|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
![]() |
Segami
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:04 AM Original message |
BREAKTHROUGH Promises $1.50 Per Gallon Synthetic Gasoline With NO CARBON EMISSIONS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
msongs
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:05 AM Response to Original message |
1. raise your hand if you believe the oil corporations are gonna go for this lol nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gateley
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:11 AM Response to Reply #1 |
3. I was just thinking I hope the "secret recipe" is sequestered in a safe place. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
naaman fletcher
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:05 AM Response to Original message |
2. phew... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Broderick
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:00 AM Response to Reply #2 |
19. LMAO!!!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MattBaggins
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:16 PM Response to Reply #2 |
60. But it's got lots of scientificky sounding words |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gateley
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:12 AM Response to Original message |
4. What do you guys think? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tinrobot
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:35 AM Response to Reply #4 |
5. Curious about how micon-sized capsules would flow |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gateley
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:43 AM Response to Reply #5 |
8. Well, that makes sense. I'd love to see this turn out to really be a success. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
n2doc
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:08 PM Response to Reply #5 |
37. Should be just fine. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:35 PM Response to Reply #37 |
63. Agree on the carbon footprint. I also want to see energy balance calculations. nt. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MedicalAdmin
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:42 PM Response to Reply #5 |
50. No carbon emissions? So what is it emitting in C's place? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:47 PM Response to Reply #50 |
52. Its a hydrogen fuel right? So the exhaust is essentially water or water vapor.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tinrobot
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:46 PM Response to Reply #52 |
55. Hydrogen is technically energy transport, not a fuel. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 03:01 PM Response to Reply #55 |
57. Technically perhaps but practically its still a fuel. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:55 PM Response to Reply #57 |
69. I agree with your observation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:51 PM Response to Reply #55 |
66. Excellent observations. I want to see their energy balance calculations. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leveymg
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:54 PM Response to Reply #55 |
68. Energy source for eletrolysis need not be carbon-based - could be photoelectric. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:45 PM Response to Reply #52 |
65. The question is what elements make up the non-carbon backbone. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:53 PM Response to Reply #65 |
67. Here is more on the composite material... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 05:32 PM Response to Reply #67 |
73. Thanks for the info. I can think of several ways for managing the ash. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:40 PM Response to Reply #50 |
64. Look like they start with non carbon containing molecules, then enrich them with hydrogen, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leeroysphitz
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 09:18 PM Response to Reply #50 |
75. Who cares? It's free energy. Were all gonna get rich! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:33 PM Response to Reply #5 |
62. Hydrogen richness likely means that it is either gaseous or a light fluid. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:32 PM Response to Reply #4 |
61. Energy balance calculations need to be made. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
immoderate
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:40 AM Response to Original message |
6. Well, I won't hold my breath. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dogmudgeon
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:42 AM Response to Original message |
7. " ... our unique patented proce$$ ... " |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maine_Nurse
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 02:26 AM Response to Reply #7 |
12. After the oil companies lobby for the import tax... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NewMoonTherian
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 09:43 AM Response to Reply #7 |
17. But if the other claims are true... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
w4rma
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:35 AM Response to Reply #17 |
29. Green should be cheaper rather than more expensive than dirty since dirty passes along costs to the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NewMoonTherian
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 12:56 AM Response to Reply #29 |
79. I'm not sure what you mean. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:51 AM Original message |
Time for another production of Mamet's "The Water Engine" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:51 AM Response to Original message |
9. Dupe |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
patrick t. cakes
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 01:58 AM Response to Original message |
10. Stephen Voller... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sakabatou
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 02:19 AM Response to Original message |
11. If this works, I wonder how long till Big Oil tries to kill it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joeunderdog
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:27 PM Response to Reply #11 |
45. or kill him. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
entanglement
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 02:27 AM Response to Original message |
13. This is a new hydrogen transport and storage mechanism, not a primary energy breakthrough |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xithras
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 03:49 AM Response to Original message |
14. While hydrides could be used as a fuel source, it doesn't address the biggest problem with Hydrogen. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:28 AM Response to Reply #14 |
22. Is that what dirigibles needed? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 05:07 PM Response to Reply #22 |
70. It is possible to make small quantities of molecular hydrogen via reaction of chemicals. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 05:18 PM Response to Reply #70 |
72. Ah. Just great, huh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 05:41 PM Response to Reply #72 |
74. I left out solar and wind energy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:48 AM Response to Original message |
15. back in the 70's they said nuclear power would practically eliminate your electricity bill |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:29 AM Response to Reply #15 |
23. And that is relevant to the topic how? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MedicalAdmin
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:45 PM Response to Reply #23 |
