Energy is a core component of technology. Functionally speaking, why wouldn't pic related work?
It would be cleaner than fossil fuels, cheaper than nuclear, more productive than solar/wind, and create new jobs.
Energy is a core component of technology. Functionally speaking, why wouldn't pic related work?
Nathaniel Sullivan
Other urls found in this thread:
John Lee
It's not cheaper, energy output is minuscule, and creating one will require more energy than it can produce while on garanty
Hudson Kelly
You need to feed the people that are generating the electricity. Nowadays solar panels are more efficient than plants, so even if the entirety of a plant was edible, it still would be less efficient than just using solar power.
Austin Cruz
You would literally get more energy by just burning the food meant for those people.
Dylan Perry
you're all idiots. millions of people use exercise bike every day in america and all the energy goes to waste
Gabriel Turner
Yeah but it would solve the obesity crisis.
>BMI over 30 and you aren't a bodybuilder? You must work at the power plant now.
Kayden Johnson
>why wouldn't pic related work?
What is the power output of one person? What fraction of that can be converted to electricity? How long can they sustain it?
Brody Phillips
How many Joules?
Christian Taylor
You would need more effort to move, that energy has to come from somewhere.
Robert Ortiz
With a very efficient (expensive) setup a person can comfortably sustain 75-100 Wh. In the US that averages to 1.5 cents per hour. Even if the entire contraption was free, just the effort of putting it up isn't worth it.
Ryan Davis
millions of people using exercise bikes wouldn't cover more than an extremely tiny fraction of the country's energy use, even if that energy from the bikes could be captured efficiently.
Levi Bailey
>a person can comfortably sustain 75-100 Wh
>sustain watt-hours
Do you have any idea what you're talking about?
David Morris
nuclear waste solar panels waste
wind turbine waste
fossil fuel pollution
we just start a project and we are already limited to not check if the source reaction cannot be improved
like a hydrogen fuel cell if you know how many different forms or subtractions of energy can be produced,
but nope, it's invented, it just needs some amelioration's basically ported on consumption but almost never on production of reactive forces
it is exactly as Karl Benz said on February 12, 1888
there is a consumption and power limit.
since humanity never looks forward we could never
increase
effectively
the yield of energy produced
Jose White
KK .. K...E..KK.K
Henry Perry
Thanksss OP i feel myself smarter now..
Daniel Gomez
At least he didn't say "sustain 100 W/h", as that's even less sane.
Aiden Jenkins
You watched that one episode of Rick & Morty, didn't you user?
>CAPTCHA: RWW0D
Jose Rodriguez
Or we could just go full nuclear with state of the art reactors and to set back the incoming energy crisis.
Carter Watson
but then the ecojustice fags can't control us
Brody Sanders
thermodynamicall speaking, a person can't output more energy than is in the food they eat. There's a reason we don't generate electrical power from food.
Ryan Russell
Olympic Cyclist Vs. Toaster: Can He Power It?
youtube.com
This guy's legs are fuckin out of control
Gabriel Murphy
what episode?
Ryder Thomas
It would work just fine, but you have to feed all of those people. The totality of the logistical chain is quite immense for keeping human labor.