Booms, Busts, and Recoveries Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Snowshoe who wrote (57322)	12/19/2004 4:34:43 PM
From: Seeker of Truth	Read Replies (1) of 74559

Hello Snowshoe, Thanks for the interesting reports. There are three points here. 1. Carbon fibre car bodies and airplane bodies will save fuel. This sounds correct and there is no refutation of this. There is also no denial that carbon fibre is more expensive than steel. So the net economic advantage of shifting to carbon fibre remains to be shown. 2. Fuel cells should save fuel. We've been promised this for decades. It may yet be proved to be true. 3. Hydrogen is cheaper than carbon based fuels. It seems to both me and the rebutter that this is not true. We can get hydrogen from methane and water but the process only occurs if we invest a lot of heat. The handling of H2 is extremely expensive, because of the low energy per volume which necessitates high compression, transmission,decompression etc. Storage is a big and unsolved problem. Nothing else in the world leaks like hydrogen. As for getting H2 directly from H2O, that is an obvious money loser.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next