[AT] Hydrogen fuel

[charlie hill]

My opinion is that we should be building safe nukes and using the waste heat 
from the nukes to do things like making ethanol and hydrogen and posibly 
gasifying coal.  We will always need portable (gas, ethanol, etc) fuels but 
there is reason why we should be burning coal and petroleum to make 
electricity.  What I don't understand is this idea that nukes have to be 
massive.  Every submarine and aircraft carrier in the modern US Navy is 
fueled by a nuke that's pretty small and presumably safe.

Charlie
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Edchainsaw at aol.com>
To: <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 8:16 PM
Subject: Re: [AT] Hydrogen fuel


>
>
> In a message dated 2/24/2008 1:08:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> at-request at lists.antique-tractor.com writes:
>
> How  could they have split the hydrogen from the oxygen without using more
> fuel  than they could have gained?  Free lunch?  Dumping the  condensate
> overboard would have been the most efficient unless they needed  any
> condensate for ballast to make up for the weight of the fuel  burned.
>
> George Willer
>
> It does not take  that much fuel to dived the  element of  water---  there
> are several ways to do it and it takes LESS fuel than   drilling  a  well 
> to get
> oil.
> a  small  solar cell  with leads in to water  will do  it.  I have  worked
> with this for over  30yrs in   experimentation.     Hydrogen is NO free 
> lunch,
> it is  clean  and  can be made  clean.     I will  say I am a NUKE backer
> myself  but I know it is  very  HUMAN  unfriendly..
>
>
>
> **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
> (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
> 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at