two slightly taller than standard doors .
My compressor draws 3kW from an ordinary wall socket , so by the time you add in the inefficiency of the inverter you 're probably looking at four such panels - an area 5m by 3m - to comfortably run that .
I suspect that my compressor , with its 200-litre receiver that it can get up to about 150psi before the motor starts to struggle , would just not be enough to power this car for very long .
Oh , and do n't forget that you could only run the compressor during the day , when you probably will want to use the car .
If you 're going to store the power in a bank of batteries , why not put the batteries in the car ? The " air car " websites seem a little light on specifics , but they do n't seem to mention how large the receiver is or what kind of pressure it holds .
I 'm betting it 's very non-trivial to fill that , safely , without consuming a lot of power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The energy could come from solar panels on your garage.
It compresses the air.
How big is your garage?
A 1kW solar panel is about 2.5m by 1.5m, or about the size of two slightly taller than standard doors.
My compressor draws 3kW from an ordinary wall socket, so by the time you add in the inefficiency of the inverter you're probably looking at four such panels - an area 5m by 3m - to comfortably run that.
I suspect that my compressor, with its 200-litre receiver that it can get up to about 150psi before the motor starts to struggle, would just not be enough to power this car for very long.
Oh, and don't forget that you could only run the compressor during the day, when you probably will want to use the car.
If you're going to store the power in a bank of batteries, why not put the batteries in the car?The "air car" websites seem a little light on specifics, but they don't seem to mention how large the receiver is or what kind of pressure it holds.
I'm betting it's very non-trivial to fill that, safely, without consuming a lot of power.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189598</id>
	<title>Re:No kidding?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258810740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>y'know, CO2 is a viable option here, with zero carbon footprint.  I know, I know, I just released 100 pounds of CO2 directly into the atmosphere, how can that not have a carbon footprint?</p><p>Easily:  my solar powered CO2 extractor pulled 100 pounds of CO2 out of the atmosphere this morning and compressed it into a fuel tank.</p><p>All I did was use sunlight to move myself, my car and 100 pounds of C02 across town.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>y'know , CO2 is a viable option here , with zero carbon footprint .
I know , I know , I just released 100 pounds of CO2 directly into the atmosphere , how can that not have a carbon footprint ? Easily : my solar powered CO2 extractor pulled 100 pounds of CO2 out of the atmosphere this morning and compressed it into a fuel tank.All I did was use sunlight to move myself , my car and 100 pounds of C02 across town .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>y'know, CO2 is a viable option here, with zero carbon footprint.
I know, I know, I just released 100 pounds of CO2 directly into the atmosphere, how can that not have a carbon footprint?Easily:  my solar powered CO2 extractor pulled 100 pounds of CO2 out of the atmosphere this morning and compressed it into a fuel tank.All I did was use sunlight to move myself, my car and 100 pounds of C02 across town.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187580</id>
	<title>New Burrito car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258796520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm driving the new burrito powered car, sponsored by Taco Bell. That's right; it has two stages and a storage system. It's called the iFart. It's even got air breaks or breaking wind or whatever. Built in wipers too. You kind of need them for the sharts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm driving the new burrito powered car , sponsored by Taco Bell .
That 's right ; it has two stages and a storage system .
It 's called the iFart .
It 's even got air breaks or breaking wind or whatever .
Built in wipers too .
You kind of need them for the sharts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm driving the new burrito powered car, sponsored by Taco Bell.
That's right; it has two stages and a storage system.
It's called the iFart.
It's even got air breaks or breaking wind or whatever.
Built in wipers too.
You kind of need them for the sharts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188212</id>
	<title>I developed a zero-emission go-kart...</title>
	<author>Gordonjcp</author>
	<datestamp>1258800660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... when I was 11.  It was powered by a big tightly-coiled length of bungee cord that you wound up against a ratched with a handle.  When you released the brake, it would shoot forwards for an incredible distance with breathtaking acceleration, all powered by renewable energy, mostly derived from sugary soft drinks and pies.</p><p>That didn't work so well, either.</p><p>On its best-ever test run it managed a good 30 feet or so before the elastic came off the attachment to the drive axle.  Once the elastic was off, it coasted rather better and further than it had ever managed under power.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... when I was 11 .
It was powered by a big tightly-coiled length of bungee cord that you wound up against a ratched with a handle .
When you released the brake , it would shoot forwards for an incredible distance with breathtaking acceleration , all powered by renewable energy , mostly derived from sugary soft drinks and pies.That did n't work so well , either.On its best-ever test run it managed a good 30 feet or so before the elastic came off the attachment to the drive axle .
Once the elastic was off , it coasted rather better and further than it had ever managed under power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... when I was 11.
It was powered by a big tightly-coiled length of bungee cord that you wound up against a ratched with a handle.
When you released the brake, it would shoot forwards for an incredible distance with breathtaking acceleration, all powered by renewable energy, mostly derived from sugary soft drinks and pies.That didn't work so well, either.On its best-ever test run it managed a good 30 feet or so before the elastic came off the attachment to the drive axle.
Once the elastic was off, it coasted rather better and further than it had ever managed under power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192110</id>
	<title>It is a car-naught engine..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258886940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>thank you.. come again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>thank you.. come again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>thank you.. come again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188816</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>MeatBag PussRocket</author>
	<datestamp>1258804680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'm curious as to how much thought you're really given to this, above and beyond the 'mythbusters' level. firstly, you're right, Priora are not built with lithium batteries, though you should wish that they were. Lithium is NOT stripmined,  Lithium salts are extracted from the water of mineral springs, brine pools and brine deposits. The metal is produced electrolytically from a mixture of fused lithium and potassium chloride. Nickel on the other hand IS strip-mined and while their disposal may not be all that bad, the production of nickel batteries is extremely harmful to the environment. IIRC there is a mine in Canada used for the production of Prius batteries, if thats the one i'm thinking it is, there is a 60 mile dead zone around it which contains about as much life as the surface of the moon.</p><p>there are of course problems with most forms of energy storage, the trick is finding ways to manage those problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'm curious as to how much thought you 're really given to this , above and beyond the 'mythbusters ' level .
firstly , you 're right , Priora are not built with lithium batteries , though you should wish that they were .
Lithium is NOT stripmined , Lithium salts are extracted from the water of mineral springs , brine pools and brine deposits .
The metal is produced electrolytically from a mixture of fused lithium and potassium chloride .
Nickel on the other hand IS strip-mined and while their disposal may not be all that bad , the production of nickel batteries is extremely harmful to the environment .
IIRC there is a mine in Canada used for the production of Prius batteries , if thats the one i 'm thinking it is , there is a 60 mile dead zone around it which contains about as much life as the surface of the moon.there are of course problems with most forms of energy storage , the trick is finding ways to manage those problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'm curious as to how much thought you're really given to this, above and beyond the 'mythbusters' level.
firstly, you're right, Priora are not built with lithium batteries, though you should wish that they were.
Lithium is NOT stripmined,  Lithium salts are extracted from the water of mineral springs, brine pools and brine deposits.
The metal is produced electrolytically from a mixture of fused lithium and potassium chloride.
Nickel on the other hand IS strip-mined and while their disposal may not be all that bad, the production of nickel batteries is extremely harmful to the environment.
IIRC there is a mine in Canada used for the production of Prius batteries, if thats the one i'm thinking it is, there is a 60 mile dead zone around it which contains about as much life as the surface of the moon.there are of course problems with most forms of energy storage, the trick is finding ways to manage those problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188138</id>
	<title>CO2 could be carbon neutral?</title>
	<author>weston</author>
	<datestamp>1258800180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could you come up with a process that pulls CO2 from the atmosphere?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could you come up with a process that pulls CO2 from the atmosphere ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could you come up with a process that pulls CO2 from the atmosphere?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187542</id>
	<title>Bad science marketed to unscientific people</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1258796400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ummm... duh?  The marketing for these vehicles was never targeted at physics professors, was it?  The people behind it targeted the market that they knew would be vulnerable to the pitch: people who don't "know science" and understand the constraints of the physical world.</p><p>I had an unscientific (and religion-spewing) friend get all excited when he heard about these, and tried to infect me with his excitement.  I firmly declined.  I recognized what he was too delusional to see, that there was nothing at all sustainable about it, that it was merely shifting the unsustainability to make it less obvious to the consumer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ummm... duh ? The marketing for these vehicles was never targeted at physics professors , was it ?
