Back in the late 40's or early 50's, The Model Railroader had an article about essentially live steam locos in O gauge that used dry ice for power rather than a steam boiler. Does anyone here know of anybody who has done this? Despite the threat of contributing to global warming by powering a model loco with a chunk of solid CO2 in a sealed tender cannister, it's a very interesting idea to me. Add modern radio control, rather than the crude controls back then, and you'd have a small scale backyard "steam" RR without blowers, silver soldering, etc...
a) any live steam engine can be run on dry ice if the rate of evaporation is high enough. b) there are risks of personal injury associated with handling dry ice. c) you won't contribute to global warming by running a locomotive on dry ice, as the dry ice just uses CO2 that already exists. d) OTOH, the refrigeration machinery used to produce dry ice will contribute to CO2 production
Uh, *too much* CO2 *IS* bad. See Venus for an example. And if we don't cut down the way we're loading the atmosphere with it, it's going to be *very* bad for our descendants.
And you just heard this from a Republican who's not too crazy about Al Gore.
(Free hint: reality is reality, even when it falls trippingly from the tongue of someone you cordially dislike.)
Hi Roger, the act of freezing the CO2 is what would produce more warming! No mechanical action is 100% efficient so more energy must be put into the action of freezing than can be given out in returning the CO2 to room temperature. The amounts of carbon and oxygen on Earth are fairly constant, ignoring the odd nuclear reaction, space shot and asteroids falling to earth. I wasn't around 1000 years ago so I can't comment about the comparisons between the atmospheres.
In that case, it makes more sense to use compressed air, as with the pneumatic locos Porter and others made for industrial use. But I'm not sure that would scale down to O or even G without having very high pressure tanks. Maybe if you're a good enough machinist to make something that small that doesn't leak much, but I'm not...
Maybe vinegar and baking soda would work- when I was a kid (long ago), I had a toy sub that used that to shoot missiles which would be a product liability lawyer's dream today :)
Sorry about starting a global warming thread- that wasn't my intent, but I should have known better.
On the bright side, our fossil fuel sources will eventually be depleted bringing things back to normal, whatever that is. Perhaps road apples will become fashionable again.
Compressed air would be simpler, safer, and cheaper in the long run. Unfortunately, it's also noisy. Of course, someone may complain that generating the electricity would create more CO2. Well, so would the computers which the responses to you were typed on. In fact, nearly everything associated with electricity is about dissipated heat, including model railroading. Bummer.
Global warming isn't attributed to any single event. Yeah, one can blame fossil fuels. Take a look at your neighbourhood. Chances are it is heated by fossil fuels, built of wood to some extent, and the only green is grass. The most efficient filters of CO2 are trees. How many do you see standing, and are seasonal? Wood is also an alternative heating source. Above that, all plants release some CO2 as well for growth.
You asked a legitimate question. It's unfortunate that some got carried away. It's a common problem with most threads.
A more serious green house gas is methane, guess what those road apples give off? An animal population sufficient to produce half of what we depend on fossil fuel for would produce dramatic consequences for the environment, probably all bad for humans.
If there is a tipping point and we pass it then it doesn't matter that we are no longer contributing to the imbalance.
The earth is warming, the historical record (recent and past) confirm this. If you don't want to believe that then no amount of evidence will convince you. It doesn't matter why the temp is rising, the facts show that it is.
We have no plan to deal with the warming and its consequences. This stupid on mankinds part even if mankind hasn't contributed to the problem.
Remove the current contribution being made by the USA and we are still on a collision course with a very different enironment.
As for too much CO2, remember H2O is a basic requirement for human survival but, too much of it can kill you.
Paul
-- All hail the savior algae.
-- Excuse me, I'll be right back. I have to log onto a server in Romania and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information before they suspend my accounts.
Um, I just saw a report mentioned in mainstream media that said that it's been going up since the 1970's, when they started taking counts, and that it's the highest in I forget how many thousand years (this article was a week or two ago).
So how would the media know it's the highest in several thousand years. BTW a thousand years agoi or so CO2 was 17 times current level and the tempearture was dropping.
Source a book called "Earth" by Dorling Kindersley. :) My Website:
17 times current level (around 400ppm) would put it at about 6800 ppm (parts per million). Where in the book you cite is that figure given?
BTW, Dorling Kindersley is a publisher of reference books in several series (eg Eyewitness Books, DK Guides, etc.) The book cited by you was edited by J Luhr.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.