Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
You're being faciscious (?), yes?
What would make you tend to think that I haven't calculated long ago that
almost everything revolves around the lucre? (That is, of course, the way
"contemporary society has been developed.)
That's also exactly where the concept of "environmental economics" becomes
the ace in the hole.
Todd Swearingen
- Original Message -
From: "Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
> Haven't you figured out by now that everything is about hoarding money?
>
> Appal Energy wrote:
>
> >Everything else aside, both industry and government have proven
themselves
> >criminally irresponsible day in and day out with LWRs. Modular and
> >inherantly safe designs exist. But no. Economy of scale supercedes the
> >concept of broadest safety margin.
> >
> >Throw in the legislation which prevents actual damage recovery in event
of
> >any abnormality ("limitted liability" - to the power of about 6) and
there
> >is sufficient proof that the power structure is less concerned about
people
> >than it is about economics.
> >
> >Most have no use for such mindless mathematics.
> >
> >Todd Swearingen
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> --
> Martin Klingensmith
> http://infoarchive.net/
> http://nnytech.net/
>
>
>
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Biofuels list archives:
> http://archive.nnytech.net/
>
> Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give You Thirty Dollars for
Trying!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/KXUxcA/fNtFAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Haven't you figured out by now that everything is about hoarding money?
Appal Energy wrote:
>Everything else aside, both industry and government have proven themselves
>criminally irresponsible day in and day out with LWRs. Modular and
>inherantly safe designs exist. But no. Economy of scale supercedes the
>concept of broadest safety margin.
>
>Throw in the legislation which prevents actual damage recovery in event of
>any abnormality ("limitted liability" - to the power of about 6) and there
>is sufficient proof that the power structure is less concerned about people
>than it is about economics.
>
>Most have no use for such mindless mathematics.
>
>Todd Swearingen
>
>
>
--
--
Martin Klingensmith
http://infoarchive.net/
http://nnytech.net/
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Rent DVDs from home.
Over 14,500 titles. Free Shipping
& No Late Fees. Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/BVVfoB/hP.FAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Everything else aside, both industry and government have proven themselves
criminally irresponsible day in and day out with LWRs. Modular and
inherantly safe designs exist. But no. Economy of scale supercedes the
concept of broadest safety margin.
Throw in the legislation which prevents actual damage recovery in event of
any abnormality ("limitted liability" - to the power of about 6) and there
is sufficient proof that the power structure is less concerned about people
than it is about economics.
Most have no use for such mindless mathematics.
Todd Swearingen
- Original Message -
From: "Darryl McMahon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
> Hakan wrote:
> > Once somewhat involved in the design and building of the last
> > reactors in Sweden, I am not a starch opponent of nuclear
> > one pass power. It is the enrichment of several passes and the
> > massive amount of enriched material it results in, that make
> > me a very strong opponent to nuclear power. Without several
> > passes, we only have fuel for 60 years more and it will be
> > better to not use it at all, than produce a world that have so
> > much enriched material that it will be impossible to control.
> >
> I worked for several years for the federal government agency that
regulated nuclear
> energy in Canada. I am rather ambivalent about nuclear energy vs. fossil
fuels as
> a result. However, the idea of the U.S. starting an agressive campaign of
building
> light-water reactors gives me chills. It won't be cheap power, we've
proven that
> already, and Yucca Mountain notwithstanding, still have not resolved
long-term
> radioactive waste storage. This is the same government that could not
remember to
> budget for Afghanistan reconstruction just one year after the commitment,
but we
> should trust them with long-term treatment of radioactive waste?
>
>
> Darryl McMahon
>
>
> Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
> http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
>
> Biofuels list archives:
> http://archive.nnytech.net/
>
> Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading!
Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/cjB9SD/od7FAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM
-~->
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/
Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
They'll be long dead by the time someone has to worry about it. Darryl McMahon wrote: >> >> >I worked for several years for the federal government agency that regulated >nuclear >energy in Canada. I am rather ambivalent about nuclear energy vs. fossil >fuels as >a result. However, the idea of the U.S. starting an agressive campaign of >building >light-water reactors gives me chills. It won't be cheap power, we've proven >that >already, and Yucca Mountain notwithstanding, still have not resolved long-term >radioactive waste storage. This is the same government that could not >remember to >budget for Afghanistan reconstruction just one year after the commitment, but >we >should trust them with long-term treatment of radioactive waste? > > >Darryl McMahon > > > > > > -- -- Martin Klingensmith http://infoarchive.net/ http://nnytech.net/ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/O10svD/Me7FAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM -~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Hello, Thanks for the joule - electron correction, by the way. The nuclear reactor issue is part of it, certainly. They also want to use coal (the last big reservoir of fossil fuel - 100 years left, at least) as a primary source of hydrogen (reforming coal gas to produce H2). The uniting feature is that their energy buddies would remain in control of the erngy supply - and they obviously don't care about the resulting environmental and social devastation. It is encouraging to note that the plans for 1000's of nuclear reactors advanced in the seventies were scrapped - people can make a difference. Read John McPhee's book, "The Curve of Binding Energy", for a review of what might have been. It is also relevant to the use of depleted uranium in Iraq, and the expansion of nuclear weapons programs around the world. On Mon, 5 May 2003, Kim Nguyen wrote: > bush and the current admin are pushing for the hydrogen cars because > they want to revive the nuclear power industry...they see us using nukes > to crack water and make hydrogen...what does everyone think about this? > > kn > sac, ca > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/05/03 10:34AM >>> > http://lfee.mit.edu/features/hydrogen_vehicles > Laboratory For Energy and the Environment > > Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle won't reduce greenhouse gas emissions by > 2020; diesel and gasoline hybrids are a better bet, concludes an MIT > study > > Published in MIT Tech Talk, March 5, 2003. > > Even with aggressive research, the hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle will > not be better than the diesel hybrid (a vehicle powered by a > conventional engine supplemented by an electric motor) in terms of > total energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, says a study > recently released by the Laboratory for Energy and the Environment > (LFEE). > > And while hybrid vehicles are already appearing on the roads, > adoption of the hydrogen-based vehicle will require major > infrastructure changes to make compressed hydrogen available. If we > need to curb greenhouse gases within the next 20 years, improving > mainstream gasoline and diesel engines and transmissions and > expanding the use of hybrids is the way to go. > > These results come from a systematic and comprehensive assessment of > a variety of engine and fuel technologies as they are likely to be in > 2020 with intense research but no real "breakthroughs." The > assessment was led by Malcolm A. Weiss, LFEE senior research staff > member, and John B. Heywood, the Sun Jae Professor of Mechanical > Engineering and director of MIT's Laboratory for 21st-Century Energy. > > Release of the study comes just a month after the Bush administration > announced a billion-dollar initiative to develop commercially viable > hydrogen fuel cells and a year after establishment of the > government-industry program to develop the hydrogen fuel-cell-powered > "FreedomCar." > > The new assessment is an extension of a study done in 2000, which > likewise concluded that the much-touted hydrogen fuel cell was not a > clear winner. This time, the MIT researchers used optimistic > fuel-cell performance assumptions cited by some fuel-cell advocates, > and the conclusion remained the same. > > The hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle has low emissions and energy use on > the road--but converting a hydrocarbon fuel such as natural gas or > gasoline into hydrogen to fuel this vehicle uses substantial energy > and emits greenhouse gases. > > "Ignoring the emissions and energy use involved in making and > delivering the fuel and manufacturing the vehicle gives a misleading > impression," said Weiss. > > However, the researchers do not recommend stopping work on the > hydrogen fuel