The people behind it targeted the market that they knew would be vulnerable to the pitch : people who do n't " know science " and understand the constraints of the physical world.I had an unscientific ( and religion-spewing ) friend get all excited when he heard about these , and tried to infect me with his excitement .
I firmly declined .
I recognized what he was too delusional to see , that there was nothing at all sustainable about it , that it was merely shifting the unsustainability to make it less obvious to the consumer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ummm... duh?  The marketing for these vehicles was never targeted at physics professors, was it?
The people behind it targeted the market that they knew would be vulnerable to the pitch: people who don't "know science" and understand the constraints of the physical world.I had an unscientific (and religion-spewing) friend get all excited when he heard about these, and tried to infect me with his excitement.
I firmly declined.
I recognized what he was too delusional to see, that there was nothing at all sustainable about it, that it was merely shifting the unsustainability to make it less obvious to the consumer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187732</id>
	<title>Bogusity not noticed soon enough.</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1258797360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
What bothers me is that the "air car" guy got so much attention for so long.
This thing has been in development since 1991,  "close to production" since 2003, and the guy has been able to get
enough money to build multiple good-looking prototypes. It's starting to look like a long-running scam like the Keely motor or the Moller flying car. The thermodynamics just don't make sense.
</p><p>
In the only publicized test, the vehicle had a range of 7.22 km.
</p><p>
Much is made of the connection between these guys and Tata, the Indian car company.  But from IEEE Spectrum, it turns out that Tata's "deal" is that that they just have an option to buy into the technology if it ever works.
</p><p>
The <a href="http://www.tramwayinfo.com/Tramframe.htm?http://www.tramwayinfo.com/tramways/Articles/Compair2.htm" title="tramwayinfo.com">Nantes Tramway</a> [tramwayinfo.com] had compressed-air street cars working in 1911.   They ran 6km on flat ground between compressor stations, so their range was comparable to the "air car".  They used about 15 pounds of coal (at the compressor stations) per mile, which is
roughly equivalent to 1.5 MPG.  A typical Diesel bus today gets 6 MPG.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What bothers me is that the " air car " guy got so much attention for so long .
This thing has been in development since 1991 , " close to production " since 2003 , and the guy has been able to get enough money to build multiple good-looking prototypes .
It 's starting to look like a long-running scam like the Keely motor or the Moller flying car .
The thermodynamics just do n't make sense .
In the only publicized test , the vehicle had a range of 7.22 km .
Much is made of the connection between these guys and Tata , the Indian car company .
But from IEEE Spectrum , it turns out that Tata 's " deal " is that that they just have an option to buy into the technology if it ever works .
The Nantes Tramway [ tramwayinfo.com ] had compressed-air street cars working in 1911 .
They ran 6km on flat ground between compressor stations , so their range was comparable to the " air car " .
They used about 15 pounds of coal ( at the compressor stations ) per mile , which is roughly equivalent to 1.5 MPG .
A typical Diesel bus today gets 6 MPG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
What bothers me is that the "air car" guy got so much attention for so long.
This thing has been in development since 1991,  "close to production" since 2003, and the guy has been able to get
enough money to build multiple good-looking prototypes.
It's starting to look like a long-running scam like the Keely motor or the Moller flying car.
The thermodynamics just don't make sense.
In the only publicized test, the vehicle had a range of 7.22 km.
Much is made of the connection between these guys and Tata, the Indian car company.
But from IEEE Spectrum, it turns out that Tata's "deal" is that that they just have an option to buy into the technology if it ever works.
The Nantes Tramway [tramwayinfo.com] had compressed-air street cars working in 1911.
They ran 6km on flat ground between compressor stations, so their range was comparable to the "air car".
They used about 15 pounds of coal (at the compressor stations) per mile, which is
roughly equivalent to 1.5 MPG.
A typical Diesel bus today gets 6 MPG.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126</id>
	<title>Cold Steam Engine?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258836780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It occurs to me that a compressed air vehicle could be compared to a "cold" steam engine.</p><p>Have there been any scientific advances that could make steam engines in general viable for car sized engines?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It occurs to me that a compressed air vehicle could be compared to a " cold " steam engine.Have there been any scientific advances that could make steam engines in general viable for car sized engines ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It occurs to me that a compressed air vehicle could be compared to a "cold" steam engine.Have there been any scientific advances that could make steam engines in general viable for car sized engines?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188676</id>
	<title>Re:Time for a new tagline</title>
	<author>ColdWetDog</author>
	<datestamp>1258803780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Slashdot - news for idiots, stuff that's obvious</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Required reading for Patent Reviewers</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot - news for idiots , stuff that 's obvious Required reading for Patent Reviewers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot - news for idiots, stuff that's obvious

Required reading for Patent Reviewers
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187916</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>daemonc</author>
	<datestamp>1258798620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm guessing the parent actually knew that, since he mentioned strip mining, which is the most common way to produce nickel.</p><p>Lithium, on the other hand, is extracted from saltwater.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing the parent actually knew that , since he mentioned strip mining , which is the most common way to produce nickel.Lithium , on the other hand , is extracted from saltwater .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing the parent actually knew that, since he mentioned strip mining, which is the most common way to produce nickel.Lithium, on the other hand, is extracted from saltwater.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187998</id>
	<title>Manufacturers?</title>
	<author>ProfessionalCookie</author>
	<datestamp>1258799160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Manufacturers claims?  Is there even manufacturers??</htmltext>
<tokenext>Manufacturers claims ?
Is there even manufacturers ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Manufacturers claims?
Is there even manufacturers?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187566</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258796460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes they DO pollute the air.  Nice piece of misdirection by adding the 'directly', but you're making a very poor argument. They create far more pollution just in the process of compressing the air in the first place than an electric car or even an efficient gasoline powered car, so can the straw man arguments.  Do you by chance own stock in a company that wants to market air cars?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes they DO pollute the air .
Nice piece of misdirection by adding the 'directly ' , but you 're making a very poor argument .
They create far more pollution just in the process of compressing the air in the first place than an electric car or even an efficient gasoline powered car , so can the straw man arguments .
Do you by chance own stock in a company that wants to market air cars ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes they DO pollute the air.
Nice piece of misdirection by adding the 'directly', but you're making a very poor argument.
They create far more pollution just in the process of compressing the air in the first place than an electric car or even an efficient gasoline powered car, so can the straw man arguments.
Do you by chance own stock in a company that wants to market air cars?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188360</id>
	<title>Re:Cold Steam Engine?</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1258801560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Have there been any scientific advances that could make steam engines in general viable for car sized engines?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley\_Motor\_Carriage\_Company" title="wikipedia.org">more than a century ago</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><blockquote><div><p>A Stanley Steamer set the world record for the fastest mile in an automobile (28.2 seconds) in 1906.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
<a href="http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z11210/Stanley-Steamer-Rocket.aspx" title="conceptcarz.com">http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z11210/Stanley-Steamer-Rocket.aspx</a> [conceptcarz.com]Powered by a steam engine, and did 150 mph back in 1907.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have there been any scientific advances that could make steam engines in general viable for car sized engines ?
more than a century ago [ wikipedia.org ] .A Stanley Steamer set the world record for the fastest mile in an automobile ( 28.2 seconds ) in 1906 . http : //www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z11210/Stanley-Steamer-Rocket.aspx [ conceptcarz.com ] Powered by a steam engine , and did 150 mph back in 1907 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have there been any scientific advances that could make steam engines in general viable for car sized engines?
more than a century ago [wikipedia.org].A Stanley Steamer set the world record for the fastest mile in an automobile (28.2 seconds) in 1906.

http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z11210/Stanley-Steamer-Rocket.aspx [conceptcarz.com]Powered by a steam engine, and did 150 mph back in 1907.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189004</id>
	<title>Naval Torpedos</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258805820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Compressed air was originally a power source for naval torpedoes, but then it was found that there was better energy density to be had by burning kerosene in the compressed air.</p><p>If car manufacturers did away with the compressed-air tanks, used atmospheric air and burnt some hydrocarbon fuel in it then they could be on to a winner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressed air was originally a power source for naval torpedoes , but then it was found that there was better energy density to be had by burning kerosene in the compressed air.If car manufacturers did away with the compressed-air tanks , used atmospheric air and burnt some hydrocarbon fuel in it then they could be on to a winner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressed air was originally a power source for naval torpedoes, but then it was found that there was better energy density to be had by burning kerosene in the compressed air.If car manufacturers did away with the compressed-air tanks, used atmospheric air and burnt some hydrocarbon fuel in it then they could be on to a winner.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190724</id>
	<title>You Know What is Said When the Green Light's On...</title>
	<author>LifesABeach</author>
	<datestamp>1258821660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The B.S. ends"<br>
<br>
Ok, Compressed air as the energy source? Cool.  100+ M.P.G., cool.  The trash talk will end when we see it work; personally, I hope it does.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The B.S .
ends " Ok , Compressed air as the energy source ?
