As long as it takes oil to process whatever is done and it takes more oil
energy than is gained by the process, it is foolish. The only energy source
that is viable at this time is nuclear and that effort has been put back 40
years by people that insist that something like hydrogen, alcohol and
methane will work because nuclear is too dangerous. Running out of fuel and
giving the Middle East enough money to be a viable threat is also dangerous.
Refusing to drill for oil off our coasts while Cuba and China do it is
another ridiculous practice. Not drilling in Anwr, senseless. Just because
GM or BMW do things for PC publicity, doesn't make it viable. There aren't
enough "goodies" in a gas tank size container of hydrogen for it to ever be
practical not to mention the difficulty in containing it. -- Bill --
Bill:
I would agree that it does not make sense from the standpoint of energy, and
that was sort of my point, too. However, we are now in the situation of
having
all of our eggs in one basket and there are good reasons not to remain in
that
situation. Do we ignore the problem and continue to use gasoline, thus
making
us more and more dependent on the sources of the same and probably
continuing
to drive up the price, or can we diversify our energy sources in such a way
as to preserve the supply of gasoline for a longer period of time and,
perhaps,
even have a positive effect on the environment? All I am saying is that all
the possibilities should be investigated, thus allowing us some flexibility
in our choices rather than just continuing on the path we are on while
ignoring reality. I don't think that BMW and GM and the rest are entirely
stupid, so they must envision a scenario in which H2 can play a role. Let's
give a little credit for their willingness to try the experiment.
Tod
B382002384LRXFE
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Tigers@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/tigers
http://www.team.net/archive
|