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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (32882)	5/2/2003 3:57:53 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

If you need Hydrogen for a fuel cells, you can use biomass or off-peak hydropower, to produce the energy to strip it from oxigen in water. Or, as Bush prefers, from carbon in hydrocarbon fuels.

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (32882)	5/2/2003 4:38:32 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

KC, natural stuff: natural dyes, materials, rubber, etc were imported from colonies to Europe. Germany, had no colonies and suffered blockades during two wars, it developed a lot of man made materials and a big chemical industry. But it still needed oil and gas as feedstock. Hence the dependency on oil. Now forget about biotechnology to clone humans and animals; make a square tomato to better packing and other stuff that captures the imagination of people. The potential of biotechnology, is to enable us to produce natural products. Bio-plastics, bio-diesel, Ethanol. See if we get a bug that make fermentation of sugar cane faster, we can cut the cost of producing bio-plastic and ethanol. Compare fuel cells to Ethanol; We have a mature technology. It is proved. The infrastructure (distribution and retail) is the same as oil derivatives gasoline and diesel. Now take an ump roved laboratory technology, not proved and that requires a complete new infrastructure to distribute and retail and you see which one is competitive. What the US need is the plain states to get the upper hand and elect their president instead of oil elect theirs. The US government is paying them no to plant, why not just pay them to plant biomass crops? Canada, Australia, Brazil and Argentina could pull the table on the US, France and UK since they have big investment in oil based economy. We don't. We could gain a lot by investing in biotechnology. Now it is becoming clear why Bush didn't want a Kyoto agreement. If we get a better cassava plant and produce plastics out of it, many poor countries could 'grow' their 'oil'.