Cool. 100 + M.P.G. , cool .
The trash talk will end when we see it work ; personally , I hope it does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The B.S.
ends"

Ok, Compressed air as the energy source?
Cool.  100+ M.P.G., cool.
The trash talk will end when we see it work; personally, I hope it does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192558</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>smoker2</author>
	<datestamp>1258896240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're being a dickhead. Is it better to make something once that then produces no more emissions while in use, or produce something that continues to emit while in use ? I realise this is the throwaway society, but really, I don't think cars are there yet. Your argument could be applied to any machine or structure since forever, no matter how "green" its intentions. It is impossible to make anything and emit nothing while doing so. So let's hear your true zero emission design, one that emits nothing while being manufactured.<br> <br>We're waiting<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're being a dickhead .
Is it better to make something once that then produces no more emissions while in use , or produce something that continues to emit while in use ?
I realise this is the throwaway society , but really , I do n't think cars are there yet .
Your argument could be applied to any machine or structure since forever , no matter how " green " its intentions .
It is impossible to make anything and emit nothing while doing so .
So let 's hear your true zero emission design , one that emits nothing while being manufactured .
We 're waiting .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're being a dickhead.
Is it better to make something once that then produces no more emissions while in use, or produce something that continues to emit while in use ?
I realise this is the throwaway society, but really, I don't think cars are there yet.
Your argument could be applied to any machine or structure since forever, no matter how "green" its intentions.
It is impossible to make anything and emit nothing while doing so.
So let's hear your true zero emission design, one that emits nothing while being manufactured.
We're waiting ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186978</id>
	<title>Lets play: Spot The Typo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258835700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a hint: its one of the words which is a link!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a hint : its one of the words which is a link !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a hint: its one of the words which is a link!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188568</id>
	<title>Thermodynamics</title>
	<author>Ralph Spoilsport</author>
	<datestamp>1258803120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>is such a BITCH.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is such a BITCH .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is such a BITCH.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188000</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258799160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all, I'd like to state that I am officially ignoring any post that includes the phrase: "Wake up people!" (with or without the exclamation point). Here is a scenario where this means of propulsion make sense cars. Hot areas that are dirt poor.The technology is easy to fix, with no batteries or computers to monitor them, less likely to break. Wind and solar power drive simple electric motors that constantly compress air into large tanks like those propane tanks you see in farm country here in the states. An air hose transfers the compressed air from a container of high pressure (the storage tank) to one of lower pressure (the tank on the vehicle). By the way, this makes the most sense on a bicycle with normal pedals for propulsion. This scenario also allows the transfer of energy from a stronger entity, like a donkey, horse or cow to a weaker entity like a human. An adult male could even send his energy along on a trip to be made by a younger or less strong member of his family like his wife or child. Why not ride the horse or donkey? Because the donkey can be kept in an area where it can be fed, watered and protected while it provides power for multiple vehicles. But really, the solar/wind scenario is more appealing. I'm just pointing out the flexibility of this kind of propulsion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , I 'd like to state that I am officially ignoring any post that includes the phrase : " Wake up people !
" ( with or without the exclamation point ) .
Here is a scenario where this means of propulsion make sense cars .
Hot areas that are dirt poor.The technology is easy to fix , with no batteries or computers to monitor them , less likely to break .
Wind and solar power drive simple electric motors that constantly compress air into large tanks like those propane tanks you see in farm country here in the states .
An air hose transfers the compressed air from a container of high pressure ( the storage tank ) to one of lower pressure ( the tank on the vehicle ) .
By the way , this makes the most sense on a bicycle with normal pedals for propulsion .
This scenario also allows the transfer of energy from a stronger entity , like a donkey , horse or cow to a weaker entity like a human .
An adult male could even send his energy along on a trip to be made by a younger or less strong member of his family like his wife or child .
Why not ride the horse or donkey ?
Because the donkey can be kept in an area where it can be fed , watered and protected while it provides power for multiple vehicles .
But really , the solar/wind scenario is more appealing .
I 'm just pointing out the flexibility of this kind of propulsion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, I'd like to state that I am officially ignoring any post that includes the phrase: "Wake up people!
" (with or without the exclamation point).
Here is a scenario where this means of propulsion make sense cars.
Hot areas that are dirt poor.The technology is easy to fix, with no batteries or computers to monitor them, less likely to break.
Wind and solar power drive simple electric motors that constantly compress air into large tanks like those propane tanks you see in farm country here in the states.
An air hose transfers the compressed air from a container of high pressure (the storage tank) to one of lower pressure (the tank on the vehicle).
By the way, this makes the most sense on a bicycle with normal pedals for propulsion.
This scenario also allows the transfer of energy from a stronger entity, like a donkey, horse or cow to a weaker entity like a human.
An adult male could even send his energy along on a trip to be made by a younger or less strong member of his family like his wife or child.
Why not ride the horse or donkey?
Because the donkey can be kept in an area where it can be fed, watered and protected while it provides power for multiple vehicles.
But really, the solar/wind scenario is more appealing.
I'm just pointing out the flexibility of this kind of propulsion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190226</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>deacon</author>
	<datestamp>1258815900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nickel is not the 5 cent piece in your pocket. Element 28 is a carcinogen.</p><p><a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;hs=hsM&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=spell&amp;resnum=0&amp;ct=result&amp;cd=1&amp;q=nickel+carcinogen&amp;spell=1" title="google.com">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;hs=hsM&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=spell&amp;resnum=0&amp;ct=result&amp;cd=1&amp;q=nickel+carcinogen&amp;spell=1</a> [google.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nickel is not the 5 cent piece in your pocket .
Element 28 is a carcinogen.http : //www.google.com/search ? hl = en&amp;client = firefox-a&amp;rls = org.mozilla : en-US : official&amp;hs = hsM&amp;sa = X&amp;oi = spell&amp;resnum = 0&amp;ct = result&amp;cd = 1&amp;q = nickel + carcinogen&amp;spell = 1 [ google.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nickel is not the 5 cent piece in your pocket.
Element 28 is a carcinogen.http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&amp;hs=hsM&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=spell&amp;resnum=0&amp;ct=result&amp;cd=1&amp;q=nickel+carcinogen&amp;spell=1 [google.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186990</id>
	<title>Replace compressed air with compressed hydrogen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258835820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Problem solved.  Now you not only get energy from the potential energy of the compression, but also from the fuel itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem solved .
Now you not only get energy from the potential energy of the compression , but also from the fuel itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem solved.
Now you not only get energy from the potential energy of the compression, but also from the fuel itself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190262</id>
	<title>Re:No kidding?</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1258816200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is a surprise to someone? Who ever though this *could* work? Certainly not anyone with any knowledge of thermodynamics.</p></div></blockquote><p>I think in the USA that's one senator and some people in state government.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a surprise to someone ?
Who ever though this * could * work ?
Certainly not anyone with any knowledge of thermodynamics.I think in the USA that 's one senator and some people in state government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a surprise to someone?
Who ever though this *could* work?
Certainly not anyone with any knowledge of thermodynamics.I think in the USA that's one senator and some people in state government.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187948</id>
	<title>Wow, they said it...</title>
	<author>athlon02</author>
	<datestamp>1258798740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually admitting that a "green" energy source may not be as green as they thought.  Wish more hybrid owners understood that... that battery must be disposed of eventually.  As I understand it, hybrids aren't as green as people think.  So much of the "green movement" is a total sham b/c it focuses narrowly on supposed benefits while ignoring reality &amp; even data that contradicts the claims made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually admitting that a " green " energy source may not be as green as they thought .
Wish more hybrid owners understood that... that battery must be disposed of eventually .
As I understand it , hybrids are n't as green as people think .
