The last few days I have heard an add on the local country radio station that says that the shortage of gas and the long lines at the pump were because of taxes and price fixing by the government. If my memory serves me correctly, mid-east countries stopped selling to us because of our policies toward Israel. Please confirm or correct this memory. They gist of this ad was that we should do business as usual with regard to our oil policy. I completely disagree with the idea that we should not raise taxes on gasoline. Not because it would stop us from using as much, but, because the additional tax revenue should go to building the infrastructure to make us energy independent. In the course of making us energy independent we should also insist that non-carbonaceous fuels are developed. It is possible to fix two HUGH problems with one stone.
With the use of wind and solar power to make molecular H2, we could be energy independent in no time at all. Oh yeah, BP says that they are developing alternate energy, check it out. It is a pittance. Only enough to put on the good guys face. Since, the oil companies don't want to be the change producers, we need to take action to see to it that the changes come before someone starts lobbing nukes to control the oil. Lets raise the gas tax! Then, let's take that money and build a safe, clean, and home based long term energy structure.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Why Tiny
Last week, I was talking with Kimberly, my wife, and I remarked that they had given me the nickname Tiny while I was breaking batteries, at Pacific Hyde and Fur in Lewiston, Idaho. It was a scrap metal yard and no longer dealt in hides nor furs. But it was there that they first called me Tiny. Other guys were also given nick names, the little guy was called "little Bit", Boss was the boss. So why was I "Tiny" I was the tallest guy there. She didn't hesitate a second. She said, "Maybe they were measuring your patience." Do ya think? huh!
Am I impatient to think that Bushes proposal in his 10 20 program is too slow? You are darn right I am impatient!!! If we spent as much money every year as he spends in Bushes War every year for ten years on producing hydrogen from wind and solar power we would not have to import any more oil or natural gas. If we take responsibility for our own energy needs we would not be producing CO2 at such an alarming rate!!!
Am I impatient to think that Bushes proposal in his 10 20 program is too slow? You are darn right I am impatient!!! If we spent as much money every year as he spends in Bushes War every year for ten years on producing hydrogen from wind and solar power we would not have to import any more oil or natural gas. If we take responsibility for our own energy needs we would not be producing CO2 at such an alarming rate!!!
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Safety of Hydrogen H2 as a fuel
Today, there seems to be considerable concern for safety. Much more so than in the fifties. I remember a Ford ad on TV. The ad started with a Ford automobile in the picture. Then a wrecking ball hit the side of the car and demonstrated the safety of side impact on the car with a heavy and stout frame. Nobody cared. Ford considered the ad to be a flop, and took it off the air. This week I went to look at new cars, when we considered the Ford Escape hybrid, it seemed that all the sales guy wanted to talk about was the safety of the automobile.!!.
So I wanted to share a little of what I have gleaned from my recent readings about the safety of H2 as a fuel. We have all seen pictures of the Hnderberg dirigible burning back in the thirties. I had, like most of us, assumed that since it was filled with hydrogen that we saw hydrogen burning. It is true that the fire started with hydrogen being ignited by a spark, but the thirty -six deaths did occur from fire!
"Despite the violent fire, most of the crew and passengers survived. Of the 36 passengers and 61 crew, 13 passengers and 22 crew died. Also killed was one member of the ground crew, Navy Linesman Allen Hagaman. Most deaths did not arise from the fire but were suffered by those who leapt from the burning ship. (The lighter-than-air fire burned overhead.) Those passengers who rode the ship on its descent to the ground survived. Some deaths of crew members occurred because they wanted to save more people on board the ship. In comparison, almost twice as many perished when the helium-filled USS Akron crashed. [12]"
Quoted from Wikpedia about the Hindeberg.
Today, the San Fransisco area is laboring under the results of a horrific fire that destroyed a critical piece of infrastructure. It was gasoline fueled. Hydrogen would not have caused this degree of destruction! Gasoline puddles and then burns from the surface for a long time. Hydrogen would burn to some extent, but most would quickly escape into the atmosphere and dissipate.
Hydrogen ignites at a higher concentration than does gasoline. The indicates that it takes four times higher concentration than does gasoline.
A problem does exist with hydrogen. It is odorless. If there were a leak it might go undetected. In a closed space this could have deleterious consequences. There is a simple solution for this problem. Just as with natural gas, add an oder agent. Make it smell!
Overall, I would have to conclude that hydrogen, H2, would increase the safety of our country compared to the ways we are currently using our energy sources.
So I wanted to share a little of what I have gleaned from my recent readings about the safety of H2 as a fuel. We have all seen pictures of the Hnderberg dirigible burning back in the thirties. I had, like most of us, assumed that since it was filled with hydrogen that we saw hydrogen burning. It is true that the fire started with hydrogen being ignited by a spark, but the thirty -six deaths did occur from fire!
"Despite the violent fire, most of the crew and passengers survived. Of the 36 passengers and 61 crew, 13 passengers and 22 crew died. Also killed was one member of the ground crew, Navy Linesman Allen Hagaman. Most deaths did not arise from the fire but were suffered by those who leapt from the burning ship. (The lighter-than-air fire burned overhead.) Those passengers who rode the ship on its descent to the ground survived. Some deaths of crew members occurred because they wanted to save more people on board the ship. In comparison, almost twice as many perished when the helium-filled USS Akron crashed. [12]"
Quoted from Wikpedia about the Hindeberg.
Today, the San Fransisco area is laboring under the results of a horrific fire that destroyed a critical piece of infrastructure. It was gasoline fueled. Hydrogen would not have caused this degree of destruction! Gasoline puddles and then burns from the surface for a long time. Hydrogen would burn to some extent, but most would quickly escape into the atmosphere and dissipate.
Hydrogen ignites at a higher concentration than does gasoline. The indicates that it takes four times higher concentration than does gasoline.
A problem does exist with hydrogen. It is odorless. If there were a leak it might go undetected. In a closed space this could have deleterious consequences. There is a simple solution for this problem. Just as with natural gas, add an oder agent. Make it smell!
Overall, I would have to conclude that hydrogen, H2, would increase the safety of our country compared to the ways we are currently using our energy sources.
latest passion
Yesterday, I became excited about a magazine that I found on the web. On page 10, see link http://h2nation.com/h2nation-4.pdf. Dick Morris, the ex Clinton advisor and occasional Fox News contributor, writes about Hydrogen economy. The question that he raises and one that I have questioned for a while now is, "wouldn't it be better to develop alternate energy, rather than spending $105,000,000,000.00 a year to be the police force for a group of people that hate each other, and seem to be unable to find forgivness?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
