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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (1866)	7/13/2000 10:02:22 PM
From: A.J. Mullen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12231

Maurice & all, I think fuel-battery hybrids are simpler and better approach for cars. The energy density of hydrocarbons is a big (voluminous) problem for passenger cars. Fuel cells are promising for power generation. Some plants are already up and running: Subject 11531 Much energy is lost in transmission lines, so some can be saved in transmission if small, quiet and non-toxic plants can be placed in suburban areas. Fuel Cell energy uses gas as its energy source. There are fewer saturated carbon-bonds and higher ratio of hydrogen to carbon atoms, so more water and less CO2 will be produced per joule of energy released. No mechanical losses either, so it should be more efficient. Not that fuel cells will be a panacea. They might help a bit. (I own some of FCL). Hydroelectric power is no panacea either: news.bbc.co.uk sandelman.ottawa.on.ca I must admit to being pleased that dams were not so wonderful. As a whitewater kayaker I am meant to hate them, although one extends the season for me here in Southern California so I'm ambivalent in this too. How much is (possibly) going to be spent on a missile system that probably won't work against a threat that doesn't yet exist? One nuclear bomb can only create a short-term local anomaly. One could ruin your day. Global Change might ruin the planet. Ashley

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (1866)	7/15/2000 10:04:06 AM
From: qdog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12231

Ideally, hydrogen, which is why they use nat gas as a catalyst. However, it not burned, which gives it a unigue property and renders it virtually pollution free to produce the hydrogen. Yes, metallurgy has produced better, stronger and lighter materials and other composites, that make things lighter and able to sustain torgue forces. Andretti first stab at the INdy 500 ended about 10 laps short with a mechanical failure, but he had larred the field twice, I believe, the first year with a turbine engine. Oil is still being consider as a natural occuring substances. Nat gas is the decomposition of plant and animal, which is why landfills are built to recover methane. When I was in North Yemen, they drilled wells that had huge columns of source rock, just couldn't find the trap. Yes there is huge evidence that this was a seabed at one time, as up 5000' of Jabal Balaq, I came on fossilized coral and crustaceous lying all over the place. In the Wahed Hadramout youu would go through hiking shoes rather quickly as that coral would still cut up the soles. Oddly, there is a vast amount of nat gas there. Wells drilled in PA, still to this day produce a small amount of crude per day (one two barrels) which can be explained with various theory, but it goes to the theory that it is actually a substance that comes from a channel deeper in the earth crust. However, we are extracting it at a far greater rate than we are able to replenish or find, in relative terms. Just like the deforrrestation of PA in the late 1800, the forrest are now only coming back to maturity. When you trek inthe woods there, you can see the man made evidence of trees in a row. How long will, if the theory is true, will resiviors be replenished? Houston is around 40+C presently, but cars aren't exploding. Globalstar wasn't a stock that interested me originally and still doesn't. My homework didn't add up then and doesn't now, but that doesn't make me right on the matter. Too much light being strung around the earth that has a vast amount of bandwidth in comparasion to RF. I go with stocks that my homework suggest a reasonable return, such as my call on ALA. Took it awhile, but it is starting to payoff. Of course so did QCOM...... As always your cyber debate friend, Chris