cell. "If auto systems with significantly lower > greenhouse gas emissions are required in, say, 30 to 50 years, > hydrogen is the only major fuel option identified to date," said > Heywood. The hydrogen must, of course, be produced without making > greenhouse gas emissions, hence from a non-carbon source such as > solar energy or from conventional fuels while sequestering the carbon > emissions. > > The assessment highlights the advantages of the hybrid, a highly > efficient approach that combines an engine (or a fuel cell) with a > battery and an electric motor. Continuing to work on today's gasoline > engine and its fuel will bring major improvements by 2020, cutting > energy use and emissions by a third compared to today's vehicles. But > aggressive research on a hybrid with a diesel engine could yield a > 2020 vehicle that is twice as efficient and half as polluting as that > "evolved" technology, and future gasoline engine hybrids will not be > far behind, the study says. > > Other researchers on the study were Andreas Schafer, principal > research engineer in the Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial > Development, and Vinod K. Natarajan (S.M. 2002). The new report and > the original "On the Road in 2020" study from 2000 are available at > http://lfee.mit.edu/publications under "
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Hakan wrote: > Once somewhat involved in the design and building of the last > reactors in Sweden, I am not a starch opponent of nuclear > one pass power. It is the enrichment of several passes and the > massive amount of enriched material it results in, that make > me a very strong opponent to nuclear power. Without several > passes, we only have fuel for 60 years more and it will be > better to not use it at all, than produce a world that have so > much enriched material that it will be impossible to control. > I worked for several years for the federal government agency that regulated nuclear energy in Canada. I am rather ambivalent about nuclear energy vs. fossil fuels as a result. However, the idea of the U.S. starting an agressive campaign of building light-water reactors gives me chills. It won't be cheap power, we've proven that already, and Yucca Mountain notwithstanding, still have not resolved long-term radioactive waste storage. This is the same government that could not remember to budget for Afghanistan reconstruction just one year after the commitment, but we should trust them with long-term treatment of radioactive waste? Darryl McMahon Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. http://us.click.yahoo.com/O10svD/Me7FAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM -~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Also this: http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/20686/story.htm Los Alamos nuclear lab looks to build clean energy USA: May 6, 2003 LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - The birthplace of the atomic bomb, Los Alamos National Laboratory, is looking to embark on a new path that could make the preeminent nuclear weapons lab a leader in the clean-energy source of hydrogen fuel cells. The weapons lab, founded 60 years ago, has been researching hydrogen fuel cell technology for about 25 years and has said it is ready to answer U.S. President George W. Bush's call to make the technology into a viable energy source. "Los Alamos has always been about more than making the atomic bomb. If fuel cells become a more useful technology we'll be an overnight success, even though we've been working on it since 1977," said Ken Stroh, program manager for hydrogen and fuel cell technology at the laboratory. In his State of the Union address earlier this year, Bush proposed a $1.7 billion initiative to fund hydrogen fuel cell research over the next five years, with an ultimate goal of eliminating U.S. dependence on foreign oil by 2040. There are numerous facilities fighting for a piece of the $1.7 billion pie, but Los Alamos thinks it may have an inside track through its experience as a U.S. government lab, its prestige, and by having a governor in Bill Richardson who once served as the U.S. energy secretary and understands the inner workings of Washington. "We've never had a supportive environment like this," Stroh said. Lab officials have recently met with the likes of General Motors and Ford to discuss ways to create an economy based on fuel-cell technology. Los Alamos is looking for any good news it can get. In recent months, the lab has been rocked by ethics scandals that cost its former director his job and questioned the oversight ability of the lab's senior managers. FUEL CELLS TO GO Hydrogen fuel cells can be built to any size, which means they can power anything from a cell phone, which takes about one watt of electricity, to an automobile, at about 130 kilowatts, he said. Hydrogen fuel cells emit almost no pollution and produce electricity from oxygen and hydrogen. But hydrogen is expensive to make, and is derived mostly from hydrocarbons