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 : Green Hydrogen -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gg cox who wrote (1468)	5/10/2023 2:25:33 PM
From: Eric	1 Recommendation Recommended By longz Respond to of 2050

Doesn't matter. It's cleaner than burning fossil fuels!

To: gg cox who wrote (1468)	5/10/2023 2:27:40 PM
From: Eric	Respond to of 2050

Lets see.... Photons to Electrons move at virtually the speed of light thru a conductor. Direct to an electrolyzer. You can't do that with fossil fuels!

To: gg cox who wrote (1468)	5/10/2023 3:20:33 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Respond to of 2050

Does depend on cost t produce.. far cheaper to quarry things like granite etc for countertops and ship from China and/or India than to produce in Canada

To: gg cox who wrote (1468)	2/19/2024 9:36:11 AM
From: gg cox	Respond to of 2050

<<<< Why? Hydrogen trains — and buses, trucks, cars, and every other mode of transportation — are more expensive to maintain and more expensive to fuel than every alternative. Their total cost of ownership is multiple times more, three times in the case of trains. The only time hydrogen trains are actually sold is when the tenders explicitly called for hydrogen trains, and that is almost entirely because governmental money is earmarked for hydrogen fleets. Clearly ChatGPT thinks hydrogen is a square wheel for trains too, as it provided the image above with little prompting. It’s remarkable that hydrogen for energy proponents can look at 25 years of failures, challenges, retrenching, and falling sales and still hold a pale blue torch for the molecule. It’s not a technology going through teething pains, it’s a technology that simply doesn’t work well or economically as an energy carrier.>>> Message 34575660