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: Krowbar who wrote (251750)	4/29/2002 12:40:17 AM
From: Krowbar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"We will go after the source of the terrorists! We will go after the funding of the terrorists! We will not tire!" "I have developed a deep personal bond with Prince Abdullah" Let's see. Bear with me, 'cause I'm just a dumb liberal. 15 of the 19 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, and they were funded by Saudi Arabia. Bush invited Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia to the ranch in Crawford and said that he formed a deep personal bond with him. And Prince Abdullah gives Bush an ultimatum on the Middle East? What am I missing here? Why has there not been much chatter about this by the Bushies here? Del

To: Krowbar who wrote (251750)	4/29/2002 9:17:10 AM
From: nealm	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

> You can NOT get something for nothing Who said that you could? YOU did with your pollyanna approach to energy production. Hydrogen made from electrolysis is close to 90% efficient using the latest engineering. If off-peak electricity is used, which will probably be the case, then electricity that would have been wasted would be creating a fuel... Again something for nothing. Hand waving doesn't cut. BTW do you know what the efficiency of generating ANY type of electricity? That is the efficiency from the fuel to the transformer. You'll be shocked. Really? You need to inform the oil industry of your process that uses no energy. I did not say "no". I said compared to the content of the crude it is negligable (i.e. small). Inefficiencies for creating and transporting count for hydrogen , but they don't for gasoline? Hydrogen would have to be compressed and refrigerated for transportation. Discovery suggests near limitless supply of clean fuel. canada.com{1... Do you read your own posts? From your own link... The low yield of energy from burning hydrogen compared to gas, however, means that vast quantities of rock would have to be mined. This what the author of article knows. So instead of refining crude this is what you like? The most promising source of the hydrogen may be geological "traps" similar to those now drilled for natural gas. This what the author surmises (i.e. guesses). I'm curious if natural gas or oil is found instead would we forgo it, because you don't like Bush. Your political aspirations doesn't make fuel. I have a pretty good guess of my own of why we won't see pockets of hydrogen gas in those wells. In addition, green algae have been found that produce hydrogen directly from sunlight. hfcletter.com; Algae? You would run the US economy on algae?!? You'd have better luck with those windmills. Hey how about "cold fusion"? Was that you? Try learning something about the subject before giving me a condescending lecture. Especially try listening to somebody else besides Exxon and the Cheney/Bush administration. Is there really a difference? Listen, I have three engineering degrees, I thought I was helping you out. It just amazes me how people like YOU make up stuff and then get upset when your called on it. A bit of advice, stick to trying to steal elections instead of lecturing us on energy production.