FW: <VV> E85 fuel -- solving the energy problems

[John Maxwell]

>WHAT????????? Low cost?????? Ease of manufacture???????? This statement is
more than just misleading.

Electrolysis is easy enough, and can be powered from many sources.



>There are processes for freeing hydrogen from these other elements and
isolating it in its pure form, but they
>consume ENERGY -- lots of it.

There is no free lunch and any high density energy source is going to have
cost.  The highest level of natural energy is MASS.  If I had my preference,
I would have a nuclear gas turbine powered vehicle.  You know you have
arrived if your accelerator pedal is connected to control rods.  That would
be direct nuclear power.  Hydrogen power has the ability to allow us to have
indirect nuclear powered vehicles where hydrogen is generated by nuclear
power plants.  Even the greenies have come to understand that nuclear power
is better environmentally than fossil fuels, and hydrogen combustion is
certainly pollution free.  The sad thing is that a quarter of a century ago,
people with no foresight shut down the nuclear power industry in this
country even as the rest of the world moved out.  The end result was that we
had no chose but to feed money to the parts of the world that hates our guts
and wants to do us harm.  Now we are paying the price.  Economic prosperity
is directly related to ability to utilize energy, and for us to stay on top
for economic prosperity, we need essentially unlimited energy.  Sorry, but
that means nuclear.


>Don't swallow the promises that hydrogen, ethanol, etc. are magic solutions
>for energy independence. These are just politically-motivated
>pronouncements from our ineffective, generally-dishonest,
>special-interest-directed, U.S. government. Said government is primarily
>run by third-rate lawyers and other incompetents that can't get or don't
>want real jobs, and have no understanding of science or reality. Their next
>brilliant idea for solving the country's energy problems may be to have
>Alberto Gonzales petition the Supreme Court to declare all inconvenient
>laws, like gravity and those of thermodynamics, unconstitutional, and thus
>null and void. Don't laugh, the Supreme Court has already, at least once,
>ruled against scientific truth. See Nix v. Helden.

The real problem with the politicians is they listen to emotional derelicts
instead of the people who have the ability to generate technical solutions.
We are now behind the eight ball because it will take time to build the
nuclear power plants that will get us out of the mess we are in.  In the
mean time, there are reasons to pursue stopgap measures.

>There are two, high-potential solutions to our planet's energy problems.
>But, they will require actual scientific research and technological
>development. Since these concepts are well beyond the comprehension and
>political time horizons of politicians and bureaucrats, don't expect to see
>any real, effective plans for solving the energy problems.

Huh?

>As individuals, we are quite alone to solve our own energy problems.
>Re-invigorating economical cars like Corvairs is a positive step.


>Paul