So much of the " green movement " is a total sham b/c it focuses narrowly on supposed benefits while ignoring reality &amp; even data that contradicts the claims made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually admitting that a "green" energy source may not be as green as they thought.
Wish more hybrid owners understood that... that battery must be disposed of eventually.
As I understand it, hybrids aren't as green as people think.
So much of the "green movement" is a total sham b/c it focuses narrowly on supposed benefits while ignoring reality &amp; even data that contradicts the claims made.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958</id>
	<title>"zero fuel"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258835640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>How would you compress the air in the first place?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How would you compress the air in the first place ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would you compress the air in the first place?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258836720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;&gt;all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip mines</p><p>Prius cars don't use lithium.  They use nickle and hydride, and when disposed are no more harmful than throwing-away coins and water.  (Although recycling the metal would be better.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; &gt; all those Prius owners do n't really seem to care about Lithum strip minesPrius cars do n't use lithium .
They use nickle and hydride , and when disposed are no more harmful than throwing-away coins and water .
( Although recycling the metal would be better .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;&gt;all those Prius owners don't really seem to care about Lithum strip minesPrius cars don't use lithium.
They use nickle and hydride, and when disposed are no more harmful than throwing-away coins and water.
(Although recycling the metal would be better.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191846</id>
	<title>compressed water might be cheaper</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258880700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>get a really long belt system pulling metal tanks into the oceans depths with a valve to trap the sea pressure. we can then pull them up with that pressure and use them as power plants. they would be mighty heavy, but relatively cheap to refill. I remember seeing a deep sea submersible which had sprung a leak pulled to the surface, when they broke the valve it spewed water at high pressure for minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>get a really long belt system pulling metal tanks into the oceans depths with a valve to trap the sea pressure .
we can then pull them up with that pressure and use them as power plants .
they would be mighty heavy , but relatively cheap to refill .
I remember seeing a deep sea submersible which had sprung a leak pulled to the surface , when they broke the valve it spewed water at high pressure for minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>get a really long belt system pulling metal tanks into the oceans depths with a valve to trap the sea pressure.
we can then pull them up with that pressure and use them as power plants.
they would be mighty heavy, but relatively cheap to refill.
I remember seeing a deep sea submersible which had sprung a leak pulled to the surface, when they broke the valve it spewed water at high pressure for minutes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188102</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>zaivala</author>
	<datestamp>1258799940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The earlier reports were quite a bit rosier, and a French company is already stepping up production of these vehicles.  Which raises the questions: Is this Berkeley study funded by oil companies? Were the earlier stories inflated?  Or both?<p>

A later question could be, are there more efficient or less polluting ways to compress (or release) air than the one Berkeley studied?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The earlier reports were quite a bit rosier , and a French company is already stepping up production of these vehicles .
Which raises the questions : Is this Berkeley study funded by oil companies ?
Were the earlier stories inflated ?
Or both ?
A later question could be , are there more efficient or less polluting ways to compress ( or release ) air than the one Berkeley studied ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The earlier reports were quite a bit rosier, and a French company is already stepping up production of these vehicles.
Which raises the questions: Is this Berkeley study funded by oil companies?
Were the earlier stories inflated?
Or both?
A later question could be, are there more efficient or less polluting ways to compress (or release) air than the one Berkeley studied?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187670</id>
	<title>Aircars and electric cars</title>
	<author>zogger</author>
	<datestamp>1258797000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These are designed to remove the *concentration* of exhaust gases from fuel burning from crowded urban areas. It isn't really that there are that much less overall emissions, just relocate where the emissions occur (although something can be said for having emissions controls at the generating plant). There's a lot of stop and go traffic, etc, most vehicles today sit at idle or run at some lower less efficient speed in city traffic. Air cars and electric cars shut completely off at "idle" and aren't wasting fuel sitting there in some traffic jam or at the stop light doing nothing as regards moving from point A to B.</p><p>That's the primary advantage here for short range urban vehicles as regards the environment. If you primarily do long trips, get a well tuned/ well built modern diesel for best mileage/less fuel burnt.</p><p>Nice graphic on this page that shows where the fuel goes with a regular car, idling accounts for almost 1/5th energy wastage today, with extra pollution concentrated then for no real reason.</p><p><a href="http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/atv.shtml" title="fueleconomy.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/atv.shtml</a> [fueleconomy.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are designed to remove the * concentration * of exhaust gases from fuel burning from crowded urban areas .
It is n't really that there are that much less overall emissions , just relocate where the emissions occur ( although something can be said for having emissions controls at the generating plant ) .
There 's a lot of stop and go traffic , etc , most vehicles today sit at idle or run at some lower less efficient speed in city traffic .
Air cars and electric cars shut completely off at " idle " and are n't wasting fuel sitting there in some traffic jam or at the stop light doing nothing as regards moving from point A to B.That 's the primary advantage here for short range urban vehicles as regards the environment .
If you primarily do long trips , get a well tuned/ well built modern diesel for best mileage/less fuel burnt.Nice graphic on this page that shows where the fuel goes with a regular car , idling accounts for almost 1/5th energy wastage today , with extra pollution concentrated then for no real reason.http : //www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/atv.shtml [ fueleconomy.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are designed to remove the *concentration* of exhaust gases from fuel burning from crowded urban areas.
It isn't really that there are that much less overall emissions, just relocate where the emissions occur (although something can be said for having emissions controls at the generating plant).
There's a lot of stop and go traffic, etc, most vehicles today sit at idle or run at some lower less efficient speed in city traffic.
Air cars and electric cars shut completely off at "idle" and aren't wasting fuel sitting there in some traffic jam or at the stop light doing nothing as regards moving from point A to B.That's the primary advantage here for short range urban vehicles as regards the environment.
If you primarily do long trips, get a well tuned/ well built modern diesel for best mileage/less fuel burnt.Nice graphic on this page that shows where the fuel goes with a regular car, idling accounts for almost 1/5th energy wastage today, with extra pollution concentrated then for no real reason.http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/atv.shtml [fueleconomy.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187174</id>
	<title>compressed air uses</title>
	<author>stimpleton</author>
	<datestamp>1258837020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did an apprenticeship in Motor Mechanics for 4 years when I left school 25 years ago. I recall a question to the tutor back then about compressed air to drive a car. Here was his answer: Compressed air is not good as a primary driving medium, it is only good as a buffer(the storage tank) or where electricity might add risk. Examples being driving air tools in a pit below ground. By its nature, compressed air must pass thru constricted orifices. There is tremendous loss of pressure over distance. I recall our workshop compressor...very different from what you buy at a hardware store. Huge tank, dual motors, each on three phase power. The newbies job was to empty the water and oil traps from the Air  Intake system. About 20 litres per day and about 200 mls of  oil like fluid(The atmosphere in the workshop back then was a haze of car fumes and dust). We had 4 electric hoists and one compressed air hoist too. The air hoist could lift many times the wieght of the electric. <br> <br>
I think compressed air cars will serve a specialist role, operating in  specific roles. Whether there is commercial visbility, I do not know. Aside from the modern buzzword of "Footprint", the technology to compress air is as old as stem and pistons. That wont change. Even on high tech air craft carriers, the landing restraints have huge hoary old compressed air pistons dampenening the jets planes. The tech below deck, keeps the ram clean and applies some lubricant periodically....just as would happen in steam train days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did an apprenticeship in Motor Mechanics for 4 years when I left school 25 years ago .
I recall a question to the tutor back then about compressed air to drive a car .
Here was his answer : Compressed air is not good as a primary driving medium , it is only good as a buffer ( the storage tank ) or where electricity might add risk .
Examples being driving air tools in a pit below ground .
By its nature , compressed air must pass thru constricted orifices .
There is tremendous loss of pressure over distance .
I recall our workshop compressor...very different from what you buy at a hardware store .
Huge tank , dual motors , each on three phase power .
The newbies job was to empty the water and oil traps from the Air Intake system .
About 20 litres per day and about 200 mls of oil like fluid ( The atmosphere in the workshop back then was a haze of car fumes and dust ) .
We had 4 electric hoists and one compressed air hoist too .
The air hoist could lift many times the wieght of the electric .
I think compressed air cars will serve a specialist role , operating in specific roles .
Whether there is commercial visbility , I do not know .
Aside from the modern buzzword of " Footprint " , the technology to compress air is as old as stem and pistons .
That wont change .
