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 : Heinz Blasnik- Views You Can Use -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: yard_man who wrote (2672)	6/26/2003 4:45:14 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4905

it takes more energy to break the bonds than you get out of the reaction. SOoo -- if you use some renewable source of energy to break that bond -- that is less efficient than simply generating the energy from the renewable and using it -- essentially what you are using hydrogen for in that case (renewable energy for electrolysis) is composing an energy storage system which is lossy -- just like batteries. That sounds like a deal breaker, but perhaps actually is not. The reasons why we are searching for new energy sources are, basically, that carbon fuels are poisoning our air and killing our world, and that they will run out in the next hundred years or so. Efficiency is a Very Good Thing, but I personally don't mind inefficiently using wind and solar energy that are wasted if not used anyway, to produce clean energy from hydrogen. I realize they might not suffice the energy need of our planet, but they would take a sizable chunk out of the carbon fuel use. Until we find a more efficient clean fuel, it would help. Talking about energy loss, that is not as much a dealbreaker as one might think. Energy loss is everywhere. In electricity transmission networks, for example, there is 8-10% electricity loss from point of origin to point of consumption.