sci.energy

Eric Gisin wrote:

> "Dan Bloomquist" wrote
> > Eeyore wrote:
> >
> >>>And I posted such back on 7/30 in this very thread. Graham refuses to
> >>>get it so he makes it about me.
> >>
> >> About 'powered roadways' ? The idea (whilst technically feasible) is fundamentally
> >> ridiculous for a zillion practical reasons..
> >
> > Now I get it. You are a dumb shit. Go back and read the reference. Quit being a lazy fuck so to
> > suit your agenda.......
>
> No trollboy, YOU post a summary of this idiotic idea for US.
> I'm not going read every URL posted by net kooks who don't understand science.

The interesting thing about the 'powered roadway' idea is that it can be shown to work in isolation
on short test tracks and the like. What is less well known are its inherent inefficiencies,
limitations and losses that make it energy wasteful and difficult to use and of course building such
an infrastructure would be massively wasteful of valuable resources.

It's not unlike maglev trains in some respects (technically do-able at great expense) but worse.

Graham