Even on high tech air craft carriers , the landing restraints have huge hoary old compressed air pistons dampenening the jets planes .
The tech below deck , keeps the ram clean and applies some lubricant periodically....just as would happen in steam train days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did an apprenticeship in Motor Mechanics for 4 years when I left school 25 years ago.
I recall a question to the tutor back then about compressed air to drive a car.
Here was his answer: Compressed air is not good as a primary driving medium, it is only good as a buffer(the storage tank) or where electricity might add risk.
Examples being driving air tools in a pit below ground.
By its nature, compressed air must pass thru constricted orifices.
There is tremendous loss of pressure over distance.
I recall our workshop compressor...very different from what you buy at a hardware store.
Huge tank, dual motors, each on three phase power.
The newbies job was to empty the water and oil traps from the Air  Intake system.
About 20 litres per day and about 200 mls of  oil like fluid(The atmosphere in the workshop back then was a haze of car fumes and dust).
We had 4 electric hoists and one compressed air hoist too.
The air hoist could lift many times the wieght of the electric.
I think compressed air cars will serve a specialist role, operating in  specific roles.
Whether there is commercial visbility, I do not know.
Aside from the modern buzzword of "Footprint", the technology to compress air is as old as stem and pistons.
That wont change.
Even on high tech air craft carriers, the landing restraints have huge hoary old compressed air pistons dampenening the jets planes.
The tech below deck, keeps the ram clean and applies some lubricant periodically....just as would happen in steam train days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187914</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>the\_one(2)</author>
	<datestamp>1258798620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's solar panels all the way down (seriously)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's solar panels all the way down ( seriously )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's solar panels all the way down (seriously)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187904</id>
	<title>What about Air hybrids?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258798560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did I miss it, or did this not cover engines like the Scuderi air hybrid?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did I miss it , or did this not cover engines like the Scuderi air hybrid ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did I miss it, or did this not cover engines like the Scuderi air hybrid?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187704</id>
	<title>Re:There are other ways to compress the air.</title>
	<author>Cyberllama</author>
	<datestamp>1258797180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But you could just as easily have that windmill power a turbine to generate electricity to charge the battery in your electric car and get a far higher energy density leading to more mileage per charge and per each day's wind.  I think that's the point that's being made.  There's lots of clean ways that can generate energy -- any of which can be used to compress air, but why add that extra unnecessary step in the middle when it's just an added inefficiency?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But you could just as easily have that windmill power a turbine to generate electricity to charge the battery in your electric car and get a far higher energy density leading to more mileage per charge and per each day 's wind .
I think that 's the point that 's being made .
There 's lots of clean ways that can generate energy -- any of which can be used to compress air , but why add that extra unnecessary step in the middle when it 's just an added inefficiency ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But you could just as easily have that windmill power a turbine to generate electricity to charge the battery in your electric car and get a far higher energy density leading to more mileage per charge and per each day's wind.
I think that's the point that's being made.
There's lots of clean ways that can generate energy -- any of which can be used to compress air, but why add that extra unnecessary step in the middle when it's just an added inefficiency?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195424</id>
	<title>Re:CO2 could be carbon neutral?</title>
	<author>WolfWithoutAClause</author>
	<datestamp>1258920900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's done *all* the time; you liquefy the air in a liquefaction plant; the CO2 comes off at one of the taps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's done * all * the time ; you liquefy the air in a liquefaction plant ; the CO2 comes off at one of the taps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's done *all* the time; you liquefy the air in a liquefaction plant; the CO2 comes off at one of the taps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254</id>
	<title>There are other ways to compress the air.</title>
	<author>jcr</author>
	<datestamp>1258794420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Compressing air can be done with any source of mechanical energy.  Put a windmill on your roof, gear it down, and have it drive the compressor directly.</p><p>Come to think of it, having a sizable amount of compressed air storage in one's house would be handy.  Great for dusting.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Compressing air can be done with any source of mechanical energy .
Put a windmill on your roof , gear it down , and have it drive the compressor directly.Come to think of it , having a sizable amount of compressed air storage in one 's house would be handy .
Great for dusting.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Compressing air can be done with any source of mechanical energy.
Put a windmill on your roof, gear it down, and have it drive the compressor directly.Come to think of it, having a sizable amount of compressed air storage in one's house would be handy.
Great for dusting.-jcr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190258</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>swizzley</author>
	<datestamp>1258816140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sorrry but no free ac this time, it would use more energy to create more compressed air for the air conditioning then it would use to power the car; that is if they used a hybrid air electric system that took full advantages of high powered triangular lasers strobing on a polished silver cone spinning at 300+rpm by compressed air. Then they would have enough propulsion power to travel the car and compress your air conditioner. That is assuming minimal energy was lost in the system, correctly compensating for breaking and conserving that energy to accelerate later.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorrry but no free ac this time , it would use more energy to create more compressed air for the air conditioning then it would use to power the car ; that is if they used a hybrid air electric system that took full advantages of high powered triangular lasers strobing on a polished silver cone spinning at 300 + rpm by compressed air .
Then they would have enough propulsion power to travel the car and compress your air conditioner .
That is assuming minimal energy was lost in the system , correctly compensating for breaking and conserving that energy to accelerate later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorrry but no free ac this time, it would use more energy to create more compressed air for the air conditioning then it would use to power the car; that is if they used a hybrid air electric system that took full advantages of high powered triangular lasers strobing on a polished silver cone spinning at 300+rpm by compressed air.
Then they would have enough propulsion power to travel the car and compress your air conditioner.
That is assuming minimal energy was lost in the system, correctly compensating for breaking and conserving that energy to accelerate later.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30194174</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>left00coaster</author>
	<datestamp>1258911420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"If the power plant is downwind they could actually improve the air quality in the city."
<br>
<br>
Perhaps, but what would be the impact on everything else that is down-wind? The Pacific Northwest is full of counter-examples for your argument.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" If the power plant is downwind they could actually improve the air quality in the city .
" Perhaps , but what would be the impact on everything else that is down-wind ?
The Pacific Northwest is full of counter-examples for your argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"If the power plant is downwind they could actually improve the air quality in the city.
"


Perhaps, but what would be the impact on everything else that is down-wind?
The Pacific Northwest is full of counter-examples for your argument.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188786</id>
	<title>Re:oooooo science says its true, must be</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258804440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Science, religion, what's the difference, it both requires faith to believe in the world they propose."</p><p>Scientific assertions are testable, superstition is not, and your assertion is contemptibly stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Science , religion , what 's the difference , it both requires faith to believe in the world they propose .
" Scientific assertions are testable , superstition is not , and your assertion is contemptibly stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Science, religion, what's the difference, it both requires faith to believe in the world they propose.
"Scientific assertions are testable, superstition is not, and your assertion is contemptibly stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187858</id>
	<title>Re:"zero fuel"?</title>
	<author>Ex-MislTech</author>
	<datestamp>1258798260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One way to compress air for near free would be to have pneumatic braking<br>at all off ramps on highways, and at all stop lights as they go red.</p><p>Regenerative braking in hybrids work in a similar but electrical manner.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One way to compress air for near free would be to have pneumatic brakingat all off ramps on highways , and at all stop lights as they go red.Regenerative braking in hybrids work in a similar but electrical manner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One way to compress air for near free would be to have pneumatic brakingat all off ramps on highways, and at all stop lights as they go red.Regenerative braking in hybrids work in a similar but electrical manner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187418</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1258795680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mostly don't care about lithium strip mines; I like all the things progress has bought me and slapping a solid layer of saran wrap around the planet doesn't seem like a worthwhile trade off.</p><p>(The mostly is there because I don't care for wanton destruction, and our needs can often be met in ways that aren't particularly harmful to the 'natural' environment)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mostly do n't care about lithium strip mines ; I like all the things progress has bought me and slapping a solid layer of saran wrap around the planet does n't seem like a worthwhile trade off .
( The mostly is there because I do n't care for wanton destruction , and our needs can often be met in ways that are n't particularly harmful to the 'natural ' environment )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mostly don't care about lithium strip mines; I like all the things progress has bought me and slapping a solid layer of saran wrap around the planet doesn't seem like a worthwhile trade off.
