Los Angeles may be packed with Priuses and boast green celebrity residents like DiCaprio and Diaz, but it's still the biggest gas guzzling city in the nation, comprising nearly 30 percent of California's gasoline consumption. Since the BP oil spill, however, government officials and Angelenos alike are saying enough is enough: Mayor Villaraigosa recently unveiled his controversial 30/10 transit plan to speed up construction of 12 big-ticket public transportation projects to 10 years from 30; earlier this month, Hollywood actress Q'orianka Kilcher was arrested in front of the White House after chaining herself to a fence and covering her body in black paint to represent oil.
Bold moves by both, but on a more realistic level, how can our smoggiest city move past its addiction to oil once and for all? See what environmental leaders, policymakers, and eco celebs (including Kilcher herself) had to say at yesterday's LA Get Off Oil Day rally.
WATCH:
Follow Jennifer Grayson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jennigrayson
By the way, there are a number of candidates for the next revolutionary energy technology - one of the most promising is the "BlackLight Process" which consumes hydrogen to produce heat at 200 times the amount you can get from lighting it on fire. Another one I like is Dr Venter is working with Exxon/Mobile to genetically modify an organism to convert carbon dioxide to methane, which could allow coal-fired power plants to turn their emissions into fuel or electricity profitably.
LA County has a population of 10,363,000 as of 2008. California's 2008 population is 36,756,000. So for a total of 28% of the state's population, the county uses 27% of the gasoline. Statistically average. Why the hyperbole?
http://daphne.palomar.edu/calenvironment/smog.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inversion_(meteorology)
Save money, cut the deficit, employ everyone, cut energy dependence:
Immediately order energy retrofits for all gov buildings.
Rooftop PV Solar, Offshore wind, and Waste Bio char, can supply the worlds energy and fuel needs: cleanly, safely, Forever, within 12 years and cheaper in the long run 2-6 cents now, and 26$ per barrel bio oils.
http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/solar_panels.htm
about 1$ per Wp solar panels, new.
install solar plants for about $1.30 per watt, compared with an industry average of about $1.75, according to Hardy." http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=a7K1FZoNgJ0w
Wind: “between two and six cents today, depending on location.12 Wind power approaches competitiveness with conventional generation at this price point. “
http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/binaries/wind%20issue%20brief_FINAL.pdf
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/BiofBioproBioref%203,%20547-562,%202009%20Laird.pdf
26$ per barrel bio oil from waste bio char.
What a trooper to see you out in the hot LA sun with a baby in the oven ;D
(GreenTwithTamara.TV will have another video from LA Get Off Oil Day later in the week.)
Meanwhile, check out the "Green T" video from City Hall yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/greentwithtamara#p/c/1E636953F4BA9B79/0/W8IgoRG1-sk
And also see more about the Mayor's plan and Measure R from the Los Angeles TV show "Metro Motion" here:
METRO MOTION: http://www.metro.net/news/pages/metro-motion/
Episode: http://www.youtube.com/tvstarfish#p/u/6/o-GOG_5sqbs
And "Green T" talks about being "car-free" since 2001:
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgjrw95j_1174gn22nvf4
Can you say hypocrite?
See Moving Beyond Oil and Running on Water at http://www.aesopinstitute.org
Accelerating their birth with 24/7 development is difficult but possible.
The technologies are hard to believe as they challenge long-held beliefs among scientists and engineers, but as National laboratories and independent tests take place a paradigm shift can be anticipated.
A barrel of water can replace 200 barrels of oil when used to create fractional Hydrogen. BlackLight Power has an extensive website detailing their approach. A recent additional covering Motive Power outlines how they see it applied to transportation.
Our own work disagrees with their theoretical analysis but we both agree that the ratio of water to oil is correct.
And there is much more. See the Aesop Institute site and imagine Los Angeles leading the way.
Sell your contraption at QVC or Home Shopping Network. They have a lot more credibility than you and I know they will take no nonsense from you.
There is the Hydrino Study Group, an assembly of useful morons (to Mills, Roarty, and Goldes). From their website:
question (by dcampen)
It is unfortunate that Mills does not have this 2002 paper available on the BLP website:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2860(02)00355-1
By putting 30 watts into a simple mixture of helium-hydrogen Mills was getting 300 watt output and a power density of 30 MW/cubic meter. Has he ever explained why he can't make a power generator from this? What is his need for these new exotic fuels when a simple mixture of helium and hydrogen would give such high power densities?
response (by VelvetPoster): Helium is a very expensive and very finite resource.
VelvetPoster's response is incorrect since first, helium can be recirculated around and helium is cheap enough tobe available at mom and pop stores. Mills and company have be switching to sodium, potassium, helium, nickel, etc..
No success.
The report (TechnicalPresentation021710.pdf) on http://www.american-reporter.com/ is just a lot of rehashed publicity showing spectra results easily explained by crystal field theory. When science is not on your side (you can do a lot of fancy math and hand-jiving but Mother Nature has the last say), appeal to authority and bring out the celebrities: "The company has assembled a formidable board of directors that include a former head of Westinghouse, a top federal nuclear energy official, ..." The American Reporter is another left-wingnut rag. Show us something from, say, National Science Foundation or the American Physical Society.
Garret Moddel from colorado.edu have debunked all this ZPE wet dreams in his paper "Assessment of proposed electromagnetic quantum vacuum energy extraction methods" (xxx.lanl.gov). Unfortunately for himself, who has aUS patent “Quantum vacuum energy extraction,” Patent 7379286, he did not understand the physics of EM surface waves on Casimir tubes; thus his scheme is worthless. After exchanging a couple of emails, Moddel admitted to me that his patent was a mistake. Sensible people becoming silly.
As I said before, I emailed Rowan. The faculty at Rowan were tight-mouthed and referred me to Black Light Power for any discussion. They are backing away from BLP claims that they confirmed hydrinos.