Wow. I'm surprised this story didn't get wider circulation. If the West can refine the technology to power something larger and more comfortable like a Lexus SUV then things will never be the same. It would nice to tell OPEC and these revolting Middle Eastern regimes that collectively we don't need them anymore and that they can return to scratching around in the desert, interfering with the camels, killing each other etc without us really having to give a s**t about "oil security". Result!
Graviton Yankee (13.5 mt)
Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Sun Jun 15, 2008 3:31 am
Here is the link's video:
We also need to find out the reliability, performance, range -- since water is heavy -- and servicing issues of this car. I am guessing this car runs on a redox (oxidation-reduction) fuel cell reaction that might need expensive servicing.
In parallel, printers for PCs can be cheap, but the manufacturers stick it to people on supplies needed to keep them running.
An example of hidden costs for a possible redox fuel cell concept would be a spike in metals or possible membrane materials used to supply such cars, much like biofuels generated their own crises in crop price spikes because of surge in demand. The constant need for replenishments of support technology materials might be a hidden cost, especially since fuel cell efficiency decreases with current increase.
Don't blame everything on "big oil." There might be practical reasons why this never took off on a large scale. And no, I am not funded by big oil.
Yes, the accusation of being "funded by Big Oil" is a standard closing-down-the-argument technique deployed by Red-Greens whenever anyone dares to challenge their sacred cow assumptions on man made global warming, the necessity to live only in tents, exist only on muesli and so on.
You speak of the technology in the past tense, "never took off", yet we know from experience that many research innovations developed in Europe and the US were subsequently refined and mass produced at reasonable cost in Japan eg television, the video recorder etc.
That said the pernicious influence of large American corporates on the population at large is well documented. I understand LA had a very effective public transport system until GM lobbied to have it dismantled, ensuring that residents had to buy their cars in order to get around. It is conceivable that US research into water based propulsion was spiked by oil interests for similiar reasons. Of course Japan has no natural resources at all and relies on innovation and export to survive. No special interests there. Given the impending $250 barrel of oil and the talent available at Japanese corporation like Toyota one would hope that water powered vehicles will take off now the Japs on the case....
sonicbomb Forum Admin
Joined: Aug 06, 2006
Sun Jun 15, 2008 9:58 pm
Any technology that threatens the billion dollar profits of oil companies is going to be suppressed, ergo this does not. Grav, the marketing term for what you are talking about specifically printers (and baked beans ) is a "Loss leader".
Thanks for the video link Grav and yes it would be great to leave that corrupt Saudi royal family bankrupt. They are surely going to use all of their resources along with multinational oil companies to prevent the commercialization of water powered cars.
Having water as the main fuel would make the U.S. and the world economy to grow at unprecedented levels without the environment having to pay for it because what makes an economy grow is energy not money.
There were past American and Italian attempts for it but they “disappeared”, this is a current also impressive American water technology:
Record prices have prompted a slew of bills to curtail the role of investors, but traders say they could backfire.
By Steve Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com staff writer
June 17, 2008: 11:19 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Fed up with soaring oil prices and a chorus of people blaming Wall Street speculators, Congress is considering a host of rules aimed at limiting the inflow of investor money into oil contracts.
But oil traders urge caution. While more disclosure is a good thing, they say making it harder for speculators to invest in oil futures could have the opposite effect intended, and send prices higher.
In light of oil's phenomenal climb from under $50 a barrel to nearly $140 in less than 18 months - and the public belief that Wall Street traders were behind the rise - Congress is awash in bills that attempt to limit the role of speculators. Several have bipartisan support and could soon become law.
"In two days, the price of oil rose $16," said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., at a joint hearing of two Senate panels on oil speculation Tuesday. "Did I miss something, was there some war in the Middle East?"
"No, something is going on besides supply and demand, and it could be excessive speculation," he added.
Proposals include requiring foreign exchanges to provide more information about crude oil trades, limiting the number of contracts speculators are allowed to hold, increasing the amount of money speculators need to put up to buy an oil contract, and removing speculators from the market entirely and limiting trade to just producers and consumers.
Traders say requiring more information from foreign exchanges is a good idea, as markets function better the more transparent they are.
But they urge lawmakers not to hamper speculative trading. They say big oil users such as refiners or airlines - unable to find a counter party to offset their bets - could send prices higher by hoarding product or through panic buying.
"They have to be very, very careful with what they're doing here," said Phil Flynn, senior market analyst at Alaron Trading in Chicago. 'I always worry when politicians think they know better than the market what the price of oil should be."
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum