Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to Here is where you are wrong....

Again, you don;t get it.
EnergyExpert — (archived)

First you said such stations are impossible. Now that I showed you such H2 stations exist and are fueling cars that are on the road with you, (and not blowing up like Zubrin says they should) you say its not some magic number.

The H2 stations listed are pilot models, to work the bugs out before large scale deployment. That is how the auto industry or any indusrty other then aerospace, works. They build, test and learn. Before you achieve economics of scale by producing them in the millions. Unlike the aerospace industry that builds Shuttle, launches it twice on test flights and then declares it ready for operational service. And then is shocked that their viewgraphs didn't reflect the real world it fails to meet the viewgraph performance.

And look at Ethanol. It has been around as a proposed fuel for decades. It was even considered by Henry Ford as a fuel for the Model-T. And yet look at the limited penetration. There are 5 million flex-fuel vehicles in the U.S. and yet only a 1,000 stations with off the shelf technology? Even with the HEAVY subsidy that ethanol has had from its political friends? Does that tell you anything about how impractical it is? No wonder you want to FORCE people to buy it.

AND in your denial you still miss the point of which is better for the environment. H2 whose output is 99% water, may be produced in any quality needed to replace gasoline with only an increase of base load generation by 1/3 or Ethanol with its CO2 output and heavy demand for imported oil for fertalizer, insecticides and herbicides and coal or natural gas for distilling. H2 will provide a clean fuure, Ethanol just more air and water pollution and destruction of the land.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (132 posts)