Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!
From: Steve Spence (sspence_at_beavercreekconsulting.com)
Date: 09/25/04
- Next message: Steve Spence: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Previous message: FEerguy9: "eer"
- In reply to: Mike Ackerman: "Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Next in thread: Mike Ackerman: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Reply: Mike Ackerman: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Reply: Tkalbfus1: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Reply: Fred B. McGalliard: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:42:21 -0400
Well, it's an element, not exactly a synfuel. Granted, a very expensive
element ...
"Mike Ackerman" <mackermNOSPAM@mailpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:2rji68F1b8ju1U1@uni-berlin.de...
> After much consideration, I've decided that "energy carrier" is a stupid
> term. It seems to be used by the pro-hydrogen advocates instead of the
> more descriptive term "synthetic fuel."
>
> What's wrong with "synthetic fuel": something which comes from a
> chemical reactor instead of a still? (and no nit-picking about
> cracking). Hydrogen peroxide is a synthetic fuel. Nitromethane is a
> synthetic fuel. Why not hydrogen?
>
> Mike Ackerman
>
- Next message: Steve Spence: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Previous message: FEerguy9: "eer"
- In reply to: Mike Ackerman: "Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Next in thread: Mike Ackerman: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Reply: Mike Ackerman: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Reply: Tkalbfus1: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Reply: Fred B. McGalliard: "Re: Stop saying "energy carrier"!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
