Using Oil for the Children: Take Two.

[Crissa]

Cotton takes more water (and intensive soil enrichment) to produce than other types of plant-based clothing. So no, finding alternatives is not stupid.

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

Crissa->

So why not simply develop a less water-intensive cotton? People have been improving crops for like ages through selective breeding.

It seems to me that people are developing stuff just for the sake of doing so.

Hence my question in the first thread. Monocrop agriculture is petroleum based. Without oil, we're going to have to radically rethink farming.

I don't that's really going to happen, though, until the price of food begins to escalate in proportion with increased oil costs. Then there'll be massive starvation until we can figure out a solution (if we can figure out a solution). If we can't... Then a lot of people are going to go hungry.

Transportation issues alone will be very bad for the agricultural industry. In old times, cities were relatively close to where the food production was. Nowadays, it isn't because of readily available transport. Lose the transport (because you lose the oil), and cities go hungry.

[Crissa]

Transport doesn't require oil.

Anyhow, it's highly difficult to make plants do something against their nature. Maybe someday, but it doesn't now.

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

Transport doesn't recall oil.

The primary method of shipping goods is by rail and by ship. Both rely very heavily on oil.

And you Americans even have these giant trucks and rigs.

Anyhow, it's highly difficult to make plants do something against their nature. Maybe someday, but it doesn't now.

-Crissa

If a Watermelon can be convinced not to have seeds and therefore be unable to reproduce (something definiely against its nature), I would say Selective Breeding is pretty convincing .

The problem with new plants is that it ignores the fact that most existing crops took many, many years before they were "mass-produceable". Corn's ancestor produced only tiny ears that were hardly fit for human consumption, and it was a long while before modern-day corn emerge.

By contrast, tinkering with existing plants may yield better results - because you don't have to start from scratch.

[Crissa]

But none of them require oil. Our biggest cross-country rails still in operations were electrified a hundred years ago. And all the engines in operation now are electric only, powered by generator cars. They totally can change power source - swap what they plug into.

Oil is cheap. But it isn't the only way.

Making a plant plus or minus a morphological feature is easy. Making it use less or more sun, or nutrients from the soil... I don't know if we've ever done that.

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

But none of them require oil. Our biggest cross-country rails still in operations were electrified a hundred years ago. And all the engines in operation now are electric only, powered by generator cars. They totally can change power source - swap what they plug into.

Oil is cheap. But it isn't the only way.

First of all, you ignored ships. Pretty much every cargo ship today is powered by oil. The only alternatives are going back to wind, going back to coal, or super-big ships with nuclear power.

Secondly, American rail lines are electrified, but the same does not apply to everyone. And a lot of your power is STILL supplied by oil.

Thirdly. Monster rigs. They use oil. And you can't turn those guys into solar powered rigs (although bio diesel may work.

Making a plant plus or minus a morphological feature is easy. Making it use less or more sun, or nutrients from the soil... I don't know if we've ever done that.

-Crissa

Make a plant minus all morphological features outside of what you actually need for the harvest. Most of the time we only use a fraction of the plant's total biomass for food or clothing - the rest going to waste. Sun, nutrients, and water all go into making these chaft parts.

Plants will always need sun, nutrients and water. It's a law of physics that their matter has to come from somewhere. But one can also selectively breed plants to have more of the useful parts and thus be much more efficient.

[Crissa]

They use oil, but oil is not required.

New ships are being made with vector propulsion pods; once again, they're powered by a generator.

Trucks only exist because the roads are subsidized and rails are not.

Energy has to come from somewhere, yes. But while we use oil now, there is no reason it cannot come from other sources. There are many ignored sources.

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

New ships are being made with vector propulsion pods; once again, they're powered by a generator.

The generator has to produce its own power. And aside from nuclear or coal power, there aren't any a lot of practical ways of generating power at sea.

[Prak]

...what about steam or turbine?

granted, either will need to use energy to start up, but it's better, if they can produce more energy than is used to move the ship, than just running on coal or oil or something.

[Zinegata]

...what about steam or turbine?

granted, either will need to use energy to start up, but it's better, if they can produce more energy than is used to move the ship, than just running on coal or oil or something.

Steam engines are powered by using heated coals to boil water. The boiled water turns into steam. The Steam is then used to drive the engine.

So this engine, by definition, needs to burn fossil fuels to heat water rapidly.

Turbines in ships are just a more efficient form of steam engine (it uses steam to spin fans which then power the ship).

[Prak]

there are other ways of generating heat.

[Zinegata]

there are other ways of generating heat.

But can they heat water rapidly enough to boil water in large quantities?

[Prak]

off the top of my head? I have no clue, but I'm sure something could be found.

[Zinegata]

The "other way" is to actually use a fission reactor to heat water, turn it into steam, and feed the steam into turbines for energy/propulsion.

From what I know of naval engineering, people have tried many alternatives. And in the end they decided "Okay, our only choices are sail, coal, oil, and nukes. Pick your poison".

Oil won out of all the choices, BTW, because it allowed for consistent cruising and yet the fuel was very easy to load unto the ship. With the added bonus of crewmen not glowing in the dark.

[Crissa]

Oil won out, yes.

So what?

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

The replacement should as much as possible be easy to load unto a ship and preferably not make the crew glow in the dark?

I thought I explained it pretty comprehensively to make this rather obvious.

[Crissa]

You didn't explain anything at all, actually.

Also, nuclear reactors don't make crewmen glow in the dark.

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

"Oil won out of all the choices, BTW, because it allowed for consistent cruising and yet the fuel was very easy to load unto the ship. With the added bonus of crewmen not glowing in the dark."

Again, I was laying out the attributes of successful shipboard powerplants. But you're being a bitch and seemingly implying that I'm an oil-lover (when my point is "Transport is screwed without oil").

As for crewmen glowing in the dark... it's a joke. On the problems and issues over nuclear power.

Properly maintained nuke plants don't make crewmen glow in the dark. But nuclear reactors are currently used mainly in US Navy ships, where they are indeed kept very safe by professional crews and guys with nuclear engineering degrees.

Nuke plants in other navies aren't as well-maintained. And are you really gonna entrust a nuke plant to some ship flagged out of Panama, crewed by a bunch of ex-Soviet sailors?

[Crissa]

US military crews do not have nuclear engineering degrees. They're trained monkeys.

I personally do not have control of whether Panama has a nuclear-powered ship. Nor does my country.

-Crissa

[Zinegata]

US military crews do not have nuclear engineering degrees. They're trained monkeys.

-Crissa

Not the whole crew of course. You're stupid for even thinking that.

But the Chief Engineer typically has at least some nuke engineers in his staff. And in a USN submarine, you can't be a skipper unless you have a nuclear engineering degree.

But still, you really want to give a Panama-flagged cargo ship a nuclear engine? With ex-Soviet crewmen? Who might go "Kekeke. We can make even more money by selling uranium to black market!"

[Crissa]

Whatever you want to believe.

-Crissa