such as natural gas or gasoline in a process that does pollute. Hydrogen, the most abundant element in the universe, has the highest energy output of any known fuel. But it needs an external energy source to free it from its chemical compound and create more energy. Hydrogen, whose byproduct is water, is now often accessed through natural gas, but can also use wind and solar power, as well as nuclear energy. Support for fuel cell research is strong in New Mexico, where Gov. Richardson has said his goal is to make 10 percent of the state's energy, by 2010, come from renewable resources, including wind and solar energy. The governor wants his state to be at the forefront of fuel cell technology and is encouraging a proposed national fuel cell center to be located in New Mexico. "When you talk about win-win propositions, fuel cell technology is one of the best. It creates two very important things - cleaner, renewable energy, and jobs," Richardson recently told industries who met to talk about hydrogen technology. New Mexico's Sen. Pete Dominici, a Republican who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, wrote recently that "the best way to produce hydrogen, with no pollution in the production process, is through nuclear energy." He is pushing for combining the expertise Los Alamos has in nuclear energy with its knowledge of fuel-cell technology. "Nuclear power could be an important aspect in making both hydrogen and electricity," Stroh said. Would New Mexico use the idea to push for nuclear capabilities at the lab to make hydrogen? "That's not even on our radar screen right now," said Richardson spokesman Pahl Shipley. Story by Zelie Pollon REUTERS NEWS SERVICE > >bush and the current admin are pushing for the hydrogen cars because > >they want to revive the nuclear power industry...they see us using nukes > >to crack water and make hydrogen...what does everyone think about this? > > > >kn > >sac, ca > >Nukes and fossil-fuels both I'd say. This just in on nukes: > > >http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke4may04,1,512 >9372.story > >May 4, 2003 > >THE NATION > >Nuclear Energy Industry Sees Its Fortunes Turning in Capital > >By Richard Simon, Times Staff Writer > >WASHINGTON - The U.S. nuclear power industry - at a virtual >standstill for more than 20 years and looking particularly bleak >after Sept. 11, 2001 - could be on the threshold of a comeback. > >Since 1973, no company has ordered a nuclear plant that it eventually >completed. Now, energy legislation expected to clear the Senate >within the next few weeks would provide federal loan guarantees for >up to half the cost of building as
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Once somewhat involved in the design and building of the last reactors in Sweden, I am not a starch opponent of nuclear one pass power. It is the enrichment of several passes and the massive amount of enriched material it results in, that make me a very strong opponent to nuclear power. Without several passes, we only have fuel for 60 years more and it will be better to not use it at all, than produce a world that have so much enriched material that it will be impossible to control. I also think that Bush & Co are looking very much to the large US coal reserves, when they talking about hydrogen. It does not make sense to look at oil products for the US independence, when the US R/P is only 11,7 years for its own resources. The coal with over 200 years R/P makes more sense for independence, but a disaster for environment. The President who takes this route will "kill his own people", for the interest of corporate profits. My opinion is that a maximizing of energy saving, combined with good biofuel production is the only short term "ready for use" technologies. Solar and wind products are today commodities and give some more legs to stand on. For developing countries, this might be the only path to the future. For US also, but first they have to give up the idea of corporate energy control and a "silver bullet" solution, that process could be very difficult. It is also boring hard work that has to be done and that is not really "the American way of life". Hakan At 11:47 AM 5/6/2003 +0900, you wrote: > >bush and the current admin are pushing for the hydrogen cars because > >they want to revive the nuclear power industry...they see us using nukes > >to crack water and make hydrogen...what does everyone think about this? > > > >kn > >sac, ca > >Nukes and fossil-fuels both I'd say. This just in on nukes: > > >http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke4may04,1,5129372.story > >May 4, 2003 > >THE NATION > >Nuclear Energy Industry Sees Its Fortunes Turning in Capital > >By Richard Simon, Times Staff Writer > >WASHINGTON - The U.S. nuclear power industry - at a virtual >standstill for more than 20 years and looking particularly bleak >after Sept. 11, 2001 - could be on the threshold of a comeback. > >Since 1973, no company has ordered a nuclear plant that it eventually >completed. Now, energy