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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (96351)	2/3/2008 11:21:52 AM
From: ChanceIs	Respond to of 206334

>>>Nuclear power takes H20 and makes H2 and O2. Any serious approach to this has to use nuclear.<<< I couldn't agree more. That doesn't mean that there isn't a big problem transporting the H2 to the consumption site. I want to learn more here. The difficulty in transporting the H2 makes the case for the electric car - easier to move electrons over existing infrastructure than nuclei over as yet unbuilt pipes. H2 production can be a plus at a nuke site since it can absorb the waste heat in its rendering. >>>Alternates to nuclear are feel good political rhetoric for the uninformed.<<< Yep. >>I do not want to come off here as disrespectful to board members. However, I simply feel that the chemistry involved with alternates is simply ignored. The political rhetoric in the media is all about feel good wish it were true pandering.<<< Yep. And BTW. I don't think too many board members here are sold on alternative energy. >>>there may be no hope until an energy disaster forces reality.<<< Take that to the bank, and buy NG in the ground. This reminds me, I didn't use any of my allotment for January: Let us accept things as they are, and profit off of the folly of the world. Mayer Rothschild

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (96351)	2/3/2008 4:28:52 PM
From: carl a. mehr	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 206334

Bob You said it and I agree:<<Lord - we need an intelligent open debate on these issues>> I tried to get an intelligent forum going in regard to thermal energy. Chevron runs an advertisement where they claim to be supplying power to a city of 7 million people using thermal energy. I wonder where this city is located? A couple of years ago I saw such a power plant in Tibet, China, and it was "out of order". I haven't seen a working thermal power plant yet. Has anybody? The corrosion problems of the pipes seems to be extremely severe and causes huge maintenance problems...carlmehr

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (96351)	2/3/2008 5:34:14 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 206334

Liquid fuels, even low carbon liquid fuels, hold significant advantages over the use of hydrogen as a fuel. Not the least of these is the continued use of existing infrastructure, ease of use, safety, and energy density. Globally, cows emit more "greenhouse gases" primarily methane, than do cars, primarily carbon dioxide. If greenhouse gases are a problem, the solution must be viewed comprehensively, rather than remaining myopically focused on transportation. Even if you wish to power transport with the main power grid, say nuclear, the best way to do this may still be to process the hydrogen with other material to create a liquid fuel. .