(The mostly is there because I don't care for wanton destruction, and our needs can often be met in ways that aren't particularly harmful to the 'natural' environment)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191874</id>
	<title>"fossil-fuel transportation"?</title>
	<author>Gorimek</author>
	<datestamp>1258881240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is hardly anything like "fossil-fuel transportation".</p><p>Most motors can be run on Ethanol or bio-diesel, which have their own problems, but are carbon neutral.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is hardly anything like " fossil-fuel transportation " .Most motors can be run on Ethanol or bio-diesel , which have their own problems , but are carbon neutral .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is hardly anything like "fossil-fuel transportation".Most motors can be run on Ethanol or bio-diesel, which have their own problems, but are carbon neutral.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188180</id>
	<title>...producing the electricity used to compress the</title>
	<author>future assassin</author>
	<datestamp>1258800420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ok does this account for the pollution created by the gas burning and by the gas manufacturing plants and oil rigs?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok does this account for the pollution created by the gas burning and by the gas manufacturing plants and oil rigs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok does this account for the pollution created by the gas burning and by the gas manufacturing plants and oil rigs?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187810</id>
	<title>The ONLY efficient one will be electric</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258797900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The simple fact is, that electric cars are by far the only efficient means of moving. The ONLY real issue is the storage. Once that is licked (and great strides have been made over the last 15 years), then it is over for idea like the air car, gas cars, or even hydrogen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The simple fact is , that electric cars are by far the only efficient means of moving .
The ONLY real issue is the storage .
Once that is licked ( and great strides have been made over the last 15 years ) , then it is over for idea like the air car , gas cars , or even hydrogen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The simple fact is, that electric cars are by far the only efficient means of moving.
The ONLY real issue is the storage.
Once that is licked (and great strides have been made over the last 15 years), then it is over for idea like the air car, gas cars, or even hydrogen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187824</id>
	<title>Re:Cold Steam Engine?</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1258798020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously a micro-turbine could be used in a series hybrid fairly easily.  A google search turns up a site with a 'prototype', though a combustion turbine and not steam.</p><p>Here's a liquid nitrogen powered car:<br><a href="http://inhouse.unt.edu/index.cfm?commentID=1163" title="unt.edu" rel="nofollow">http://inhouse.unt.edu/index.cfm?commentID=1163</a> [unt.edu]</p><p>Personally I like MIT's 'millimeter' gas turbine engines:<br><a href="http://thefutureofthings.com/articles/49/engine-on-a-chip.html" title="thefutureofthings.com" rel="nofollow">http://thefutureofthings.com/articles/49/engine-on-a-chip.html</a> [thefutureofthings.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously a micro-turbine could be used in a series hybrid fairly easily .
A google search turns up a site with a 'prototype ' , though a combustion turbine and not steam.Here 's a liquid nitrogen powered car : http : //inhouse.unt.edu/index.cfm ? commentID = 1163 [ unt.edu ] Personally I like MIT 's 'millimeter ' gas turbine engines : http : //thefutureofthings.com/articles/49/engine-on-a-chip.html [ thefutureofthings.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously a micro-turbine could be used in a series hybrid fairly easily.
A google search turns up a site with a 'prototype', though a combustion turbine and not steam.Here's a liquid nitrogen powered car:http://inhouse.unt.edu/index.cfm?commentID=1163 [unt.edu]Personally I like MIT's 'millimeter' gas turbine engines:http://thefutureofthings.com/articles/49/engine-on-a-chip.html [thefutureofthings.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30199518</id>
	<title>Re:There are other ways to compress the air.</title>
	<author>Waccoon</author>
	<datestamp>1258913160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would also think that with the increased efficiency of battery storage, you'd need less solar panels to charge up the system for equivalent range in the first place.</p><p>A low-cost air car powered by an expensive electric system driving a compressor?  Batteries aren't <em>that</em> expensive, especially if we're talking about little city cars that sport</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would also think that with the increased efficiency of battery storage , you 'd need less solar panels to charge up the system for equivalent range in the first place.A low-cost air car powered by an expensive electric system driving a compressor ?
Batteries are n't that expensive , especially if we 're talking about little city cars that sport</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would also think that with the increased efficiency of battery storage, you'd need less solar panels to charge up the system for equivalent range in the first place.A low-cost air car powered by an expensive electric system driving a compressor?
Batteries aren't that expensive, especially if we're talking about little city cars that sport</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187704</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191318</id>
	<title>Re:Cold Steam Engine?</title>
	<author>jshackney</author>
	<datestamp>1258829700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Check out the book, "They Said It Couldn't Be Done" It's about Bill Lear and approximately the last half of the book deals with his development of a vapor turbine for automobiles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out the book , " They Said It Could n't Be Done " It 's about Bill Lear and approximately the last half of the book deals with his development of a vapor turbine for automobiles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out the book, "They Said It Couldn't Be Done" It's about Bill Lear and approximately the last half of the book deals with his development of a vapor turbine for automobiles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187114</id>
	<title>I have high hopes for my hot air car</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258836720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It runs off politicians and lawyers. They seem to be an abundant natural resource that is simply going to waste.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It runs off politicians and lawyers .
They seem to be an abundant natural resource that is simply going to waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It runs off politicians and lawyers.
They seem to be an abundant natural resource that is simply going to waste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187392</id>
	<title>So I Guess all the Talk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258795500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I guess all the talk was just a lot of hot air!</p><p>Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I guess all the talk was just a lot of hot air ! Thank you , thank you , I 'll be here all week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I guess all the talk was just a lot of hot air!Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195764</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>SlashSim</author>
	<datestamp>1258923540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I expect the "free A/C" is a result of the compressed air cooling as it expands. It would work on the same principle that makes the outside of your barbecue tank frosty sometimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I expect the " free A/C " is a result of the compressed air cooling as it expands .
It would work on the same principle that makes the outside of your barbecue tank frosty sometimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expect the "free A/C" is a result of the compressed air cooling as it expands.
It would work on the same principle that makes the outside of your barbecue tank frosty sometimes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187636</id>
	<title>Re:"zero fuel"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258796820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Dig really deep hole<br>2. Drop tank to bottom of hole<br>3 Seal tank<br>4 Raise tank<br>5 Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Dig really deep hole2 .
Drop tank to bottom of hole3 Seal tank4 Raise tank5 Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Dig really deep hole2.
Drop tank to bottom of hole3 Seal tank4 Raise tank5 Profit!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191334</id>
	<title>Re:Time for a new tagline</title>
	<author>troll8901</author>
	<datestamp>1258829940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Slashdot - news for idiots, stuff that's obvious</p></div><p>But that still puts Slashdot out of league of 90\% of the world's internet users.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot - news for idiots , stuff that 's obviousBut that still puts Slashdot out of league of 90 \ % of the world 's internet users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot - news for idiots, stuff that's obviousBut that still puts Slashdot out of league of 90\% of the world's internet users.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190954</id>
	<title>Re:No kidding?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1258825140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a surprise to someone? Who ever though this *could* work?</p></div><p>Angry environmentalists who hate internal combustion, want all of us to live as subsistence sustainable vegetable farmers, and are willing to suspend disbelief for just about any pseudo-science "solution" that comes along?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a surprise to someone ?
Who ever though this * could * work ? Angry environmentalists who hate internal combustion , want all of us to live as subsistence sustainable vegetable farmers , and are willing to suspend disbelief for just about any pseudo-science " solution " that comes along ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a surprise to someone?
Who ever though this *could* work?Angry environmentalists who hate internal combustion, want all of us to live as subsistence sustainable vegetable farmers, and are willing to suspend disbelief for just about any pseudo-science "solution" that comes along?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188230</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258800780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bull shit. The majority of US coins are made of zinc and nickel is more toxic than lithium.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bull shit .
The majority of US coins are made of zinc and nickel is more toxic than lithium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bull shit.
The majority of US coins are made of zinc and nickel is more toxic than lithium.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30198902</id>
	<title>Re:No kidding?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258906380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>When asked who could believe something, you list a non-existent liberal boogieman.  Nice job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When asked who could believe something , you list a non-existent liberal boogieman .
Nice job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When asked who could believe something, you list a non-existent liberal boogieman.
Nice job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190954</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187366</id>
	<title>Simple Fix?</title>
	<author>IonOtter</author>
	<datestamp>1258795260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1.  Install windmills at the recharge stations.</p><p>2.  Place compressors inside the turbine housing instead of electrical generators.</p><p>3.  Install large storage tanks at the recharge station.</p><p>4.  Let windmill run for a few days to build up a decent head and some reserve, then use electric compressors to compensate for low-production days.</p><p>You can even price compressed air based on production?  On calm days, it's more expensive, on windy days it's cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Install windmills at the recharge stations.2 .