legislation expected to clear the Senate >within the next few weeks would provide federal loan guarantees for >up to half the cost of building as many as six new nuclear power >plants. > >The federal loan guarantees would be just one part - although an >important one - of a complicated economic and political puzzle that >would need to be assembled before any nuclear plants are built. Wall >Street still must be convinced of the economic viability of >constructing such plants. And nuclear power remains controversial, >with critics charging that the benefits aren't worth the risks of a >catastrophic accident. > >Security concerns spiked after Sept. 11. Doomsday scenarios >envisioned a hijacked plane crashing into one of the nation's 103 >commercial nuclear power plants, potentially causing radiation leaks. >Government officials beefed up security at plants and distributed >nearly 10 million potassium iodide pills, which can help protect the >thyroid in case of an emergency, to residents near plants. > >Supporters of nuclear power believe it is important that the industry >move forward again. > >The industry's fortunes have improved under President Bush, who has >made expansion of nuclear power a prime goal of his energy policy. >They brightened more after Republicans gained control of both >chambers of Congress in last year's elections and Sen. Pete V. >Domenici (R-N.M.) became chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural >Resources Committee. > >Domenici, whose home state was the site of the first test of an >atomic bomb in 1945 and today is where two national nuclear >laboratories operate, is the author of the Senate legislation. He is >confident about the prospects for the measure, citing congressional >approval last year for designating Nevada's Yucca Mountain as the >nation's nuclear waste repository. > >Along with the loan guarantees, the Senate bill would authorize $1 >billion for building an "advanced" nuclear reactor in Idaho that >would produce hydrogen, a fuel that Bush has championed for cars. "If >the demonstration [project] succeeds, it could well initiate a major >nuclear reactor renaissance," said Jay E. Silberg, a Washington >lawyer for nuclear utilities. > >The Senate legislation and an energy bill approved by the House last >month would extend a cap on the nuclear industry's liability in case >of an accident. And both measures would authorize millions of dollars >for nuclear research. > >Although the House energy bill does not include the loan guarantees, >the issue is likely to be on the table when House and Senate >negotiators draw up a final measure. > >"Suffice to say America needs a str
[biofuels-biz] Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
>bush and the current admin are pushing for the hydrogen cars because >they want to revive the nuclear power industry...they see us using nukes >to crack water and make hydrogen...what does everyone think about this? > >kn >sac, ca Nukes and fossil-fuels both I'd say. This just in on nukes: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-nuke4may04,1,5129372.story May 4, 2003 THE NATION Nuclear Energy Industry Sees Its Fortunes Turning in Capital By Richard Simon, Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON - The U.S. nuclear power industry - at a virtual standstill for more than 20 years and looking particularly bleak after Sept. 11, 2001 - could be on the threshold of a comeback. Since 1973, no company has ordered a nuclear plant that it eventually completed. Now, energy legislation expected to clear the Senate within the next few weeks would provide federal loan guarantees for up to half the cost of building as many as six new nuclear power plants. The federal loan guarantees would be just one part - although an important one - of a complicated economic and political puzzle that would need to be assembled before any nuclear plants are built. Wall Street still must be convinced of the economic viability of constructing such plants. And nuclear power remains controversial, with critics charging that the benefits aren't worth the risks of a catastrophic accident. Security concerns spiked after Sept. 11. Doomsday scenarios envisioned a hijacked plane crashing into one of the nation's 103 commercial nuclear power plants, potentially causing radiation leaks. Government officials beefed up security at plants and distributed nearly 10 million potassium iodide pills, which can help protect the thyroid in case of an emergency, to residents near plants. Supporters of nuclear power believe it is important that the industry move forward again. The industry's fortunes have improved under President Bush, who has made expansion of nuclear power a prime goal of his energy policy. They brightened more after Republicans gained control of both chambers of Congress in last year's elections and Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) became chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Domenici, whose home state was the site of the first test of an