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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gg cox who wrote (170539)	4/16/2021 1:17:33 AM
From: sense	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217737

blessed to be on the ground floor of a new frontier of energy efficiency. LOL !! I've been stuck here on the ground floor since 1996... You telling me someone got the elevator working now ? What I see is still, mostly, ongoing incrementalism... in which the reality in efficiency... aka " inefficiency"... has nothing at all to do with the drivers being imposed to "make it work"... in spite of the LACK of efficiency. That's not mostly about innovation in increasing efficiency... its mostly about politics and abuse of power... control... period. The lack of efficiency in the politics as a driver of innovation and the costs of the political imposition ? <crickets> They won't ALLOW real innovation that actually out-competes "the state of the art" ? The point is not "improvement"... it is "control"... But, that's the politics of it... not the purpose of the people in the system... The two quotes in the article that really matter: "I think a lot of people have an overly optimistic timeline, and it’s not about technology necessarily." "I think the real driver for our fuel cell systems is going to be operating cost advantages." So, he gets a thumbs up from me... particularly as he reduces it to economic arguments and not others. Still, can't pass the opportunity to note that innovative uses of hydrogen in aviation are not new... So, I'd withhold judgement on basic viability until we've seen proof of market acceptance... which in context means delivering cost advantages that generate market advantages that matter for consumers. Hydrogen is inherently unsafe. Lots of other things... like aviation... are also inherently unsafe. Nothing I worked with ever made me nearly as uncomfortable as too casual use of cryogenic gases. But, toxic and dangerously explosive "rocket fuel" gas atmospheres inside sealed environments... a close second. There was that one time in a late evening makeup session in a college chem lab when the task was making di-nitro-toluene... which takes a long time to cook... so we went out to grab a bite at Burger King... making it back just before we needed to be there... only to find the janitor had locked up the lab, locked up the building, and gone home... leaving us locked outside and getting close to making tri-nitro-toluene instead. Hydrogen far down the list. But it might take some effort to minimize the perception of the risks... particularly in this application...