Place compressors inside the turbine housing instead of electrical generators.3 .
Install large storage tanks at the recharge station.4 .
Let windmill run for a few days to build up a decent head and some reserve , then use electric compressors to compensate for low-production days.You can even price compressed air based on production ?
On calm days , it 's more expensive , on windy days it 's cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Install windmills at the recharge stations.2.
Place compressors inside the turbine housing instead of electrical generators.3.
Install large storage tanks at the recharge station.4.
Let windmill run for a few days to build up a decent head and some reserve, then use electric compressors to compensate for low-production days.You can even price compressed air based on production?
On calm days, it's more expensive, on windy days it's cheaper.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187774</id>
	<title>So are plug-in hybrids</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1258797660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>unless you use solar or wind power for the electricity you will be using mostly coal burned electrical power. But nobody talks bad about hybrids. Actually my economy car costs less and uses less gas than a hybrid and is more friendly to the environment than a plug-in hybrid unless they are using renewable green electricity to power the plug-in hybrid.</p><p>I think the car that ran on used french fry oil was the best idea yet, but once that catches on fast food places will charge a lot for used french fry oil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>unless you use solar or wind power for the electricity you will be using mostly coal burned electrical power .
But nobody talks bad about hybrids .
Actually my economy car costs less and uses less gas than a hybrid and is more friendly to the environment than a plug-in hybrid unless they are using renewable green electricity to power the plug-in hybrid.I think the car that ran on used french fry oil was the best idea yet , but once that catches on fast food places will charge a lot for used french fry oil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>unless you use solar or wind power for the electricity you will be using mostly coal burned electrical power.
But nobody talks bad about hybrids.
Actually my economy car costs less and uses less gas than a hybrid and is more friendly to the environment than a plug-in hybrid unless they are using renewable green electricity to power the plug-in hybrid.I think the car that ran on used french fry oil was the best idea yet, but once that catches on fast food places will charge a lot for used french fry oil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189708</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>Waterppk</author>
	<datestamp>1258811880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This isn't as simple as you're thinking.  Nickel Metal Hydride batteries are manufactured as a paste and rolled or turned into prismatic cells.  It's difficult to recover the elements put into the pack.
<br> <br>
Replying directly to your request for a citation, the EPA has a nice page here describing all of the wonderful sickness you can enjoy when you have nickel in your water:
<a href="http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/nickel.html" title="epa.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/nickel.html</a> [epa.gov]
<br> <br>
Sounds like a great waste of energy to recover the batteries anyways;
<br> <br>
"The recycling process starts by removing the combustible material, such as plastics and insulation, with a gas fired thermal oxidizer. Gases from the thermal oxidizer are sent to the plant's scrubber where they are neutralized to remove pollutants. The process leaves the clean, naked cells, which contain valuable metal content.
<br> <br>
The cells are then chopped into small pieces, which are heated until the metal liquefies. Non-metallic substances are burned off; leaving a black slag on top that is removed with a slag arm. The different alloys settle according to their weights and are skimmed off like cream from raw milk.
<br> <br>
Cadmium is relatively light and vaporizes at high temperatures. In a process that appears like a pan boiling over, a fan blows the cadmium vapor into a large tube, which is cooled with water mist. This causes the vapors to condense and produces cadmium that is 99.95 percent pure.
<br> <br>
Some recyclers do not separate the metals on site but pour the liquid metals directly into what the industry refers to as 'pigs' (65 pounds) or 'hogs' (2000 pounds). The pigs and hogs are then shipped to metal recovery plants. Here, the material is used to produce nickel, chromium and iron re-melt alloy for the manufacturing of stainless steel and other high-end products.
<br> <br>
Current battery recycling methods requires a high amount of energy. It takes six to ten times the amount of energy to reclaim metals from recycled batteries than it would through other means. "
<br> <br>
<a href="http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-20.htm" title="batteryuniversity.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-20.htm</a> [batteryuniversity.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't as simple as you 're thinking .
Nickel Metal Hydride batteries are manufactured as a paste and rolled or turned into prismatic cells .
It 's difficult to recover the elements put into the pack .
Replying directly to your request for a citation , the EPA has a nice page here describing all of the wonderful sickness you can enjoy when you have nickel in your water : http : //www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/nickel.html [ epa.gov ] Sounds like a great waste of energy to recover the batteries anyways ; " The recycling process starts by removing the combustible material , such as plastics and insulation , with a gas fired thermal oxidizer .
Gases from the thermal oxidizer are sent to the plant 's scrubber where they are neutralized to remove pollutants .
The process leaves the clean , naked cells , which contain valuable metal content .
The cells are then chopped into small pieces , which are heated until the metal liquefies .
Non-metallic substances are burned off ; leaving a black slag on top that is removed with a slag arm .
The different alloys settle according to their weights and are skimmed off like cream from raw milk .
Cadmium is relatively light and vaporizes at high temperatures .
In a process that appears like a pan boiling over , a fan blows the cadmium vapor into a large tube , which is cooled with water mist .
This causes the vapors to condense and produces cadmium that is 99.95 percent pure .
Some recyclers do not separate the metals on site but pour the liquid metals directly into what the industry refers to as 'pigs ' ( 65 pounds ) or 'hogs ' ( 2000 pounds ) .
The pigs and hogs are then shipped to metal recovery plants .
Here , the material is used to produce nickel , chromium and iron re-melt alloy for the manufacturing of stainless steel and other high-end products .
Current battery recycling methods requires a high amount of energy .
It takes six to ten times the amount of energy to reclaim metals from recycled batteries than it would through other means .
" http : //www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-20.htm [ batteryuniversity.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't as simple as you're thinking.
Nickel Metal Hydride batteries are manufactured as a paste and rolled or turned into prismatic cells.
It's difficult to recover the elements put into the pack.
Replying directly to your request for a citation, the EPA has a nice page here describing all of the wonderful sickness you can enjoy when you have nickel in your water:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/nickel.html [epa.gov]
 
Sounds like a great waste of energy to recover the batteries anyways;
 
"The recycling process starts by removing the combustible material, such as plastics and insulation, with a gas fired thermal oxidizer.
Gases from the thermal oxidizer are sent to the plant's scrubber where they are neutralized to remove pollutants.
The process leaves the clean, naked cells, which contain valuable metal content.
The cells are then chopped into small pieces, which are heated until the metal liquefies.
Non-metallic substances are burned off; leaving a black slag on top that is removed with a slag arm.
The different alloys settle according to their weights and are skimmed off like cream from raw milk.
Cadmium is relatively light and vaporizes at high temperatures.
In a process that appears like a pan boiling over, a fan blows the cadmium vapor into a large tube, which is cooled with water mist.
This causes the vapors to condense and produces cadmium that is 99.95 percent pure.
Some recyclers do not separate the metals on site but pour the liquid metals directly into what the industry refers to as 'pigs' (65 pounds) or 'hogs' (2000 pounds).
The pigs and hogs are then shipped to metal recovery plants.
Here, the material is used to produce nickel, chromium and iron re-melt alloy for the manufacturing of stainless steel and other high-end products.
Current battery recycling methods requires a high amount of energy.
It takes six to ten times the amount of energy to reclaim metals from recycled batteries than it would through other means.
"
 
http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-20.htm [batteryuniversity.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</id>
	<title>At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>jandrese</author>
	<datestamp>1258835640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>There appear to be two primary advanages of these cars:  They're cheap to make and they don't directly pollute the city air.  If the power plant is downwind they could actually improve the air quality in the city.  You also get "free" AC, although heating the car is an issue.  Since these are primarily targeted at cities like Mumbai the cooling is more important anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There appear to be two primary advanages of these cars : They 're cheap to make and they do n't directly pollute the city air .
If the power plant is downwind they could actually improve the air quality in the city .
You also get " free " AC , although heating the car is an issue .
Since these are primarily targeted at cities like Mumbai the cooling is more important anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There appear to be two primary advanages of these cars:  They're cheap to make and they don't directly pollute the city air.
If the power plant is downwind they could actually improve the air quality in the city.
You also get "free" AC, although heating the car is an issue.