atomic bomb in 1945 and today is where two national nuclear laboratories operate, is the author of the Senate legislation. He is confident about the prospects for the measure, citing congressional approval last year for designating Nevada's Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste repository. Along with the loan guarantees, the Senate bill would authorize $1 billion for building an "advanced" nuclear reactor in Idaho that would produce hydrogen, a fuel that Bush has championed for cars. "If the demonstration [project] succeeds, it could well initiate a major nuclear reactor renaissance," said Jay E. Silberg, a Washington lawyer for nuclear utilities. The Senate legislation and an energy bill approved by the House last month would extend a cap on the nuclear industry's liability in case of an accident. And both measures would authorize millions of dollars for nuclear research. Although the House energy bill does not include the loan guarantees, the issue is likely to be on the table when House and Senate negotiators draw up a final measure. "Suffice to say America needs a strong nuclear power industry if we're going to meet our energy needs in the 21st century," said Ken Johnson, a spokesman for W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-La.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Today, nuclear power generates about one-fifth of the nation's electricity. But high construction costs, as well as public protests after the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island reactor in Pennsylvania, stopped the industry's growth. Domenici has touted nuclear energy as a cleaner alternative to coal and oil. And he has argued that nuclear power is necessary to prevent the supply shortages and price spikes that occur from too much reliance on a single energy source. Domenici has been one of the top recipients of campaign contributions from the nuclear power industry, receiving more than $67,000 from January 2001 through early 2002 in individual and political action committee donations from companies that own or build nuclear power plants, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a political watchdog group. The industry gave nearly $9 million overall to congressional candidates and political parties, almost two-thirds of it to Republicans. But the industry's expansion still faces political opposition. "Until there's a [resolution] of the nuclear waste issue, it's ridiculous to even talk about" expanding nuclear power, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said. For instance, legal challenges to the use of Yucca Mountain for waste disposal are pending. Additionally, he said, the public remains "scared to death" about nu
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
bush and the current admin are pushing for the hydrogen cars because they want to revive the nuclear power industry...they see us using nukes to crack water and make hydrogen...what does everyone think about this? kn sac, ca >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/05/03 10:34AM >>> http://lfee.mit.edu/features/hydrogen_vehicles Laboratory For Energy and the Environment Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle won't reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020; diesel and gasoline hybrids are a better bet, concludes an MIT study Published in MIT Tech Talk, March 5, 2003. Even with aggressive research, the hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle will not be better than the diesel hybrid (a vehicle powered by a conventional engine supplemented by an electric motor) in terms of total energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, says a study recently released by the Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (LFEE). And while hybrid vehicles are already appearing on the roads, adoption of the hydrogen-based vehicle will require major infrastructure changes to make compressed hydrogen available. If we need to curb greenhouse gases within the next 20 years, improving mainstream gasoline and diesel engines and transmissions and expanding the use of hybrids is the way to go. These results come from a systematic and comprehensive assessment of a variety of engine and fuel technologies as they are likely to be in 2020 with intense research but no real "breakthroughs." The assessment was led by Malcolm A. Weiss, LFEE senior research staff member, and John B. Heywood, the Sun Jae Professor of Mechanical Engineering and director of MIT's Laboratory for 21st-Century Energy. Release of the study comes just a month after the Bush administration announced a billion-dollar initiative to develop commercially viable hydrogen fuel cells and a year after establishment of the government-industry program to develop the hydrogen fuel-cell-powered "FreedomCar." The new assessment is an extension of a study done in 2000, which likewise concluded that the much-touted hydrogen fuel cell was not a clear winner. This time, the MIT researchers used optimistic fuel-cell performance