Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected
From: Arnold Walker (arnold_at_netdot.com)
Date: 06/03/04
- Next message: Frank Scrooby: "Re: Post-petroleum World?"
- Previous message: Arnold Walker: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Maybe in reply to: Bill Ward: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Next in thread: Corey: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Reply: Corey: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 03:01:23 -0500
"Lazarus Cain" <rspeaking@aol.com> wrote in message
news:bb6ea893.0405240717.2cc0bb1c@posting.google.com...
> Anthony Matonak <res04ijs@gte.net> wrote in message
news:<40A1E90C.5060305@gte.net>...
> > Robert Calvert wrote:
> > > A couple of years ago (I think it was) I read something on some
website that
> > > I didn't think too much about until recently. According to this
website, if
> > > hydrogen was produced using water, electrolyses and wind generated
> > > electricity using today's technology, hydrogen would cost the gasoline
> > > equivalent of a little over $3 a gallon.
> > ...
> >
> > There are a lot of problems with the idea of a hydrogen economy. The
> > main one is that hydrogen is a lousy medium for storage or transport
> > of energy. We have a variety of alternatives that are so dramatically
> > better, safer, cheaper that making hydrogen the main one is bizarre.
> >
> > That said, I'm somewhat at a loss to where the drive for a hydrogen
> > economy has come from. Clearly there are better alternatives on a
> > general scale so I can only think that there is a niche application
> > whose needs are driving the decision.
> >
> > Here is a theory that is completely unsupported. Let's say that we
> > want to wage war on a global scale and oil has already basically
> > run out. Tanks, trucks, aircraft and all the mechanized military
> > equipment would need a power source. Nuclear reactors leap to mind
> > as a good one since they don't need to be refueled except every
> > few years, the fuel can be reprocessed almost endlessly and the
> > military already has heavy investment in smallish reactors to power
> > their ships. These reactors are mainly idle when the ship is sitting
> > still, which they do most of the time when fighting is going on.
> > The reactors could be used to produce a fuel for the tanks, trucks,
> > aircraft and even the main propellant for their guns, in the form of
> > hydrogen. I can't think of many alternatives to fossil fuels which
> > would give as much advantage to a military as this combined nuclear
> > and hydrogen setup.
> >
> > So, what do you think? How DO we wage war in a world without
> > fossil fuels?
> >
> > Anthony
>
> Good question? How do you wage war and dominate the world without fossil
fuel?
> Can't be done, can it?
Nuclear Solution Inc. and the Aggie fussion reactor designs included small
automotive power units.
The Aggie with boron11 in fussion reaction generating magnetic resonance
with LC tank circuit for electric car or electron beam
for space (ion propulsion) and Nuclear Solution was fission (mostly) of
nuke waste. Recycled by transmutation .to generate heat for steam
or gas turbine engine.
- Next message: Frank Scrooby: "Re: Post-petroleum World?"
- Previous message: Arnold Walker: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Maybe in reply to: Bill Ward: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Next in thread: Corey: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Reply: Corey: "Re: The Hydrogen Economy may come sooner than we expected"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