Since these are primarily targeted at cities like Mumbai the cooling is more important anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190600</id>
	<title>rubber band technology</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258819980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is why I've invested all my money in the more reliable rubber-band automotive power systems.  'Kind of tiring to wind it up, but that certainly discourages overuse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is why I 've invested all my money in the more reliable rubber-band automotive power systems .
'Kind of tiring to wind it up , but that certainly discourages overuse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is why I've invested all my money in the more reliable rubber-band automotive power systems.
'Kind of tiring to wind it up, but that certainly discourages overuse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187046</id>
	<title>I guess congratulations are in order</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258836180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not on debunking this, because it's a completely ridiculous idea that anyone who's taken even introductory engineering thermodynamics should be able to debunk. Rather, they should get credit for going the extra mile and actually getting a paper out of the thing (and media attention!).<br><br>I mean really. There's perfectly good reasons why we're not using compressed air as a 'fuel', and it's not that we hadn't thought of it. The idea (and applications) have been around since the 19th century.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not on debunking this , because it 's a completely ridiculous idea that anyone who 's taken even introductory engineering thermodynamics should be able to debunk .
Rather , they should get credit for going the extra mile and actually getting a paper out of the thing ( and media attention !
) .I mean really .
There 's perfectly good reasons why we 're not using compressed air as a 'fuel ' , and it 's not that we had n't thought of it .
The idea ( and applications ) have been around since the 19th century .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not on debunking this, because it's a completely ridiculous idea that anyone who's taken even introductory engineering thermodynamics should be able to debunk.
Rather, they should get credit for going the extra mile and actually getting a paper out of the thing (and media attention!
).I mean really.
There's perfectly good reasons why we're not using compressed air as a 'fuel', and it's not that we hadn't thought of it.
The idea (and applications) have been around since the 19th century.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189170</id>
	<title>Re:Zero Emissions are worse??</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1258807260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Just compressing air from solar, wind power, etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1\% or 100\%</i> <br> <br>If you have to build a power plant 100 times the size, you have an environmental cost in that.  Given the choice between something 1\% efficient and 100\% efficient, the choice of 1\% efficient is environmentally worse, even if the direct emissions are the same.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just compressing air from solar , wind power , etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1 \ % or 100 \ % If you have to build a power plant 100 times the size , you have an environmental cost in that .
Given the choice between something 1 \ % efficient and 100 \ % efficient , the choice of 1 \ % efficient is environmentally worse , even if the direct emissions are the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just compressing air from solar, wind power, etc gives Zero emissions no matter if the efficiency is only 1\% or 100\%  If you have to build a power plant 100 times the size, you have an environmental cost in that.
Given the choice between something 1\% efficient and 100\% efficient, the choice of 1\% efficient is environmentally worse, even if the direct emissions are the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187504</id>
	<title>No</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1258796160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>duh.

<p>Thanks Berkeley.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>duh .
Thanks Berkeley .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>duh.
Thanks Berkeley.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187980</id>
	<title>Re:At least they don't pollute the city directly</title>
	<author>digitig</author>
	<datestamp>1258799040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yep, they can shift the pollution from somewhere rich people want to go to somewhere where only poor people are. Makes for a sound economic investment, at least.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , they can shift the pollution from somewhere rich people want to go to somewhere where only poor people are .
Makes for a sound economic investment , at least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, they can shift the pollution from somewhere rich people want to go to somewhere where only poor people are.
Makes for a sound economic investment, at least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187958</id>
	<title>wind power</title>
	<author>SharpFang</author>
	<datestamp>1258798860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course if you use electricity for compressing the air, you get a worse footprint.<br>Even with solar batteries (which consume a lot of energy to produce).</p><p>But put the engine in reverse and you have it pumping air, which can be achieved using a windmill. Without transforming it to electricity, just wind -&gt; rotation -&gt; pump -&gt; pressure.</p><p>Pure Steampunk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course if you use electricity for compressing the air , you get a worse footprint.Even with solar batteries ( which consume a lot of energy to produce ) .But put the engine in reverse and you have it pumping air , which can be achieved using a windmill .
Without transforming it to electricity , just wind - &gt; rotation - &gt; pump - &gt; pressure.Pure Steampunk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course if you use electricity for compressing the air, you get a worse footprint.Even with solar batteries (which consume a lot of energy to produce).But put the engine in reverse and you have it pumping air, which can be achieved using a windmill.
Without transforming it to electricity, just wind -&gt; rotation -&gt; pump -&gt; pressure.Pure Steampunk.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191664</id>
	<title>Blows...</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1258920720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>.. the wind does, that is.<br> <br>
Using a mechanical air pump driven by the wind makes massive sense to me, it is patently obvious. This method alone makes air power a win.
<br> <br>
How we generate energy now for air cars now makes no sense, is patently stupid. Fossil fuel -&gt; heat energy -&gt; mechanical energy -&gt; electricity over a lossy inefficient grid -&gt; pumping compressed air -&gt; filling up your car.</htmltext>
<tokenext>.. the wind does , that is .
Using a mechanical air pump driven by the wind makes massive sense to me , it is patently obvious .
This method alone makes air power a win .
How we generate energy now for air cars now makes no sense , is patently stupid .
Fossil fuel - &gt; heat energy - &gt; mechanical energy - &gt; electricity over a lossy inefficient grid - &gt; pumping compressed air - &gt; filling up your car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. the wind does, that is.
Using a mechanical air pump driven by the wind makes massive sense to me, it is patently obvious.
This method alone makes air power a win.
How we generate energy now for air cars now makes no sense, is patently stupid.
Fossil fuel -&gt; heat energy -&gt; mechanical energy -&gt; electricity over a lossy inefficient grid -&gt; pumping compressed air -&gt; filling up your car.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187934</id>
	<title>Its all about energy density</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1258798740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
No kidding compressed air is crap for automobiles.When something manages to have <a href="http://wiki.xtronics.com/index.php/Energy\_density" title="xtronics.com">worse volumetric energy density</a> [xtronics.com] than lead acid batteries, plus nearly as bad gravimetric energy density even when you aren't factoring the weight of the container vessel, you know you have a loser there.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No kidding compressed air is crap for automobiles.When something manages to have worse volumetric energy density [ xtronics.com ] than lead acid batteries , plus nearly as bad gravimetric energy density even when you are n't factoring the weight of the container vessel , you know you have a loser there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
No kidding compressed air is crap for automobiles.When something manages to have worse volumetric energy density [xtronics.com] than lead acid batteries, plus nearly as bad gravimetric energy density even when you aren't factoring the weight of the container vessel, you know you have a loser there.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187910</id>
	<title>Hot Air</title>
	<author>iliketrash</author>
	<datestamp>1258798560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Air cars are an enchanting idea, providing mobility with zero fuel consumption or environmental impacts."</p><p>Yeah, right. We'll get our American politicians to engage with those pesky air molecules in order to get them to crowd together for zero cost and with no carbon emissions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Air cars are an enchanting idea , providing mobility with zero fuel consumption or environmental impacts .
" Yeah , right .
We 'll get our American politicians to engage with those pesky air molecules in order to get them to crowd together for zero cost and with no carbon emissions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Air cars are an enchanting idea, providing mobility with zero fuel consumption or environmental impacts.
"Yeah, right.
We'll get our American politicians to engage with those pesky air molecules in order to get them to crowd together for zero cost and with no carbon emissions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188428</id>
	<title>Re:"zero fuel"?</title>
	<author>ShieldW0lf</author>
	<datestamp>1258802100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most people do not appreciate that there is a difference between an energy source and an energy transport mechanism, and that the word "fuel" refers to the former and not the latter.  Including the person who submitted this article, apparently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people do not appreciate that there is a difference between an energy source and an energy transport mechanism , and that the word " fuel " refers to the former and not the latter .
Including the person who submitted this article , apparently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people do not appreciate that there is a difference between an energy source and an energy transport mechanism, and that the word "fuel" refers to the former and not the latter.
Including the person who submitted this article, apparently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192574
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30200468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190954
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30198902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190258
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30193068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30194174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_21_1856207_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30199518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188786
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186966
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187142
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187914
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187116
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190226
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30200468
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188230
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187110
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187286
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187998
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187704
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30199518
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190954
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30198902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30189598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187918
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30193068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30192574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30194174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30188102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30195764
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186990
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30191874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30190840
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30187046
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_21_1856207.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_21_1856207.30186972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
