Renner

That is not Kyles car, his is a GT-R. The car listed is a GTS, which is a single turbo, 2.5L, and RWD. A GTS is not really worth it at all IMO.

Mike Vale's (local guy) 780rwhp 300ZX was featured in Modified magazine last year. I'm not sure if he is on here, but he is an IPS customer, and the AEM EMS was tuned by yours truly. This car has been around for a while, it was first worked on by Force Fed back in the day. Here are some of Hua’s pictures of the car, I think his turned out better then the ones the magazine photographer took. http://dieseldigital.net/media/2005/0917_Z32/

Exactly the opposite, there is a very strong demand for mechanical engineers currently. My department has hired 6 within the last 12 months, and plans to add several more. However, there are enough exceptional applicants that employers are able to be even more selective. So, you either need a very strong GPA (all 3 of our current new interview candidates are at a 3.9+ GPA), a graduate degree, or you need to have experience in specific areas that companies are looking for. For example, work with finite element analysis is a good qualification to have and will help get your foot in the door at the bigger companies. That is why I asked the thread starter about his resume and his core engineering GPA.

Why wouldn't the other companies hire you? You should probably figure that out first so you can improve before applying someplace else. How is your resume, is your engineering core GPA low? It looks like Battelle currently has job listings for both co-ops and interns within the EDMS department: https://recruit.battelle.org/ENG/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=jobprofile&szOrderID=13792&szCandidateID=0&szSearchWords=&szReturnToSearch=1 https://recruit.battelle.org/ENG/candidates/default.cfm?szCategory=jobprofile&szOrderID=13793&szCandidateID=0&szSearchWords=&szReturnToSearch=1 If you are interested, I suggest you address the weak areas that caused the other companies to pass on you, and then apply online ASAP as the co-op/intern spots here are pretty competitive to get into. You can also PM me if you have any questions. Good luck. Brett

http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76715

A $4000 90-96 300ZX non-turbo will typically have higher miles and most likely require a bit of money and work to maintain. If you are mechanically inclined, this is not much of an issue. If you have to pay for labor, it will probably nickel and dime you to death. If you have money for mods, spend it on a newer/lower mileage car instead. Save up and get the nicest one you can find, it will be worth it. I have owned a 91TTZ and a 94TTZ, loved them both. I will probably buy another one someday, clean ones are getting harder to find though.

Apparently the members of CR do, since this thread discussing buying a community CR dyno already has 300+ views. http://www.columbusracing.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33966

As of 2003 renewables accounted for only ~7% of total US energy production. Hate to break it to you, but by the year 2025, that number is expected to increase by a whopping 1%. On a percentage basis, Nuclear contributions are expected to decrease. Fossil fuel based generation methods will still account for around 75% of our needs. Don’t take my word for it, look at the research conducted by the Department of Energy yourself: http://www.netl.doe.gov/KeyIssues/images/chart-5b_sm.jpg http://www.netl.doe.gov/ Thinking that renewable + nuclear generation are somehow going to displace fossil fuel based power generation in the next ~20 years is nothing more then wishful thinking at best. Saying, “well we can build this or do that” doesn’t do squat for the reality of what is actually being done. So I’m not implying a thing, I’m quoting the currently published data by the DOE. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the alternatives, that’s why I am working on these projects. In fact these numbers show even more the importance of advancing the technology we are working with. However, I have done some background research on these areas, so I have a realistic view of how much work it really is going to take for us to quell our fossil fuel dependency. So once again, even in the next 18 years, even if you DOUBLE the projected capacity for nuclear and renewable power generation, you are still going to be using fossil fuels at the highest percentage, and that will still be at a higher energy cost if used for large scale electrolysis to push an H2 infrastructure. Just wishing it to be otherwise certainly doesn’t make it so. If you have any actual documentation by the DOE showing info to the contrary, I would certainly like to see it.

You guys keep conveniently ignoring two key words I have typed twice now. I guess I’ll just put it in bold this time, after this I give up: large scale. As in, a viable enough method to provide the massive amount of H2 needed to support a hydrogen economy/infrastructure in the US. I guess I didn’t spell it out enough the second time even, so I will give it one more try. Nuclear power only provides enough electricity to meet about 20% of the power needs of the US. This doesn’t even include tacking on the power needs of automobiles if they are also dependent on H2 derived from electrolysis. So once again, if you are going to try and extract large amounts of H2 from water through electrolysis, enough to meet the current energy needs of the US, you will have to burn fossil fuels. There just isn’t a large enough Nuclear infrastructure in place to support those kinds of energy needs even if every single plant was dedicated solely to H2 generation through electrolysis 24/7. Get it yet? If not, tell me then Eli, where do you think the extra capacity is going to come from seeing as how it takes about 5-10 years to build a single complete nuclear plant? You can’t just say “use nuclear power!”, and then not think even 1 step further down the line to see if that is a viable solution to meet even a fraction of demands. Unfortunatly even without the efficiency loss stackup, it wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket to satisfy even our current energy needs. Looks like I placed too much faith in your reading abilities, as well as your fundamental understanding of the overall problem at hand. Even funnier, posting info contrary to Eli’s, even if I attained it from actual real world experience, equals the ego card being played every time. Why again is your screen name Mensan? What exactly is it you are trying to advertise?

