| |
 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Energy - Hydrogen Forum » Photoactive Inorganic Membranes for Charge Transport... |
|
Page 1 of 4 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Sam West... |
 Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Check out;
Photoactive Inorganic Membranes for Charge Transport, Prabir Dutta,
Ohio State University
Here, Dr. Dutta, uses integrated photochemical molecular assemblies to
convert solar energy directly to chemical energy. Specifically
polypyridyl ruthenium-bipyridinium supramolecular systems produce long-
lived photochemically generated separated charge pairs when exposed to
sunlight. Long-lived charge separated states is exploited to generate
chemicals like 2 H2 and O2 from H2O.
Dutta stuctures the supramolecular assembly onto a zeolite membrane
and photochemically transports charge across the membrane providing
spatial charge separation using light-driven electron/hole transfer.
Dutta demonstrated practical charge propagation and long-range spatial
separation in zeolite membranes. Charge separation must then be
integrated into specific membrane structures to efficiently promote
direct chemical synthesis from sunlight.
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| hhc314... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 1, 8:44 pm, Sam West <smante... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote:900aace12f]Check out;
Photoactive Inorganic Membranes for Charge Transport, Prabir Dutta,
Ohio State University
Here, Dr. Dutta, uses integrated photochemical molecular assemblies to
convert solar energy directly to chemical energy. Specifically
polypyridyl ruthenium-bipyridinium supramolecular systems produce long-
lived photochemically generated separated charge pairs when exposed to
sunlight. Long-lived charge separated states is exploited to generate
chemicals like 2 H2 and O2 from H2O.
Dutta stuctures the supramolecular assembly onto a zeolite membrane
and photochemically transports charge across the membrane providing
spatial charge separation using light-driven electron/hole transfer.
Dutta demonstrated practical charge propagation and long-range spatial
separation in zeolite membranes. Charge separation must then be
integrated into specific membrane structures to efficiently promote
direct chemical synthesis from sunlight.
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
[/quote:900aace12f]
Thanks for posting this, and in particular, thanks for posting this
URL which deserves repeating:
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
It's unusual in that the pdf file links provided are for the entire
paper, not simpy the abstract that is so often the case.
On the downside, at least for the scientifically inclined, one should
not open this URL late in the evening because it will likely 4:00 am
when you go to bed glassy eyed because you can't stop with reading
just one of these excellent papers...and there are too many to digest
at a single sitting so save this URL for future reference.
Again, thank you for posting it. It is the best post that I've
personally read on sci.energy.hydrogen over the past 10 years!
Harry C. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| hhc314... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:18 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 3, 11:00 am, hhc314 <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:3434354de2]On Oct 1, 8:44 pm, Sam West <smante... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Check out;
Photoactive Inorganic Membranes for Charge Transport, Prabir Dutta,
Ohio State University
Here, Dr. Dutta, uses integrated photochemical molecular assemblies to
convert solar energy directly to chemical energy. Specifically
polypyridyl ruthenium-bipyridinium supramolecular systems produce long-
lived photochemically generated separated charge pairs when exposed to
sunlight. Long-lived charge separated states is exploited to generate
chemicals like 2 H2 and O2 from H2O.
Dutta stuctures the supramolecular assembly onto a zeolite membrane
and photochemically transports charge across the membrane providing
spatial charge separation using light-driven electron/hole transfer.
Dutta demonstrated practical charge propagation and long-range spatial
separation in zeolite membranes. Charge separation must then be
integrated into specific membrane structures to efficiently promote
direct chemical synthesis from sunlight.
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
Thanks for posting this, and in particular, thanks for posting this
URL which deserves repeating:
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
It's unusual in that the pdf file links provided are for the entire
paper, not simpy the abstract that is so often the case.
On the downside, at least for the scientifically inclined, one should
not open this URL late in the evening because it will likely 4:00 am
when you go to bed glassy eyed because you can't stop with reading
just one of these excellent papers...and there are too many to digest
at a single sitting so save this URL for future reference.
Again, thank you for posting it. It is the best post that I've
personally read on sci.energy.hydrogen over the past 10 years!
Harry C.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote:3434354de2]
As an afterthought, I became so engrossed in reading other papers that
it took me some time to locate Dr. Dutta's. It is paper #12, Section
K (Basic Energy Sciences).
Hope that this helps someone to locate it.
