Alternative fuel

[Gardner Denver]

Wood anyone?

[Vitoc]

I'm sure burning more wood is great for the environment too. :\

I never thought I'd see the day when "burning wood" would be considered unlawful.  I mean really, how screwed up is America with their priorities?

Shall we mention all the extra coal we'd have to burn to provide electricity for electric powered cars, assuming they ever become popular?  I can't see them becoming popular so long as it takes severals hours just to recharge the stupid car, but people seem willing to forego practicality and common sense because they've been fooled into thinking they're saving the planet.

I'm all for forward progress, but these diversions into "green" technologies like hybrids and electric cars are a waste of time, money, and resources.

[Vitoc]

From what I have read, most electric cars (if not all of them)  don't take a few hours to recharge.  There are ways to quick charge batteries, and again from my understanding , that's what they use.

  As for one article I read had a "fillup station" for electric vehicles, and I know they aren't expecting people to sit around there for hours waiting for it to recharge.

      Who said it was unlawful?  I just said 8,000,000 cars or more, burning wood, can't be the greatest thing.  As for one, we would start going through trees a lot faster as well.   

Tesla Roadster - Representing the very latest in electric car technology

A full recharge of the battery system requires 3? hours using the High Power Connector which supplies 70 amp, 240 volt electricity; in practice, recharge cycles usually start from a partially charged state and require less time. A fully charged ESS stores approximately 53 kWh of electrical energy at a nominal 375 volts and weighs 992 lb (450 kg).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster

For starters, 70 amps!?!? In your home!?!?!?  And 3.5 hours?  Kind of a long time to wait at a gas/fillup station, no?  Don't believe me?  Go check out all the electric cars; they're all the same.  Recharging batteries has always been and is still a very slow process.

EV-1

Approximately 5-1/2 to 6 hours are required for a charge from zero to complete using a 220-volt charger.

http://www.evchargernews.com/CD-A/gm_ev1_web_site/faq/faq.htm

Next up, regarding lawfulness of burning wood...

Officials in charge of air quality in Los Angeles and surrounding counties have banned the use of wood-burning fireplaces during certain high-pollution days.

http://www.newser.com/story/21063/socal-bans-wood-burning-on-bad-air-days.html

Care to guess what's just around the corner?  Yeah, we're talking an all-out ban on wood burning within the next decade or two.  The rest of the nation is already being forced to adopt CAFE standards, thanks in large part to Obamuhh.  I never thought I'd see the day when it would be illegal to burn wood in your fireplace, but here we are.

[Trios]

Officials in charge of air quality in Los Angeles and surrounding counties have banned the use of wood-burning fireplaces during certain high-pollution days.

They do that in the Seattle area as well. When the air gets stagnant they institute a 'burn-ban' in two phases, phase 1 you can't burn from your normal fireplace, phase two you can't burn in a normal wood stove. In order to burn wood in a phase two burn ban it needs to be either your single source of heat, or an EPA certified stove that is essentially 'smokeless' (which, by the by, is the kind of stove I'm installing in my house at the current time). I'm not a big fan of it, but if it makes people install the better smokeless stoves, its not that bad of a thing; they burn hotter, burn the wood more completely, and are better for the environment. No real downside to that, is there?

[Vitoc]

They do that in the Seattle area as well. When the air gets stagnant they institute a 'burn-ban' in two phases, phase 1 you can't burn from your normal fireplace, phase two you can't burn in a normal wood stove. In order to burn wood in a phase two burn ban it needs to be either your single source of heat, or an EPA certified stove that is essentially 'smokeless' (which, by the by, is the kind of stove I'm installing in my house at the current time). I'm not a big fan of it, but if it makes people install the better smokeless stoves, its not that bad of a thing; they burn hotter, burn the wood more completely, and are better for the environment. No real downside to that, is there?

If they cost more and/or a company has a patent on that type of stove, I do have a problem with that.  If they're cheap and there's competition to build them, that's fine.

[Trios]

No patent, and I don't know about 'cheap.' I don't think it costs all that much more to design a stove this way (essentially they just let in some fresh air at the top of the stove which commences the smoke to burn some more). The top-of-the-line Regency model I'm buying is about $2500 with the chimney, installing myself. I honestly haven't looked at anything else.

[Vitoc]

What do you do out in the woods on a camping trip?  Gather around the lantern?  At least until propane becomes the next target...