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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : MECHANICAL TECHNOLOGY (MKTY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (470)	11/13/1999 7:12:00 AM
From: blue_chip	Respond to of 542

Gas Research Institute Report Excerpt. electrochem.org "In comparing an SOFC system with a PEMFC system, both systems reform natural gas to hydrogen, although an SOFC can reform the natural gas internally within the anode compartment. Although the SOFC is not as sensitive to sulfur as the PEMFC, sulfur removal is required for both systems. Whereas the PEMFC system requires CO removal because of poisoning of the anode catalyst at levels above 10ppm, SOFC has the ability to handle large quantities of CO, which participates in the water-gas shift reaction in the anode compartment. Whereas the performance of the proton exchange membrane in PEMFC is very sensitive to membrane dehydration and thus required humidification of the anode and the cathode gas streams, water management is not an issue in the SOFC-based system as the performance of the solid electrolyte is not dependant on the presence of water. The waste heat generated during the operation of the PEMFC is of low grade due to its relatively low temperature (70C-90C). As a result, it is limited to moderate heating of water to 50-55C. In contrast, because the waste heat generated during the operation of the SOFC is at high temperature (650-1000C) the high quality of waste heat can be used to aid in providing the energy necessary to drive the endothermic SR reaction as well as for domestic hot water and space heating. While PEM fuel cells in general have relatively short start up times, the start up time of the PEMFC system is governed more by the time required to start up the fuel processor with its companion sulfur removal and CO preferential oxidation components. Thus the actual start-up time of a PEMFC system is LONGER, and thus more comparable to that of SOFC's. In summary, SOFC's operate at higher electrical conversion efficiencies, do not require CO removal, do not require humidification of the anode and the cathode gases, and generate higher quality waste heat that can be better used for fuel reforming, space heat, or domestic hot water applications."

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (470)	11/13/1999 9:26:00 AM
From: Scoobah	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542

Ask yourself this question, If RAM states in it's 17b disclosure that it has received 100,000 shares of free trading common shares for a service that had "already" been provided, then wouldn't it stand to reason that a 144 filing would have been associated with an investment? Of course I have a bias, everyone has a bias, the SEC is only concerned with one thing, Is a person or a company being paid to tout a stock and not disclosing said fact. I am not, have never been, and never will take stock or money to tout a stock. I either like a stock, or I don't, and since I am one of the scant few who posts on this and other message threads under my real name, nothing is going to change that fact. If you look at the FTRK threads, you will find that I am on the exact other side, I had stock, I sold it because the company is a POS, and I am on there making sure that stock touts don't mislead others into thinking there is a real company behind the stock, because there isn't. Everyone on these threads has a bias, I am bullish the fuel cell industry, and bullish DCHT because I believe they are the most undervalued and underfollowed inthe bunch, and because I have been buying an increasing stake in the company, I want to see them suceed, and increase their visibility. They make no bones about the fact that I do what I do on my own time, and my own dime. They do not pay me one thin dime. I am an investor in their company; plain and simple. It just so happens that because I manage a private equity fund, I can invest larger amounts that most. PS> My investment in XYBR has been paying off almost to the tune of the investment in DCHT., but the only reason I don't catch any flack over it, is because they have enough visibility and coverage on their own, so I can remain passive about it, and just continue to watch my investment increase proportionatly.