Harry C. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| hhc314... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 5:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 3, 1:06 pm, Sam West <smante... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote:9a58f9df19]On Oct 3, 11:18 am, hhc314 <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 3, 11:00 am, hhc314 <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 1, 8:44 pm, Sam West <smante... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Check out;
Photoactive Inorganic Membranes for Charge Transport, Prabir Dutta,
Ohio State University
Here, Dr. Dutta, uses integrated photochemical molecular assemblies to
convert solar energy directly to chemical energy. Specifically
polypyridyl ruthenium-bipyridinium supramolecular systems produce long-
lived photochemically generated separated charge pairs when exposed to
sunlight. Long-lived charge separated states is exploited to generate
chemicals like 2 H2 and O2 from H2O.
Dutta stuctures the supramolecular assembly onto a zeolite membrane
and photochemically transports charge across the membrane providing
spatial charge separation using light-driven electron/hole transfer..
Dutta demonstrated practical charge propagation and long-range spatial
separation in zeolite membranes. Charge separation must then be
integrated into specific membrane structures to efficiently promote
direct chemical synthesis from sunlight.
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
Thanks for posting this, and in particular, thanks for posting this
URL which deserves repeating:
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
It's unusual in that the pdf file links provided are for the entire
paper, not simpy the abstract that is so often the case.
On the downside, at least for the scientifically inclined, one should
not open this URL late in the evening because it will likely 4:00 am
when you go to bed glassy eyed because you can't stop with reading
just one of these excellent papers...and there are too many to digest
at a single sitting so save this URL for future reference.
Again, thank you for posting it. It is the best post that I've
personally read on sci.energy.hydrogen over the past 10 years!
Harry C.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
As an afterthought, I became so engrossed in reading other papers that
it took me some time to locate Dr. Dutta's. It is paper #12, Section
K (Basic Energy Sciences).
Hope that this helps someone to locate it.
Harry C.
Thanks.
The science supports the business of the coming energy economy based
on sunlight. The point is hydrogen may be made from sunlight and
water very efficiently, and very cheaply.
[/quote:9a58f9df19]
This is not quite true. Read the paper that you cited, and grasp it's
limited significance.
The hydrogen economy is a wishful thought, and not a very good thought
at that. Since you appear to be a strudent, run the damn number and
them come back and post your conclusions. It's as simple as that.
Harry C. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 7:10 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 4, 11:48 pm, hhc314 <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote:640970074a]On Oct 3, 1:06 pm, Sam West <smante... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 3, 11:18 am, hhc314 <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 3, 11:00 am, hhc314 <hhc... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Oct 1, 8:44 pm, Sam West <smante... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Check out;
Photoactive Inorganic Membranes for Charge Transport, Prabir Dutta,
Ohio State University
Here, Dr. Dutta, uses integrated photochemical molecular assemblies to
convert solar energy directly to chemical energy. Specifically
polypyridyl ruthenium-bipyridinium supramolecular systems produce long-
lived photochemically generated separated charge pairs when exposed to
sunlight. Long-lived charge separated states is exploited to generate
chemicals like 2 H2 and O2 from H2O.
Dutta stuctures the supramolecular assembly onto a zeolite membrane
and photochemically transports charge across the membrane providing
spatial charge separation using light-driven electron/hole transfer.
Dutta demonstrated practical charge propagation and long-range spatial
separation in zeolite membranes. Charge separation must then be
integrated into specific membrane structures to efficiently promote
direct chemical synthesis from sunlight.
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
Thanks for posting this, and in particular, thanks for posting this
URL which deserves repeating:
http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/annual_progress08_production.html
It's unusual in that the pdf file links provided are for the entire
paper, not simpy the abstract that is so often the case.
On the downside, at least for the scientifically inclined, one should
not open this URL late in the evening because it will likely 4:00 am
when you go to bed glassy eyed because you can't stop with reading
just one of these excellent papers...and there are too many to digest
at a single sitting so save this URL for future reference.
Again, thank you for posting it. It is the best post that I've
personally read on sci.energy.hydrogen over the past 10 years!
Harry C.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
As an afterthought, I became so engrossed in reading other papers that
it took me some time to locate Dr. Dutta's. It is paper #12, Section
K (Basic Energy Sciences).
Hope that this helps someone to locate it.
Harry C.
Thanks.
The science supports the business of the coming energy economy based
on sunlight. The point is hydrogen may be made from sunlight and
water very efficiently, and very cheaply.
This is not quite true. Read the paper that you cited, and grasp it's
limited significance.
