PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH 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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: A. Geiche who wrote (472509)	10/7/2003 9:35:44 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) of 769670

Yes, I said that long ago and the VP confirmed that again in Sept. And yes msnbc repeats all the anonymous oh well they are for something else from the unnamed leakers. LOL hydrogen.... What idiots. From the theoriginal.homeip.net Wed Jun 11 21:39:20 EDT 2003 I've heard several of the ever talking heads mention those mobile labs as having a use of making hydrogen. (some guy on Dayside, with Linda Vesta the latest) That is such an idiotic idea. But how does one explain the obvious stupidity. I started thinking about the process again in terms of how much hydrogen is needed to supply weather balloons. What would it cost to transport using hydrogen compressed in tanks. I thought lets use common off the shelf stuff and figure out costs. This is a silly example to explain how idiotic the extra expense of creating mobile labs are. It gives a simple and verifiable cost model. Doing it with the right kind of tanks would likely be cheaper to a lot cheaper. Note: storing hydrogen at high pressure would need tanks made of alloys compatible with that application. Well this will demonstrate why the mobile labs are to produce hydrogen for weather balloons. Rube Goldberg has certified my analysis. Clearly my alternative approach of suggesting one transport hydrogen to a remote site to inflate weather balloon holds no underwater. Thinking back to my scuba days I recalled most scuba tanks of old held 72 cubic feet of air. I wondered if I was to use scuba tanks to transport hydrogen what would the economics be. First most weather balloons are 3' or 4' diameter. that translates in volumes of 10.6 CF and 25.1 CF respectively. I then went to a supplier of tanks to find current cost and capacity. From diversdiscount.com I use the ABYSMAL LP STEEL 108 CF costing $357.85 The size specs. 2640 PSI 8 Inches in Diameter 26.8 Inches in Length Weight Empty = 41lbs Each tank filled could supply 10 3' balloons and 4 4' balloons 100 tanks would take a foot print of 7x7ft or 49 square feet. Well really less as I'm using square dimensions and the tanks are round and would stagger stack in some less space. But weight will ultimately be the limiting factor. Using a stageline.com, one would have 40' x 8'x 13' high with a hauling capacity of 12000 lbs. Using a full weight of 45 lbs per tank I could haul 266 tanks. (Tank full weight with air is 44.3lbs, clearly hydrogen would weight less.) The base of the truck is 240 square ft. A tank occupies a base area of .45 square ft. All 266 could be placed in one layer and fit well within the truck. Thus I can use the full hauling capacity without derating for weight of shelving to stack. 266 tanks would cost $95K One truck with 266 tanks could transport enough hydrogen for 2660 3' weather balloons and 1064 4' weather balloons. Yes such economics suggest spending millions on the development of mobile labs that require trucking stocks required to make hydrogen and some rate of a few dozen cubic feet a day is viable??. Feeding and housing the extra people to make the hydrogen and supplying the energy needed at that remote location is viable. Yes no liberal democrat would invest in simple air tanks. Like hydrogen hot air also rises. Yes we must ferment some discontent. theoriginal.homeip.net

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next