@AlthalusTheThief
Seems like you didn't quite read my post; I think we're arguing the same thing here :)

@Gad Get Granted, if you had such a thing as "eternal free energy" you could use that to heat up the earth as much as you wanted. Hell, you could recreate the big bang if you desired.
But my point remains - the average human power consumption in 2004 was ~15 TW. The power of sunlight hitting the earth is more than 10000 times greater (~175 PW). Increasing the absorption of the atmosphere by a single percent would be pretty bad for global warming. Generating more heat on earth is a drop in the bucket compared to that .

@(Unverified) Sorry, that's not how global warming works. The cause is extra sunlight trapped by atmospheric CO2, not the actual heat produced while burning fuel (or doing work in general). The amount of energy in sunlight hitting the earth is HUGE compared to the energy stored in all the world's fuel reserves and just capturing a small fraction of that can lead to far more warming than any number of engines.

@psylence You forgot your sarcasm tags. I hope...

Perhaps just Mr Noisycam?

Looks like some kind of old radiator from pulled out from a dump. At least they're helping with scrap metal recycling and I don't doubt its effectiveness, but how about cleaning it?

No.

Why not? Sounds like a win-win situation to me. Sony gets their money and we get reasonably-sized PS3s.

@ Master Bruce
That's probably true, but in this case 2/3 of Engadget posters couldn't be much more correct.
Petroleum, food, textile, paper, medicine, microchips.... by the kind of technologies that any of these industries (and pretty much any other industry out there) use, our entire lives should be "morally unacceptable". Nanotech might have its dangers, but this sounds a lot like biased surveying.

80% or so made sense, just thought I might be able to learn a thing or two.