It's still a comparatively infantile energy idea with little supportive
research funds and a huge opposition (gas companies). Still tho, given the
advances they've made recently it could very quickly become an efficient
alternative.

There was a journal article I read at school one day about a guy in the US
who'se been working on a synthetic photosynthesis technique for quite some
time now. If he manages to successfully do what plants do (use sunlight to
convert H20 & CO2 into it's parts) then there is a potential there as well
for Hydrogen-based fuel. Storage may be a problem now ...but again ...give
'em time.

A quick google search and I got this:
http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/researchbri...lay.php?id=369

I think it's the same guy.

--
griffin
'85 Jeep CJ-7
'97 Toyota Corolla SD

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:41AB06E2.48FB59C2@***.net...
> http://www.engr.wisc.edu/ep/conferen...Conf-EPRI8.pdf then
> that 300 megawatts hours would be $18,000.00 that will produce 2.5*60*60
> (a hour) or 9,000 kilos. Or two bucks a gallon before road taxes that
> make up the major portion of the cost of gasoline now. And of course,
> according to the article they still have to store and ship it, and give
> profit margin for the pump jockey to work on. Last year that was twenty
> bucks a gallon for the Los Angeles government test vehicles.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

 

Dreamer.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

griffin wrote:
>
> It's still a comparatively infantile energy idea with little supportive
> research funds and a huge opposition (gas companies). Still tho, given the
> advances they've made recently it could very quickly become an efficient
> alternative.
>
> There was a journal article I read at school one day about a guy in the US
> who'se been working on a synthetic photosynthesis technique for quite some
> time now. If he manages to successfully do what plants do (use sunlight to
> convert H20 & CO2 into it's parts) then there is a potential there as well
> for Hydrogen-based fuel. Storage may be a problem now ...but again ...give
> 'em time.
>
> A quick google search and I got this:
> http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/researchbri...lay.php?id=369
>
> I think it's the same guy.
>
> --
> griffin
> '85 Jeep CJ-7
> '97 Toyota Corolla SD

 

Dreamer.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

griffin wrote:
>
> It's still a comparatively infantile energy idea with little supportive
> research funds and a huge opposition (gas companies). Still tho, given the
> advances they've made recently it could very quickly become an efficient
> alternative.
>
> There was a journal article I read at school one day about a guy in the US
> who'se been working on a synthetic photosynthesis technique for quite some
> time now. If he manages to successfully do what plants do (use sunlight to
> convert H20 & CO2 into it's parts) then there is a potential there as well
> for Hydrogen-based fuel. Storage may be a problem now ...but again ...give
> 'em time.
>
> A quick google search and I got this:
> http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/researchbri...lay.php?id=369
>
> I think it's the same guy.
>
> --
> griffin
> '85 Jeep CJ-7
> '97 Toyota Corolla SD

 

Dreamer.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

griffin wrote:
>
> It's still a comparatively infantile energy idea with little supportive
> research funds and a huge opposition (gas companies). Still tho, given the
> advances they've made recently it could very quickly become an efficient
> alternative.
>
> There was a journal article I read at school one day about a guy in the US
> who'se been working on a synthetic photosynthesis technique for quite some
> time now. If he manages to successfully do what plants do (use sunlight to
> convert H20 & CO2 into it's parts) then there is a potential there as well
> for Hydrogen-based fuel. Storage may be a problem now ...but again ...give
> 'em time.
>
> A quick google search and I got this:
> http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/researchbri...lay.php?id=369
>
> I think it's the same guy.
>
> --
> griffin
> '85 Jeep CJ-7
> '97 Toyota Corolla SD

 

An accidental fire problem? Like in Hydrogen bomb? ;-)
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> That's a honking huge amount of construction, waste generation and
> consumed energy to produce ... not a lot of fuel. Probably better in the
> long run to use the generating plant to recharge electric-automobile
> batteries. Hydrogen is like stupidity: They are the most commonly
> occurring things in the universe, but is usually bound to something else
> and you can't do very much useful with either of them.
>
> Have you considered the accidental fire problem with hydrogen? You can't
> see the flame in daylight. It'll make responding to automobile collisions
> are real adventure.

 

An accidental fire problem? Like in Hydrogen bomb? ;-)
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> That's a honking huge amount of construction, waste generation and
> consumed energy to produce ... not a lot of fuel. Probably better in the
> long run to use the generating plant to recharge electric-automobile
> batteries. Hydrogen is like stupidity: They are the most commonly
> occurring things in the universe, but is usually bound to something else
> and you can't do very much useful with either of them.
>
> Have you considered the accidental fire problem with hydrogen? You can't
> see the flame in daylight. It'll make responding to automobile collisions
> are real adventure.

 

An accidental fire problem? Like in Hydrogen bomb? ;-)
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> That's a honking huge amount of construction, waste generation and
> consumed energy to produce ... not a lot of fuel. Probably better in the
> long run to use the generating plant to recharge electric-automobile
> batteries. Hydrogen is like stupidity: They are the most commonly
> occurring things in the universe, but is usually bound to something else
> and you can't do very much useful with either of them.
>
> Have you considered the accidental fire problem with hydrogen? You can't
> see the flame in daylight. It'll make responding to automobile collisions
> are real adventure.