The hydrogen economy is a wishful thought, and not a very good thought
at that. Since you appear to be a strudent, run the damn number and
them come back and post your conclusions. It's as simple as that.
Harry C.
[/quote:640970074a]
Mr. Conover,
You are trying to fool us.
Sunlight is free. Water is nearly so. Combine the two with low-cost
equipment to create hydrogen and oxygen cheaply, and oil has a
competitor in hydrogen.
There's plenty of hydrogen available too. The oceans are a lot bigger
than the limited oil supplies undergound. More than 10,000x as much
solar power as we need to run everything today.
All we need is a reason to create a supply of cheap plentiful
hydrogen.
Honda's Clarity gives us a reason.
Why does that drive you nuts Mr. Conover?
On the one hand you make 60 posts a month saying cars like the Clarity
are boat anchors.
On the other hand you make 60 posts a month saying low cost hydrogen
is a waste of time since no one is set up to use it.
Meanwhile attacking everyone who puts 2 and 2 together as frauds
idiots or perverts.
Very strange |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| PV... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Sam West <smantenna at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
[quote:5d1b2cd1c6]You are trying to fool us.
[/quote:5d1b2cd1c6]
Who's "us", Willie?
[quote:5d1b2cd1c6]Sunlight is free. Water is nearly so. Combine the two with low-cost
equipment to create hydrogen and oxygen cheaply, and oil has a
competitor in hydrogen.
[/quote:5d1b2cd1c6]
Then do it! How come it hasn't happened already? How come no major power
utility is using solar as a significant amount of their load? We know why -
it's because solar in its present form, even in an optimum grid-buy
configration, takes decades to make back the investment. And that's
assuming something better doesn't come along later after you've sunk the
costs in an old system.
[quote:5d1b2cd1c6]There's plenty of hydrogen available too. The oceans are a lot bigger
than the limited oil supplies undergound. More than 10,000x as much
solar power as we need to run everything today.
[/quote:5d1b2cd1c6]
You can't mine hydrogen, you dingbat.
[quote:5d1b2cd1c6]All we need is a reason to create a supply of cheap plentiful
hydrogen.
[/quote:5d1b2cd1c6]
How do you create something that's cheap and plentiful? If it's plentiful,
you wouldn't need to create it.
[quote:5d1b2cd1c6]Honda's Clarity gives us a reason.
[/quote:5d1b2cd1c6]
Honda's Clarity is a piece of public relations and will never be a viable
car for any other purpose.
[quote:5d1b2cd1c6]Why does that drive you nuts Mr. Conover?
[/quote:5d1b2cd1c6]
Liars, soundrels, and nutrods make sensible people angry. *
--
* PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something
like corkscrews. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 5:08 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
There are over 30 utility-scale solar plants under construction right
now in the US. More are on the way. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 5:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:01 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 6, 1:43 am, DanB <a... at (no spam) some.net> wrote:
[quote:386ba1869c]Sam West wrote:
There are over 30 utility-scale solar plants under construction right
now in the US. More are on the way.
Yep, and none with 'William Mook', Mok Energy, or Mok industries on the
label Bill Mook.
But, you knew that.....
[/quote:386ba1869c]
So? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| DanB... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Sam West wrote:
[quote:c0c16b86a1]There are over 30 utility-scale solar plants under construction right
now in the US. More are on the way.
[/quote:c0c16b86a1]
Yep, and none with 'William Mook', Mok Energy, or Mok industries on the
label Bill Mook.
But, you knew that..... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
There is plenty of hydrogen in water. There is plenty of energy in
sunlight. Dutta's paper suggests a way to cheaply get hydrogen from
water and sunlight.
Its interesting to see how Mr. Conover (hhc314) and Mr. Vader (PV)
work together to misuse their obvious knowledge of chemistry to
mislead people with purposely confusing statements and outright lies.
They're both douchebags for that reason and should be ignored. They
cannot be trusted.
For example, Mr. Vader says, "you can't mine hydrogen dingbat" in a
way that suggests we don't have plenty of hydrogen and plenty of
energy to make hydrogen cheaply available at costs that would make
hydrogen competitive with oil. He says this even while I carefully
pointed out that we had water AND sunlight (we also have water AND
high temperature nuclear reactors) He ignores this preferring to
focus on spouting confusing bullshit as if I didn't say anything about
the requirement of sunlight (or nuclear energy).
