oil=sand??? West coast sticking it to NWO

[scandinaviany3]

If you all remember a little time ago huckabee would spout off about the middle eastern oil being valuable as sand...the whole while ron was saying the government needs to get just get out of the way...

Well it sounds like the hydrogen highway in california has now spread to BC for the next olympics, into WA state, Oregon...The west coast appears to be positioned to heavily invest in hydrogen and electricity to fuel its transportation.

You dont want to miss this...come one come all to the west coast and lets start ourselves a new self sufficient nation :)

Powertechlabs in BC is now working to test hydroenergy, solar, wind as well as put in electrolysis equipment from said energy systems and others to fuel our cars.

In addition Honda presses on with GM/Hystat and other to put these systems either at a station or at your homes.

Finally quantumsphere knocks out of the park past electrolysis electrode efficiencies to produce hydrogen

http://www.qsinano.com/white_papers/QSI_DSE_Hydrogen_PPT_March_07.pdf


No..not 55%..not 65%...but a jump all the way to 85%, exceeding the DOE's dream target goals and with efforts to push this now in place to 95%

Drill now, Drill here...is officially dead!!!:D

Time to move your money in to batteries and hydrogen and out of oil :)....lets see that price fall :)

[robert4rp08]

Cool. The manufacturing plants will all probably be "dirty" though. If this is honestly about "saving the environment" the factories will be switched to wind/solar/natural gas power before production.

Somewhat off topic but....
Water vapor is the most important and prevalent greenhouse of them all. Can someone explain why it never gets talked about by the global warming "experts"?

P.S. Platinum is needed to produce the fuel cells. *wink wink*

[Sematary]

Cool. The manufacturing plants will all probably be "dirty" though. If this is honestly about "saving the environment" the factories will be switched to wind/solar/natural gas power before production.

Somewhat off topic but....
Water vapor is the most important and prevalent greenhouse of them all. Can someone explain why it never gets talked about by the global warming "experts"?

P.S. Platinum is needed to produce the fuel cells. *wink wink*

Water vapor? Are you serious? What would you do? Cover the oceans? And, if you somehow managed to eradicate water vapor, then it would never rain because there would be no clouds.
In fact, steam (aka water vapor) is a cheap and renewable energy source. And it doesn't pollute.

[scandinaviany3]

Cool. The manufacturing plants will all probably be "dirty" though. If this is honestly about "saving the environment" the factories will be switched to wind/solar/natural gas power before production.

Somewhat off topic but....
Water vapor is the most important and prevalent greenhouse of them all. Can someone explain why it never gets talked about by the global warming "experts"?

P.S. Platinum is needed to produce the fuel cells. *wink wink*

Robert,

In terms of the hydrogen production sites those are electrolysis based and the energy to produce them is either local solar or energy from dams, or wind energy. There is also exploration of tidal, and geothermal underway. Completely clean and not requireing good old oil or coal.

In terms of water vapor the station or home based electrolysizer systems usually send out oxygen like plants do. The cars burn hydrogen(similar to CNG) or can have fuel cells that will give off water. Not so sure on platinum for fuel cells being needed in the future given all the electrode work i just listed. They all want to get rid of it for costs reasons. Not to mention the efficiencies seem far superior with these new nanomaterials that quantumnanoscience and others are coming up with at MIT.

I have heard it said that water content in the air would raise temps given its absorption spectrum. But on the other hand a great many areas of the world, including the north pole claim that there has been a marked reduction of cloud layers. The result there is no shield from the sun since there is no water vapor. They want more cloud layers to prevent the ice from melting so rapidly.

Also if there is some damage to the poles for ozone reasons, similar to plants the electrolyzers will not be giving off water but instead oxygen. This combo i think would be exactly what all sides ordered for balance.

So for all of these reasons i dont see the pollution factor you mention at all.

Again these guys have really thought these things out.

Definitely a thought for all of us to consider the Pacific North West as a takeover zone for the ron paul movement.

It is the saudia arabia of water...the key to our freedoms for all.

Also food is cheap, water is abundant to drink and clean, the western canadians are connected to them and alaska.

Certainly could see some day from the dakotas to oregon and up to alaska becomeing its own nation.

[bg1654]

I have never understood why people think hydrogen is such a good idea. Perhaps you guys can help me.

As far as I understand it hydrogen will be made one of two ways... maybe both:
1) From hydrocarbons (oil)
2) From water using electrolysis

Path 1 defeats the purpose of energy independance and probably wont solve the polution issue.

Path 2 is inefficient. Hydrogen will be used one of two methods:
1) Combustion: This method is highly energy inefficient and will be accordingly expensive compared to conventional means.
2) Fuel cell: hydrogen will be converted to water and energy will be released in the form of electricity to power an electric motor.

Method 1 defeats the purpose totally by being even more inefficient, expensive, and/or polluting than using gas/oil.

Method 2 is inefficient because you are taking electricity turning it in to hydrogen then turning it back in to electricity and suffering two losses on conversion.

To me it seems the best method would be to simply leave it as electricity and use electric motors.

[dannno]

I have never understood why people think hydrogen is such a good idea. Perhaps you guys can help me.

As far as I understand it hydrogen will be made one of two ways... maybe both:
1) From hydrocarbons (oil)
2) From water using electrolysis

Path 1 defeats the purpose of energy independance and probably wont solve the polution issue.

Path 2 is inefficient. Hydrogen will be used one of two methods:
1) Combustion: This method is highly energy inefficient and will be accordingly expensive compared to conventional means.
2) Fuel cell: hydrogen will be converted to water and energy will be released in the form of electricity to power an electric motor.

Method 1 defeats the purpose totally by being even more inefficient, expensive, and/or polluting than using gas/oil.

Method 2 is inefficient because you are taking electricity turning it in to hydrogen then turning it back in to electricity and suffering two losses on conversion.

To me it seems the best method would be to simply leave it as electricity and use electric motors.

Because hydrogen is a cleaner and less expensive way to store energy than batteries.

There is a guy who has a completely self sufficient house in New Jersey. Unfortunately he doesn't get enough sun in the winter to power his house off of solar, but he gets more than enough energy in the summer. So instead of buying expensive batteries with lots of chemicals in them, he converted the solar energy to hydrogen using electrolysis and stored it in pressurized tanks. So he effectively uses the hydrogen as a way to store energy so he has enough to last through the winter.

[robert4rp08]

Water vapor? Are you serious? What would you do? Cover the oceans? And, if you somehow managed to eradicate water vapor, then it would never rain because there would be no clouds.
In fact, steam (aka water vapor) is a cheap and renewable energy source. And it doesn't pollute.

While there are multiple reasons for developing alternative sources of energy, I was probing at the motivation of the global warming (errr..... climate change) "experts" for developing hydrogen-based energy sources. Allow me to elaborate...

Theory: Excessive amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere cause an increase in temperatures on Earth. (Re: greenhouse effect)
Facts: CO2 is a greenhouse gas and a byproduct of burning fossil fuels.
Basic Hypothesis of Anthropogenic Global Warming: Since there are a lot of vehicles on the road, increases in global temperatures are a result of the CO2 emissions produced by these vehicles.

Another Fact: Water vapor is a greenhouse gas.
My Question: With the hypothesis posed by anthropogenic global warming experts, how can they advocate the use of hydrogen vehicles when water vapor is a greenhouse gas? To do so contradicts their hypothesis. Moreover, they would have to, in addition to CO2 emissions, classify anthropogenic water vapor as a "pollutant."