Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Alternative Energy Blog - Suggestions/ Comments

Feel free to post any suggestions on how the alternative energy blog could be improved and discuss any energy related issues in the comments section.

I also welcome any links which should be to:


preferably using the link text "alternative energy" or "alternative energy blog"


Anonymous Anonymous said...

great great site! keep up the good word and spreading the word.

sorry. low bandwidth comment. but just thought you could use a pat on the back.


1:35 am, October 21, 2004  
Blogger LMZanini said...

I enjoy your entries a lot.
I would like your opinion on the following site:
I have nothing to do with it, and I feel it is a mixed bag with some very valuable information and some other less valuable info, tone, attitudes and vision, but I am educating myself on this, so your opinion would be appreciated.



3:01 pm, October 24, 2004  
Blogger James said...

Hi Laura,

Thanks for dropping by.

What do I think of the site lifeaftertheoilcrash.net?
(part one)

Well, the first time I read it (the free parts at least)I was literally up all night and well into the next morning considering the implications and reading more about peak oil on the net. I had already heard of "peak oil" and was aware that it had very serious implications. However what sites like lifeaftertheoilcrash and dieoff.org spell out is a doomsday scenario with up to 90% of the world population dieing as a result.

However once I finally went to bed and woke up later in the day the world was still the same. Was I in denial? Perhaps. Sites with a similar worldview to dieoff.org suggest that oil has already peaked, there is no solution and we should all head as far away from "civilisation" as possible and set up self-sufficient communities. If we were to wait for the signs of "peak oil" it would already be too late.

I briefly considered moving to the jungles of Borneo and joining one of the few self-sufficient tribes relatively untouched by "modernity" left.

However as I recommend anyone doing, it was time to consider some of the assumptions made in lifeaftertheoilcrash.net


I have just discovered on the site the ebook is now available for free until U.S. election day.

I will therefore continue this comment either here or in a full length post after I have read the full length ebook.

The link for the free download is:


To be continued.

4:27 pm, October 26, 2004  
Blogger Mikhail Capone said...

Heard about you at worldchanging.

Great website, keep up the good work.

10:23 am, November 05, 2004  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good site, clean design - could benefit from a search box and home button on every page though), hot topic. Things I'm particularly interested about are the whys and hows. Why do the world economies cornerstone a commodity which may disappear in 50 years? Are they really a bunch of 'live for the moment, slash & burners'? What alternative technologies are there? How feasible are they? Oxygen + Hydrogen = Energy + water - what gives? When people decry the Middle East wars when referenced with oil why do the Western instigators not say 'the military defends us and our interests - oil is our interest - we depend on it. There is no more worthy reason to fight'.

1:45 pm, November 10, 2004  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Comment from: Adess Singh [Visitor] ยท http://adess@sify.com
We all know that rain falls.
We all know that this is the vapour of water evaporated from the ocean surface as also from other large water bodies.

We all know that volume to volume wet air is lighter than dry air. So when dry air picks up moisture it becomes lighter and is thus moved by displacement action under the action of gravity, up high into the atmosphere, where it gets cold and the vapour condences and falls as rain.

If wet air is lighter obviously no thermodynamic work need to be done in moving it upwards as that is its natural diraction.

Now take a look at that rain cycle as a theoretical heat engine. The water absorbes an amount heat say 'H' at the ocean surface. As the water vapour moves up under the action of displacement by gravity it does no 'work' so when at an altitude the vapour condences back to water it must return to space exactly the same quantity of heat 'H'.

In a thermodynamic heat engine if heat absorbed minus heat rejected is equal to the amount of work done, and if the two are equal then no work should have been done but in this case of the rain cycle, there are a billion tones of water at a height in a gravational field.

take a look at the heat budget of the earth in any science encyclopedia, it shows very clearly the heat absorbed by water at ocean surface is the same as heat radiated back to space at high altitude, only the heat absorbed at the ocean surface is at a higher frequency as compared to the heat returned to space which is at some what lower frequency but the amounts are the same.

11:35 am, June 24, 2005  

<< Alternative Energy Home Page