It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Wanderer1990
Why are so many of you ATSers responding so negatively to this great news!
Yes many new inventions and patents have been suppressed in one way or another, I'm not denying that at all. To all you people responding with these same old negative rhetoric and assumptions, I just have to ask why? I hope you all realize that sticking with this thought pattern isn't going to get us anywhere. You should be happy and hopeful that this new development will succeed. I myself am partial to the belief that thought it the most powerful form, and most of you ATSers are showing very poor form. Sure history repeats itself guys, but the variables are always gonna be different, nothing stays the same. All I'm trying to say is that some of you need to get a better outlook on life, it will help all of us more than you might think.
Cella Energy Ltd makes safe, low-cost hydrogen storage materials. Our materials use nano-structuring to safely encapsulate hydrogen at ambient temperatures and pressures. This sidesteps the requirement for an expensive hydrogen infrastructure.
www.cellaenergy.com...
Originally posted by hillynilly
The al gore electric car loving fanatics in this thread
is something sick.
Hydrogen technology will be the gas of tomorrow, I gurantee it.
The oil we do have will not last another 100 years.
No one in the right mind wants to *plug* in a slow, bulky, over modded golf cart on batteries...
Which will take another 100 years to have it perfected. We don't have the time.
edit on 28-1-2011 by hillynilly because: (no reason given)
Most egregious: Where, exactly, does the Times think hydrogen comes from? Santa Claus? More than 95% of US hydrogen is made from natural gas, so running a car on hydrogen doesn't reduce net carbon dioxide emissions compared with a hybrid like the Prius running on gasoline. OK, you say, can't hydrogen be made from carbon-free sources of power, like wind energy or nuclear? Sure, but so can electricity for electric cars. And this gets to the heart of why hydrogen cars would be the last car you would ever want to buy: they are wildly inefficient compared with electric cars.
Electric cars - and plug-in hybrid cars - have an enormous advantage over hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles in utilising low-carbon electricity. That is because of the inherent inefficiency of the entire hydrogen fuelling process, from generating the hydrogen with that electricity to transporting this diffuse gas long distances, getting the hydrogen in the car, and then running it through a fuel cell - all for the purpose of converting the hydrogen back into electricity to drive the same exact electric motor you'll find in an electric car.
The total power-plant-to-wheels efficiency with which a hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle is likely to utilise low-carbon electricity is 20-25% - and the process requires purchasing several expensive pieces of hardware, including the electrolyser and delivery infrastructure. The total efficiency of simply charging an onboard battery with the original low-carbon electricity, and then discharging the battery to run the electric motor in an electric car or plug-in, however, is 75-80%. That is, an electric car will travel three to four times farther on a kilowatt-hour of renewable or nuclear power than a hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle will.
www.guardian.co.uk...
Originally posted by fiftyfifty
Hmmm.. not wanting to be too skeptical but how much energy is required to produce this stuff? It's usually the case that more energy is used in production than in burning the fuel it's replacing. Fingers crossed for a revolution
There have been dozens if not hundreds of alternative fuel inventions over the past decades but we still use good old fashioned gas.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by franspeakfree
Electric care fans always conveniently leave out the fact it produces more pollution creating the energy to charge the batteries than just driving normal cars do. That is why the new car only sold about 10 copies in the first month. It does not help the environment and it is very expensive to own and operate. They only build those to get the government handouts.
Originally posted by Gloster
Just one smart question...How are they going to put that synthetic gasoline deep under the ground?????????????????????
Originally posted by Gloster
reply to post by spikey
lol no humor left, do you really think someone would ask that question seriously? even with those funny simbols you didnt get it as a joke
Conclusion: Electric cars mean greater energy security and less deaths due to mining / drilling / air pollution / water pollution.
Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by C0bzz
Conclusion: Electric cars mean greater energy security and less deaths due to mining / drilling / air pollution / water pollution.
Electricity doesn't make itself it's just a carrier of the energy from mining and drilling, you still have to generate electricity.
Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by C0bzz
Conclusion: Electric cars mean greater energy security and less deaths due to mining / drilling / air pollution / water pollution.
Electricity doesn't make itself it's just a carrier of the energy from mining and drilling, you still have to generate electricity.