Yes, it is. I am talking about burning fossil fuels to produce the electricity needed for electrolysis. Electrolysis to extract H2 on a large scale needs large amounts of electricity. Currently about 75% of the US’ electricity is generated from burning some sort of fossil fuel (coal, oil, natural gas, etc). These plants run in the 35-40% efficiency range at best. When you tack onto that the electrolysis process as well, which is only about 50-60% efficient, your energy losses are that much greater. So that is what my statement was referring to. Due to the stackup of the various thermal losses primarily, the overall “energy cost” is greater with electrolysis then with using the electricity from the fossil fuel process directly for power, and is a key reason why electrolysis is not currently more widespread to extract H2 in large quantities. I never said a thing about nuclear generation, but the same concept holds true for it anyway. The energy cost of using the electricity from a nuclear plant to run an electrolysis process is still greater then using the electricity to power items directly due to the efficiency losses. In the context of what we are discussing here, the purpose of electrolysis is to extract hydrogen atoms from water. H2 is the end goal. If you have already created H2 by other means, your goal has been reached, an electrolysis process is not needed. Yes I know, thanks for the fuel cell update, it is after all one of the many things I work on every week. Both our 2kW and our 7.5kW systems that we are currently running/demonstrating use a reformer, not an electrolyzer. Your last sentence shows you are still a little confused though. You are proposing that H2 be used in a fuel cell to produce electricity, which in turn is used to extract more H2, in some endless cycle where the efficiency losses of each system aren’t a concern. It doesn’t work that way.

Unfortunately this story is completely misleading. The all important quote: "We take water and electricity and break it down through our unique electrolysis process" That torch, and that engine, are not powered by water by any means, they are powered by hydrogen. The water is just the storage medium for the hydrogen which they are combusting. The hydrogen atoms are separated from the water molecules through electrolysis. This isn’t really anything new, and there is a reason why you aren’t seeing more of it. Electrolysis takes large amounts of energy. You would have to burn more fossil fuels to produce the electricity needed for large scale hydrogen generation through electrolysis, then you would have used if you had just burned the fossil fuels to make power directly. Possibly he has developed a more efficient form of electrolysis, that indeed would be worthwhile. But it’s certainly not a “water powered engine” as the local news hype story would like you to believe.

That reminds me of the night when Cold Air did a big smokey burnout in the easton parking lot, and then Andrew beat him from a dig in the evo. I think you and I had a dig race behind Polaris too, which resulted in all of us getting chased by the mall security guards. Pretty sure there is a vid of that one somewhere.

I have no problem with talking about my accident at all, it's your weak attempt to be clever that I was responding to. And I'm not jumping on you, I'm laughing at you. You had posted in this thread 5 times, funny that the first 4 of them made not one mention of my accident that happened 4 years ago, until just after I posted of course. Which reminds me, you also posted in the last IPS thread 27 times, despite (as usual) having absolutely no involvement with the situation at all. It's obvious you have a chip on your shoulder about something, but seriously man, try getting a life of your own... I knew you were going to bring up your little insurance conspiracy theory stuff again too (damn I should have bet somebody on it ), and it’s still just as hilarious as it was before. I told my insurance company I hit a pole, and that no other cars were involved. Guess what, the insurance appraiser checked out the car top to bottom, said "Yep, it hole a pole", recorded it as a single car accident, and that was the end of it. But hey, don’t take my word for it. By all means, continue to remind everybody that you are still completely clueless by explaining this little theory of yours some more.

The funny parts about that night: Somebody telling Berto to get in the back of Ant’s blazer for more traction. Jen’s brother coming in his truck and yanking the car out of the weeds like it was a matchbox car. ~4 years after it happened, bringing it up is still the best insult material Mark has. Winner.

Wow, it’s funny how many times my name has come up in this thread. I think my member number was something in the 20’s, I remember that I joined within the first week or 2 of the board being up. Back then I was an undergrad in mechanical engineering at OSU and I worked at Auto Assets. Graduated a few years ago and do R&D for Battelle now. Probably going back for my masters in M.E. soon. Other funny memories: 1. Walking the red laser on 270 in my first Z, and then getting killed by Mullen in the Stealth from a dig at Charter the same night. 2. Looking for races in the Kmart lot and walking up to Zavier in the RX7. He proceeded to tell me that he ran a 12.1 at the track (his car was still an auto then). Jeff later told me that his car really ran 14’s. 3. Racing Alex in his RX7, blowing by that cop on 315, and then realizing Alex was in one of my classes the following Monday. I introduced myself by saying “hey, I think we raced this past weekend”. I did a partial tranny rebuild for that car in the family room of his apartment while sitting on white leather couches. 4. Racing supra Mark to 150+ three times in a row out on 40 while everybody stood at the finish line. Tommy said it was like “being passed by a pair of F-16’s” 5. Installing Anthony’s Procharger kit in the garage of Alex’s house, and then Ant scaring the shit out of himself when we took it on it’s first test drive. 6. Jeff in the VR4 destroying Howard from a dig, I think Buck was the flagger. 7. Jeff betting Howard $1000 that he wouldn't run 11's, and Howard did. 8. Anthony promoting me to be a moderator, and then years later banning me altogether when we got into “the argument” 9. Not too long after that (while I was still banned) Tilley talked Ant into a roll race with his Cobra. I called Tilley and asked him to let me know when it was going down. He did, I caught up to the crowd on the street, and then proceeded to walk the green firechicken about a half dozen times. 10. My favorite races to date were against Mike in the black LPE TT vette, back when Z #2 was at its prime before I sold it. Tilley was in on that one too, Sam's red Vette was the camera car with Hua riding shotgun.