h a l f b a k e r yThe best idea since raw toast.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Normal trains, albeit shorter than usual, towed by massive teams
of
seasoned sled and/or draft dogs. I wonder if this could be
operated at less
expense than a normal train (ie, are the dogs more food efficient
than the engines are fuel efficient?) but it would provide gainful
employment for
working
dogs who will soon be out of work in
places that are warming with climate change, produce zero
emissions, making our air cleaner, and be easier to stop since
they wont be going much faster than 25 MPH.
Free Cat
http://www.google.c...1t:429,r:3,s:0,i:76
[UnaBubba, May 15 2012]
[link]
|
| |
or Fenrir wheel train, like a very big hamster wheel..."the train is approaching the last station, Ragnarok, all change all change.." |
|
| |
Newfoundlands are well known for their
prodigious abilities as both draft dogs and
self-propelled kitchen waste disposal systems. |
|
| |
As are Swiss Mountain Dogs. I can personally attest to their
pulling prowess, as I am currently in the process of attempting
to leash train one. |
|
| |
I had seasoned dog and a mug of draft in asia once. |
|
| |
To boggan or not to boggan? |
|
| |
// are the dogs more food efficient than the engines are
fuel efficient? //
|
|
| |
That's why we use engines. |
|
| |
I thought we used engines because they're faster and smaller. |
|
| |
Probably. Though it's far more romantic to use
dogs... or sheep, if you're Welsh or from New
Zealand. |
|
| |
[21Quest], some years ago I read that the energy-conversion efficiency of muscle tissue is about 45%. That's definitely better than most types of engines that we build (well, Stirling engines can also be 45% efficient). |
|
| |
Faster, smaller, more efficient. Energy conversion isn't the
whole equation; also consider application and stamina.
You'll have to look hard to
find a source of motive power more efficient and versatile
than petroleum. Dogs don't even come close. |
|
| |
What's the caloric content of a dog? |
|
| |
From Wikipedia (Muscle): "The efficiency of human muscle has been measured (in the context of rowing and cycling) at 18% to 26%. The efficiency is defined as the ratio of mechanical work output to the total metabolic cost, as can be calculated from oxygen consumption. This low efficiency is the result of about 40% efficiency of generating ATP from food energy, losses in converting energy from ATP into mechanical work inside the muscle, and mechanical losses inside the body."
|
|
| |
So the efficiency of converting ATP to work could be about 0.45, but food to work is far less efficient than that overall. |
|
| |
Well, that's human muscle. What about canine muscle? |
|
| |
It's always easier to find data for humans than for any other species; but the efficiencies of metabolic processes tend to be fairly similar for all mammals, so dogs should be in about the same range. The overall conversion efficiency of useful work to food energy will be somewhat lower still, once you account for the basal metabolic processes. |
|
| |
The best thing about dogs is that each one will work
like a dog. |
|
| |
Stirling engines can also be 45% efficient)
|
|
| |
I'm not even going to mention the 100% efficient Sterling Engine..
|
|
| |
Basically, the reason we have engines is the same reason that prompted people to invent the bicycles. Engines are more reliable than animals and there's nowhere to store a horse in the average city dweller's residence. It's not progress, per se, more a lack of storage space. |
|
| |
With horses, there is also the ... "pollution" ... issue. |
|
| |
There's also nowhere to store a train engine in a typical city
dweller's residence, so no loss there. I'm not talking about
replacing all vehicles with dogs... just some of the trains.
Regarding food efficiency, I'm certain the percentage could be
increased with a specialized diet. |
|
| |
Overall this could be more efficient I think. Grow the dogfood next to the track and they can eat on the go. Compared to the trouble it takes to get the fossil fuel to a usable state, My money is on the dogs. |
|
| |
//Regarding food efficiency, I'm certain the percentage could be increased with a specialized diet.//
|
|
| |
I'm afraid not. Those figures relate mechanical work to respiration as measured by oxygen consumption, and therefore effectively exclude energy consumed by digestion (which mainly happens outside the exercise period). Poor quality food could make the overall efficiency even worse, but those are already best case figures.
|
|
| |
To use an analogy, it's like directly measuring the fuel efficiency of a car using oxygen sensors and a dynamometer, then hoping to improve that efficiency by starting with higher quality crude oil at the refinery.
|
|
| |
Of course, efficiency is not always the only consideration. If the dogs were, say, scavenging for road-kill that would otherwise go to waste, at their own expense, then they would effectively be supplying free work. |
|
| |
// scavenging for road-kill that would
otherwise go to waste //
|
|
| |
It doesn't go to 'waste' - if you implemented
this, [Alterother] would starve …
|
|
| |
Then again, there might also be a downside… |
|
| |
By careful use of grammar - namely, //roadkill that would otherwise go to waste// rather than //roadkill, which would otherwise go to waste// - I imply a condition, not a fact. A lunch is not free that is ripp'd from the mouth of the needy. |
|
| |
I can see the scam now.
"For the low low price of $99.95 we Absolutely Positively guarantee to train your dog in a single day or your money back." |
|
| |
That reminds me of an episode of John Stossell's old consumer
reports show where a scammer was selling a 'solar-powered
clothes dryer' for several hundred dollars. What the dupes who
ordered one of these things got was a vinyl clothesline. |
|
| |
Another small detail I might add is that a fully-loaded
freight train cannot be controlled by mechanical braking
alone. Without the dynamic braking ability of a
locomotive, your 10,000-dog team would get, er, overrun.
|
|
| |
Personal to [8th]: don't knock it 'til you try it. There's good
eating to be had if you get there while it's still fresh. |
|
| |
'specially if your open-minded over the definition of "fresh" |
|
| |
By 'fresh', I meant 'only run over by three or four pulp
trucks', and I was kidding. I've never eaten roadkill, but I
will skin it if the pelt is in reasonable condition. Waste
not, etc. |
|
| |
I've eaten roadkill rabbits. Because of their size, they often get struck on the head, and instantly killed, with no damage to the torso. |
|
| |
Roadkill rabbits... I'll post you a few. I ran over three
of them this morning. |
|
| |
Roadkill ribbits aka "Cane Toads" |
|
| |
No, these were rabbits. There were a lot of them on
the road into town this morning, just before 5am. I
also saw two foxes, probably chasing the rabbits.
|
|
| |
Cane toads have slowed down, with the cooler
weather. I've only seen one this week. |
|
| |
Roadkill in my neck of the woods consists of deer, cat, squirrel,
marmot, cat, porcupine, occasionally a few baby quail, and cat.
Did I mention cat? Lots of
dead cats in this town. |
|
| |
I got a great moose hide a couple of years ago. Best
roadkill score ever--as a bonus, I wasn't the one who hit it! |
|
| |
//Lots of dead cats in this town.//
|
|
| |
Its not like they can just decide to leave. |
|
| |
Dead cat = Free cat. <link> |
|
| |