Mr. Conover trying to convince people that the new Honda Clarity is a
'boat anchor' without fuel, I pointed out that carbon free hydrogen
would make Clarity a huge hit. Conover then claimed hydrogen with
carbon isn't hydrogen in response to my statement about carbon-free
hydrogen. When I carefully explained hydrogen made with sunlight is
different than hydrogen made with the shift reaction he exhibited a
detailed knowledge of the shift reaction. So, why pretend to be
confused? Just to mislead people.
Mr Conover's and Mr. Vader's use statistics are interesting. They
have both made 60 or more posts every month for years all with the
same sort of malicious disregard of the facts to promote three points;
hydrogen cannot be a practical fuel
so hydrogen powered anything is a waste
anyone who says different is a fraud, a fool, or a pervert
They have such a good knowledge of basic physics and chemistry, and
are so adamant about this subject and are so malicious in their
disregard of reality in the tens of thousands of similar posts on this
subject, that it seems to me they are hired hands - pensioners
getting a little bonus from the oil companies they worked for or took
kickbacks from - to make sure this emerging communications channel did
not become a problem for their bosses.
Objective reality is quite different than the world they are
attempting to sell everyone. Anyone who stands up to them is in for
it! They chased away my friend Mr. Mook. They're rounding up the
wagons to do the same to me.
Major oil wants to keep the following facts out of the public's firm
knowledge;
hydrogen is a practical fuel
anything powered by fossil fuels, may be powered by hydrogen
anyone who says you can't do these things is a fraud or a fool
Here are some basic actual real things to know about hydrogen;
A metric ton of hydrogen may be made from 275 gallons of water using
solar processes or nuclear processes at costs less than the equivalent
cost of any fossil fuel.
A metric ton of hydrogen costing $700 delivers the same amount of
energy as $30 a barrel oil.
A metric ton of hydrogen costing $100 delivers the same amount of
energy as $4 a barrel oil.
Here are some actual real things to know about the oil companies;
The discovery rate of oil peaked in 1996.
Oil is a depleting resource
The only way oil companies have to increase their market value is to
raise the price of oil
Low cost hydrogen made abundantly from sunlight and nuclear and
biological sources put a cap on oil prices
Is it any wonder Mr. Conover and Mr. Vader and others are paid by the
oil companies to troll the internet and keep this emerging channel
firmly under the control of the oil companies? McCain lost the
election in part because Obama knew how to use the internet to get
votes and McCain didn't. Do you think the wise guys at the energy
companies haven't thought this all through?
The oil companies have been thinking about their end game strategy
since Hubbert who worked for Shell at the time figured out the
logistics curve for oil in 1954. The oil companies themselves created
OPEC in 1960 to avoid rising exploration costs. They stopped building
refineries when discovery rates peaked. They sold off their retail
operations when prices rose to levels that caused Americans to drive
less.
The oil companies have been very lucky in their plan to get the most
out of their depleting reserves.
Hubbert's findings were marginalized. So politicians weren't stirred
up to nationalize oil and messing up the oil company's end game. When
Louis 'too cheap to meter' Strauss said nuclear energy would solve our
problem, he was fired. Lucky oil companies. High temp reactors in
1950s would have capped oil prices at $3 per barrel, and the rosy
scenarios of the 1950s would have come to pass as America, not Saudi
Arabia received trillions of dollars.
When JFK tasked BNL to make high-temp nuclear reactors, he was
assassinated. Bad day for the nation. Lucky day for the oil
companies. LBJ ignored BNL. Nixon asked the oil companies themselves
to shape our energy future. This created the first energy crisis and
got oil from $2 per barrel to $10. Carter taking office during an
energy crisis proposed the nuclear option outlined by Straus and BNL
to Congress. The month he submitted his proposal Three Mile Island
melted down, China Syndrome was released in theaters, and Karen
Silkwood judgment was handed down - ending any talk of a nuclear
option. Lucky day again for the oil companies. Bad day for America.
Reagan took over and organized a global muslim militant movement under
the Reagan Doctrine to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. This later
got out of hand and turned on us. We're fighting these same people
today. Meanwhile, to pay for the wholesale transfer of trillions of
dollars of wealth into the Middle East to pay for all the oil we
import, Regan restructured the banking system, which did in the S&Ls,
and sold our mortgages to the Chinese and Saudis. Which deferred the
costs we were running up, but which we're paying for now.
