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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (250733)	4/25/2002 12:58:34 AM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

If you go to the link, you will see that wells have been sunk at the western border of Section 1002, and wells have been sunk offshore to the Northwest. Further data has been withheld on a minority of those wells. Because of the uncertainty of recoverable oil, the estimates are widely spaced. I am not opposed to hydrogen, but here is the problem; it is not as efficient as hydrocarbons. Maybe, windmills can be used (for electricity and producing hydrogen) in conjunction with large fuel cells with turbines (when the wind isn't blowing). I don't know. using Hydrogen for fuel: 1. Water+Energy(a) -> Hydrogen gas+Oxygen gas+Energy(b): Energy(a) is greater than Energy(b) 2. compress and cool hydrogen gas takes more energy 3. Hydrogen gas+Oxygen+Energy(c) -> Water + Energy(d): where Energy(d) is greater than Energy(c)-this is the part we're interested in. Note: Energy(a) cannot be less than Energy(d), otherwise you have a perpetual energy/motion machine. Hydrocarbon+Oxygen+energy(a) -> CarbonDioxide + Water +ENERGY(b) where energy(a) is less than ENERGY(b). The creation of the hydrocarbons from Carbon Dioxide and Water, was done by plants, eons ago with energy provided by the sun. The problem with using hydrocarbons for fuel, has been discussed.