Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Global Thermoelectric - SOFC Fuel cells (GLE:TSE) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: the Chief who wrote (2337)	6/23/1999 10:43:00 PM
From: wpckr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6016

Chief-- you really have it figured out. Sounds like a good deal to me.

To: the Chief who wrote (2337)	6/23/1999 10:54:00 PM
From: Gulo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6016

I'd hate to poke a hole in your dreams, Chief, but you won't get that much heat unless you generate power for your whole neighbourhood. As an aside, I think part of the confusion expressed in this thread is a misunderstanding of the terms 'heat' and 'temperature'. Many readers may not be aware that temperature does not measure heat directly. Two given systems can contain (or produce) the same amount of heat, but be at very different temperatures. The fact remains that a 50.0% efficient (i.e. fuel to electricity) fuel cell will produce exactly 2/3 the heat of a 25.0% efficient generator system. Temperature is not relevant to this calculation. If anyone on this thread requires it, I will be happy to elaborate. In fact, I believe I did explain this early on. For now, suffice it to say that the ONLY reason lower temperatures are desirable for SOFCs is for manufacturing and reliability purposes. SOFC running at higher temperatures would produce LESS heat for a given power output. Regards.