assumptions cited by some fuel-cell advocates, and the conclusion remained the same. The hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle has low emissions and energy use on the road--but converting a hydrocarbon fuel such as natural gas or gasoline into hydrogen to fuel this vehicle uses substantial energy and emits greenhouse gases. "Ignoring the emissions and energy use involved in making and delivering the fuel and manufacturing the vehicle gives a misleading impression," said Weiss. However, the researchers do not recommend stopping work on the hydrogen fuel cell. "If auto systems with significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions are required in, say, 30 to 50 years, hydrogen is the only major fuel option identified to date," said Heywood. The hydrogen must, of course, be produced without making greenhouse gas emissions, hence from a non-carbon source such as solar energy or from conventional fuels while sequestering the carbon emissions. The assessment highlights the advantages of the hybrid, a highly efficient approach that combines an engine (or a fuel cell) with a battery and an electric motor. Continuing to work on today's gasoline engine and its fuel will bring major improvements by 2020, cutting energy use and emissions by a third compared to today's vehicles. But aggressive research on a hybrid with a diesel engine could yield a 2020 vehicle that is twice as efficient and half as polluting as that "evolved" technology, and future gasoline engine hybrids will not be far behind, the study says. Other researchers on the study were Andreas Schafer, principal research engineer in the Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development, and Vinod K. Natarajan (S.M. 2002). The new report and the original "On the Road in 2020" study from 2000 are available at http://lfee.mit.edu/publications under "Reports" (or see below). CONTACT: Nancy Stauffer Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (617) 253-3405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reports * Comparative Assessment of Fuel Cell Cars (2003), by Malcolm A. Weiss, John B. Heywood, Andreas Schafer, and Vinod K. Natarajan. http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/LFEE_2003-001_RP.pdf * On the Road in 2020: A Life-cycle Analysis of New Automobile Technologies (2000), by Malcolm A. Weiss, John B. Heywood, Elisabeth M. Drake, Andreas Schafer, and Felix F. AuYeung. http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/el00-003.pdf Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Grou
Re: [biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Description: HTML bush and the current admin are pushing for the hydrogen cars because they want to revive the nuclear power industry...they see us using nukes to crack water and make hydrogen...what does everyone think about this? kn sac, ca >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/05/03 10:34AM >>>http://lfee.mit.edu/features/hydrogen_vehiclesLaboratory For Energy and the EnvironmentHydrogen fuel-cell vehicle won't reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020; diesel and gasoline hybrids are a better bet, concludes an MIT studyPublished in MIT Tech Talk, March 5, 2003.Even with aggressive research, the hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle will not be better than the diesel hybrid (a vehicle powered by a conventional engine supplemented by an electric motor) in terms of total energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, says a study recently released by the Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (LFEE).And while hybrid vehicles are already appearing on the roads, adoption of the hydrogen-based vehicle will require major infrastructure changes to make compressed hydrogen available. If we need to curb greenhouse gases within the next 20 years, improving mainstream gasoline and diesel engines and transmissions and expanding the use of hybrids is the way to go.These results come from a systematic and comprehensive assessment of a variety of engine and fuel technologies as they are likely to be in 2020 with intense research but no real "breakthroughs." The assessment was led by Malcolm A. Weiss, LFEE senior research staff member, and John B. Heywood, the Sun Jae Professor of Mechanical Engineering and director of MIT's Laboratory for 21st-Century Energy.Release of the study comes just a month after the Bush administration announced a billion-dollar initiative to develop commercially viable hydrogen fuel cells and a year after establishment of the government-industry program to develop the hydrogen fuel-cell-powered "FreedomCar."The new assessment is an extension of a study done in 2000, which likewise concluded that the much-touted hydrogen fuel cell was not a clear winner. This time, the MIT researchers used optimistic fuel-cell performance assumptions cited by some fuel-cell advocates, and the conclusion remained the same.The hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle has low emissions and energy