Had Mr. Mook's plan been adopted in 2004 -it still would not have
produced any oil until next year. Yet, had the plan been adopted, oil
would not have gone above $22 per barrel. America would have saved
$50 per barrel on every barrel of oil sold. And the $8.4 trillion in
cash that flowed out of our banking system from 2004 to 2008 would
still be here and things would be quite different.
That can be said of any approach between 1954 and today that provided
real competition to the major energy companies. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mr. Ward,
Why not ask this question in the 'Where is Mook?' thread??? Why ask
it here?
The answer to your question is;
Why would I talk about Mook's Indonesian projects here?
No one has yet asked me about what I know of Mook's Indonesian
projects.
I am not personally involved in the Indonesian projects.
Those projects are still active while the other projects I mentioned
in the other thread are not.
You can get far better information directly from Mr. Mook's website or
from Mr. Mook himself.
http://www.mokenergy.com/index.php/indonesian_project/
william.mook at (no spam) mokenergy.com
or from his Indonesian partners in Jakarta.
Sam |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sam West... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 6, 11:59 am, Bill Ward <bw... at (no spam) ix.REMOVETHISnetcom.com> wrote:
[quote:2bdede87f9]On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:43:58 -0700, DanB wrote:
Sam West wrote:
There are over 30 utility-scale solar plants under construction right
now in the US. More are on the way.
Yep, and none with 'William Mook', Mok Energy, or Mok industries on the
label Bill Mook.
But, you knew that.....
I wonder if Mook ever delivered the H2 he claimed he sold in that
Indonesian adventure? What happened to the manufacturing plants he was
supposedly building? He seemed to omit that period from his CV.
[/quote:2bdede87f9]
Mr. Ward,
Why not ask this question in the 'Where is Mook?' thread??? Why ask
it here?
The answer to your question is;
Why would I talk about Mook's Indonesian projects here?
No one has yet asked me about what I know of Mook's Indonesian
projects.
I am not personally involved in the Indonesian projects.
Those projects are still active while the other projects I mentioned
in the other thread are not.
You can get far better information directly from Mr. Mook's website or
from Mr. Mook himself.
http://www.mokenergy.com/index.php/indonesian_project/
william.m... at (no spam) mokenergy.com
or from his Indonesian partners in Jakarta.
Sam |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Ward... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 9:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:43:58 -0700, DanB wrote:
[quote:d5001bbe84]Sam West wrote:
There are over 30 utility-scale solar plants under construction right
now in the US. More are on the way.
Yep, and none with 'William Mook', Mok Energy, or Mok industries on the
label Bill Mook.
But, you knew that.....
[/quote:d5001bbe84]
I wonder if Mook ever delivered the H2 he claimed he sold in that
Indonesian adventure? What happened to the manufacturing plants he was
supposedly building? He seemed to omit that period from his CV. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Ward... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:08 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 03:25:03 -0700, Sam West wrote:
[quote:d1c399b0a5]There is plenty of hydrogen in water. There is plenty of energy in
sunlight. Dutta's paper suggests a way to cheaply get hydrogen from
water and sunlight.
Its interesting to see how Mr. Conover (hhc314) and Mr. Vader (PV) work
together to misuse their obvious knowledge of chemistry to mislead
people with purposely confusing statements and outright lies. They're
both douchebags for that reason and should be ignored. They cannot be
trusted.
For example, Mr. Vader says, "you can't mine hydrogen dingbat" in a way
that suggests we don't have plenty of hydrogen and plenty of energy to
make hydrogen cheaply available at costs that would make hydrogen
competitive with oil. He says this even while I carefully pointed out
that we had water AND sunlight (we also have water AND high temperature
nuclear reactors) He ignores this preferring to focus on spouting
confusing bullshit as if I didn't say anything about the requirement of
sunlight (or nuclear energy).
Mr. Conover trying to convince people that the new Honda Clarity is a
'boat anchor' without fuel, I pointed out that carbon free hydrogen
would make Clarity a huge hit. Conover then claimed hydrogen with
carbon isn't hydrogen in response to my statement about carbon-free
hydrogen. When I carefully explained hydrogen made with sunlight is
different than hydrogen made with the shift reaction he exhibited a
detailed knowledge of the shift reaction. So, why pretend to be
confused? Just to mislead people.