51. It ain't - he's just having a Reagan moment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:10 PM Response to Reply #51 |
59. Well, gee, look at you bein' all snarky |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MedicalAdmin
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 10:25 AM Response to Reply #59 |
83. So I did the Raygun impression well? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Qutzupalotl
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 02:18 PM Response to Reply #23 |
56. The pricing estimate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 04:09 PM Response to Reply #23 |
58. It's talking about reducing energy costs |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quaker bill
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 05:35 AM Response to Original message |
16. My son was involved with this research |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:30 AM Response to Reply #16 |
24. Thank you for this information! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
renate
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:32 AM Response to Reply #16 |
26. seriously? How incredibly cool for him! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:23 PM Response to Reply #16 |
44. Thanks - you report it better than 'gizmag' does |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:48 PM Response to Reply #16 |
54. Hope he is successful with his new research on using nuke waste for fuel.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quaker bill
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 07:35 AM Response to Reply #54 |
80. The concept has already been proven |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 09:14 AM Response to Reply #80 |
82. Sounds great. Hope it all works out. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bluestate10
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 05:17 PM Response to Reply #16 |
71. Thank you for the information. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quaker bill
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 07:44 AM Response to Reply #71 |
81. My son is a materials scientist |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hunter
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 10:30 AM Response to Original message |
18. Our precious automobiles! They're saved! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Recursion
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:21 AM Response to Original message |
20. How much carbon is released making the fuel? (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:27 AM Response to Original message |
21. THIS? Would be a bigger game-changer than any current war. Recommend Post #16 before you snark. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Broderick
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:30 AM Response to Original message |
25. My Aunt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Imagevision
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:32 AM Response to Original message |
27. You know this guy will disappear... ! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vickers
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:34 AM Response to Original message |
28. "a future transportation fuel with a stable price" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DainBramaged
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:35 AM Response to Original message |
30. Why does the word Ponzi keep flashing in my mind? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:38 AM Response to Original message |
31. So where do these "complex hydrides" come from? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
formercia
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:55 AM Response to Reply #31 |
34. Start with a basic Hydride: H2O, break it down into Hydrogen and Oxygen... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:58 AM Response to Reply #34 |
36. It takes alot energy to split H2O.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
formercia
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:17 PM Response to Reply #36 |
39. That's my point, sorry for not being clear |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:18 PM Response to Reply #39 |
41. You were clear.. I just didnt read your whole post.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:13 PM Response to Reply #34 |
38. If you just look at it as a better way to store and utillize hydrogen then yes that makes sense.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
formercia
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:18 PM Response to Reply #38 |
40. Usually done with electricity |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:21 PM Response to Reply #40 |
42. Yeah, and electricity is mostly coal produced at the moment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MedicalAdmin
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:48 PM Response to Reply #31 |
53. They come from the complex hidrides islands. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:39 AM Response to Original message |
32. How much energy is used, how much pollution released, in making this fuel? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:46 AM Response to Reply #32 |
33. Yeah, that's the big question.. the article is absent critical details like that.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 11:56 AM Response to Original message |
35. Here more detail on the production process.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:27 PM Response to Reply #35 |
46. "cannot be easily re-hydrided or chemically recycled" seems the big problem, to me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
charlie
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:37 PM Response to Reply #46 |
48. Yeah, sounds like sensational science "journalism" again |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DCBob
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:41 PM Response to Reply #46 |
49. The article did mention they are working on other hydride materials that can be recycled.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EstimatedProphet
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:22 PM Response to Original message |
43. Look for this to be on the market in 50 years |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jkid
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 12:30 PM Response to Original message |
47. While it may be good news for the environment. It will still result in traffic gridlock... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thesush
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 10:21 PM Response to Original message |
76. . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kablooie
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 10:52 PM Response to Original message |
77. If it's real it will be locked away behind lawsuits for decades. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeSwiss
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 10:56 PM Response to Original message |
78. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KansasVoter
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 10:26 AM Response to Original message |
84. I bet I read 500 of these stories for everyone that actually makes it to market. Skeptical. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nuclear Unicorn
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 10:26 AM Response to Original message |
85. POODLES! Thread is over 24hrs...can't rec |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
garybeck
![]() |
Fri Jan-28-11 12:14 PM Response to Original message |
86. Misleading/incorrect OP: "NO CARBON EMISSIONS" think again! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Fri Jul 26th 2024, 06:41 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC