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 : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ED_L who wrote (40865)	11/26/2000 8:30:29 PM
From: yard_man	Respond to of 436258

There really has been no shift away from coal per se (nat gas turbines have enjoyed a very rapid build out to meet peak demands with relatively low capital investment -- a persistently high nat gas price may change the politics & economics simultaneously) -- coal still provides more than 50% of our electricity in the states ...I agree with more monies for research into cleaner burning technologies and even coal gasification. People get all lathered up about fuel cells, but these are only energy conversion devices -- the attraction being the ability to sever a relationship with an electric supplier --but at what cost? First there is the high capital cost of the fuel cells themselves -- then the fuel cells need a hydrogen source -- usually natural gas. All one is doing by using a fuel cell for their residence is giving up fuel diversity -- with a local utility -- you get energy (hopefully) from multiple fuel types and are less subject to price swings in individual fuels, but pity the fool with a fuel cell who has natural gas heat when nat gas prices go up and stay up ...