Mr Conover's and Mr. Vader's use statistics are interesting. They have
both made 60 or more posts every month for years all with the same sort
of malicious disregard of the facts to promote three points;
hydrogen cannot be a practical fuel
so hydrogen powered anything is a waste anyone who says different is a
fraud, a fool, or a pervert
They have such a good knowledge of basic physics and chemistry, and are
so adamant about this subject and are so malicious in their disregard of
reality in the tens of thousands of similar posts on this subject, that
it seems to me they are hired hands - pensioners getting a little bonus
from the oil companies they worked for or took kickbacks from - to make
sure this emerging communications channel did not become a problem for
their bosses.
Objective reality is quite different than the world they are attempting
to sell everyone. Anyone who stands up to them is in for it! They
chased away my friend Mr. Mook. They're rounding up the wagons to do
the same to me.
Major oil wants to keep the following facts out of the public's firm
knowledge;
hydrogen is a practical fuel
anything powered by fossil fuels, may be powered by hydrogen anyone who
says you can't do these things is a fraud or a fool
Here are some basic actual real things to know about hydrogen;
A metric ton of hydrogen may be made from 275 gallons of water using
solar processes or nuclear processes at costs less than the equivalent
cost of any fossil fuel.
A metric ton of hydrogen costing $700 delivers the same amount of energy
as $30 a barrel oil.
A metric ton of hydrogen costing $100 delivers the same amount of energy
as $4 a barrel oil.
Here are some actual real things to know about the oil companies;
The discovery rate of oil peaked in 1996. Oil is a depleting resource
The only way oil companies have to increase their market value is to
raise the price of oil
Low cost hydrogen made abundantly from sunlight and nuclear and
biological sources put a cap on oil prices
Is it any wonder Mr. Conover and Mr. Vader and others are paid by the
oil companies to troll the internet and keep this emerging channel
firmly under the control of the oil companies? McCain lost the election
in part because Obama knew how to use the internet to get votes and
McCain didn't. Do you think the wise guys at the energy companies
haven't thought this all through?
The oil companies have been thinking about their end game strategy since
Hubbert who worked for Shell at the time figured out the logistics curve
for oil in 1954. The oil companies themselves created OPEC in 1960 to
avoid rising exploration costs. They stopped building refineries when
discovery rates peaked. They sold off their retail operations when
prices rose to levels that caused Americans to drive less.
The oil companies have been very lucky in their plan to get the most out
of their depleting reserves.
Hubbert's findings were marginalized. So politicians weren't stirred up
to nationalize oil and messing up the oil company's end game. When
Louis 'too cheap to meter' Strauss said nuclear energy would solve our
problem, he was fired. Lucky oil companies. High temp reactors in
1950s would have capped oil prices at $3 per barrel, and the rosy
scenarios of the 1950s would have come to pass as America, not Saudi
Arabia received trillions of dollars.
When JFK tasked BNL to make high-temp nuclear reactors, he was
assassinated. Bad day for the nation. Lucky day for the oil companies.
LBJ ignored BNL. Nixon asked the oil companies themselves to shape our
energy future. This created the first energy crisis and got oil from $2
per barrel to $10. Carter taking office during an energy crisis
proposed the nuclear option outlined by Straus and BNL to Congress. The
month he submitted his proposal Three Mile Island melted down, China
Syndrome was released in theaters, and Karen Silkwood judgment was
handed down - ending any talk of a nuclear option. Lucky day again for
the oil companies. Bad day for America. Reagan took over and organized
a global muslim militant movement under the Reagan Doctrine to fight the
Russians in Afghanistan. This later got out of hand and turned on us.
We're fighting these same people today. Meanwhile, to pay for the
wholesale transfer of trillions of dollars of wealth into the Middle
East to pay for all the oil we import, Regan restructured the banking
system, which did in the S&Ls, and sold our mortgages to the Chinese and
Saudis. Which deferred the costs we were running up, but which we're
paying for now.
Had Mr. Mook's plan been adopted in 2004 -it still would not have
produced any oil until next year. Yet, had the plan been adopted, oil
would not have gone above $22 per barrel. America would have saved $50
per barrel on every barrel of oil sold. And the $8.4 trillion in cash
that flowed out of our banking system from 2004 to 2008 would still be
here and things would be quite different.
That can be said of any approach between 1954 and today that provided
real competition to the major energy companies.
[/quote:d1c399b0a5]
ISTR posts about a grand multi-component Indonesian project being
financed by selling H2 Mr. Mook hadn't actually produced. Next time you
look in a mirror, why don't you ask him how that turned out? It seems to
be absent in the current story of his life. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:35 pm
|
|