Posted by JoeSixPack on July 30, 2005, 2:16 pm
> Hydrogen was suggested as an alternative energy source by corporate
> interests who were anxious to keep the public dependent on high technology
> (and therefore established industrial players).
> The production, transport, storage and sale of hydrogen is dangerous and
> difficult.
> In comparison, my own car that's standing outside as I type this will run
> on
> alcohol.
> The solution is alcohol, not hydrogen. It's easy to make, cheap, burns
> clean, is safe to distribute and store.
> It can be distilled from sewage, from crops, from surplus and waste
> foodstuffs.
> There's even the likelihood that new organisms that will in one stage
> ferment to higher concentrations will be genetically engineered.
> You can even run a fuel cell on it.
> _Alcohol_, not hydrogen.
Face it, the days of blasting down the interstate, surrounded by 3 tonnes of
metal, using 75,000 Watts of power (0 HP = 64,119,700 calories per hour)
are over in the near future.
Such an orgy of wasted energy was a wet dream that we were allowed to live
out for a century or so.
We might have to invest in solar and wind energy collection on a massive
scale, and then either use it to distill biofuels or use it directly to
create hydrogen fuel.
Either way it won't be cheap. The fossil-fuel free ride will soon be over.
Posted by Dan Bloomquist on July 30, 2005, 2:29 pm
JoeSixPack wrote:
>
> We might have to invest in solar and wind energy collection on a massive
> scale, and then either use it to distill biofuels or use it directly to
> create hydrogen fuel....
There are over a trillion tons of proven coal reserves on the planet.
There is nuclear energy. There is by no means enough land to replace
this civilization's demand for energy with crop fuels.
Sounds like you need another six pack.
Best, Dan.
--
Add one for email
Posted by JoeSixPack on July 30, 2005, 2:35 pm
> JoeSixPack wrote:
>>
>> We might have to invest in solar and wind energy collection on a massive
>> scale, and then either use it to distill biofuels or use it directly to
>> create hydrogen fuel....
> There are over a trillion tons of proven coal reserves on the planet.
> There is nuclear energy. There is by no means enough land to replace this
> civilization's demand for energy with crop fuels.
> Sounds like you need another six pack.
Looks like you misread the post. My words were at the bottom, without the
little >> thingies in front.
Posted by Dan Bloomquist on July 30, 2005, 3:16 pm
JoeSixPack wrote:
>
>>
>>JoeSixPack wrote:
>>
>>
>>>We might have to invest in solar and wind energy collection on a massive
>>>scale, and then either use it to distill biofuels or use it directly to
>>>create hydrogen fuel....
>>
>>There are over a trillion tons of proven coal reserves on the planet.
>>There is nuclear energy. There is by no means enough land to replace this
>>civilization's demand for energy with crop fuels.
>>
>>Sounds like you need another six pack.
>>
> Looks like you misread the post. My words were at the bottom, without the
> little >> thingies in front.
Are you saying I didn't quote you correctly? That you didn't write the
above about solar, wind, and hydrogen?
Best, Dan.
--
Add one for email
Posted by JoeSixPack on July 30, 2005, 4:26 pm
> JoeSixPack wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>JoeSixPack wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>We might have to invest in solar and wind energy collection on a massive
>>>>scale, and then either use it to distill biofuels or use it directly to
>>>>create hydrogen fuel....
>>>
>>>There are over a trillion tons of proven coal reserves on the planet.
>>>There is nuclear energy. There is by no means enough land to replace this
>>>civilization's demand for energy with crop fuels.
>>>
>>>Sounds like you need another six pack.
>>>
>> Looks like you misread the post. My words were at the bottom, without
>> the little >> thingies in front.
> Are you saying I didn't quote you correctly? That you didn't write the
> above about solar, wind, and hydrogen?
That's correct. I responded to a post by someone else. My comments are at
the bottom, without the
little >> thingies in front.
XML site map
> interests who were anxious to keep the public dependent on high technology
> (and therefore established industrial players).
> The production, transport, storage and sale of hydrogen is dangerous and
> difficult.
> In comparison, my own car that's standing outside as I type this will run
> on
> alcohol.
> The solution is alcohol, not hydrogen. It's easy to make, cheap, burns
> clean, is safe to distribute and store.
> It can be distilled from sewage, from crops, from surplus and waste
> foodstuffs.
> There's even the likelihood that new organisms that will in one stage
> ferment to higher concentrations will be genetically engineered.
> You can even run a fuel cell on it.
> _Alcohol_, not hydrogen.