Ben Zarzycki wrote:
The point of electrolysis is not that it is cheaper (although it may be if we had an abundance of clean energy such as solar cells). The point is that is creates a clean "hydrogen cycle" that is not dependent on plants. Water is split. Water is made. No intermediary steps. This is not the case for any other method.
Why is 'not using plants' a desideratum? What are we, some religious sect that cannot tolerate the killing of our leafy brethren?
The problem with solar cells is not that we don't have an abundance of solar energy. The problem is that solar cells are Really Expensive, currently an order of magnitude or more too expensive. There's another objection to electrolysis, btw: if you have large scale electrolysis, it's rather easy to modify the system to produce a side stream of heavy water (H comes off much faster than D in an electrolytic cell, with a separation factor of something like 7.) So large scale electrolysis means any country can have a clandestine plutonium production program for little extra cost. This is way off topic, so I'll retreat to private email after this. Paul _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