use on the road--but converting a hydrocarbon fuel such as natural gas or gasoline into hydrogen to fuel this vehicle uses substantial energy and emits greenhouse gases."Ignoring the emissions and energy use involved in making and delivering the fuel and manufacturing the vehicle gives a misleading impression," said Weiss.However, the researchers do not recommend stopping work on the hydrogen fuel cell. "If auto systems with significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions are required in, say, 30 to 50 years, hydrogen is the only major fuel option identified to date," said Heywood. The hydrogen must, of course, be produced without making greenhouse gas emissions, hence from a non-carbon source such as solar energy or from conventional fuels while sequestering the carbon emissions.The assessment highlights the advantages of the hybrid, a highly efficient approach that combines an engine (or a fuel cell) with a battery and an electric motor. Continuing to work on today's gasoline engine and its fuel will bring major improvements by 2020, cutting energy use and emissions by a third compared to today's vehicles. But aggressive research on a hybrid with a diesel engine could yield a 2020 vehicle that is twice as efficient and half as polluting as that "evolved" technology, and future gasoline engine hybrids will not be far behind, the study says.Other researchers on the study were Andreas Schafer, principal research engineer in the Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development, and Vinod K. Natarajan (S.M. 2002). The new report and the original "On the Road in 2020" study from 2000 are available at http://lfee.mit.edu/publications under "Reports" (or see below).CONTACT:Nancy StaufferLaboratory for Energy and the Environment(617) 253-3405[EMAIL PROTECTED]Reports* Comparative Assessment of Fuel Cell Cars (2003), by Malcolm A. Weiss, John B. Heywood, Andreas Schafer, and Vinod K. Natarajan. Document>http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/LFEE_2003-001_RP.pdf* On the Road in 2020: A Life-cycle Analysis of New Automobile Technologies (2000), by Malcolm A. Weiss, John B. Heywood, Elisabeth M. Drake, Andreas Schafer, and Felix F. AuYeung. http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/el00-003.pdf Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-->Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give You Thirty Dollars for Trying!http://us.click.yahoo.com/KXUxcA/fNtFAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM-~->Biofuel at Journey to Forever:http://journeytoforever.org/b
[biofuel] MIT: Hydrogen Car No Better than Diesel Hybrid
http://lfee.mit.edu/features/hydrogen_vehicles Laboratory For Energy and the Environment Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle won't reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020; diesel and gasoline hybrids are a better bet, concludes an MIT study Published in MIT Tech Talk, March 5, 2003. Even with aggressive research, the hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle will not be better than the diesel hybrid (a vehicle powered by a conventional engine supplemented by an electric motor) in terms of total energy use and greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, says a study recently released by the Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (LFEE). And while hybrid vehicles are already appearing on the roads, adoption of the hydrogen-based vehicle will require major infrastructure changes to make compressed hydrogen available. If we need to curb greenhouse gases within the next 20 years, improving mainstream gasoline and diesel engines and transmissions and expanding the use of hybrids is the way to go. These results come from a systematic and comprehensive assessment of a variety of engine and fuel technologies as they are likely to be in 2020 with intense research but no real "breakthroughs." The assessment was led by Malcolm A. Weiss, LFEE senior research staff member, and John B. Heywood, the Sun Jae Professor of Mechanical Engineering and director of MIT's Laboratory for 21st-Century Energy. Release of the study comes just a month after the Bush administration announced a billion-dollar initiative to develop commercially viable hydrogen fuel cells and a year after establishment of the government-industry program to develop the hydrogen fuel-cell-powered "FreedomCar." The new assessment is an extension of a study done in 2000, which likewise concluded that the much-touted hydrogen fuel cell was not a clear winner. This time, the MIT researchers used optimistic fuel-cell performance assumptions cited by some fuel-cell advocates, and the conclusion remained the same. The hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle has low emissions and energy use on the road--but converting a hydrocarbon fuel such as natural gas or gasoline into hydrogen to fuel this vehicle uses substantial energy and emits greenhouse gases. "Ignoring the emissions and energy use involved in making and delivering the fuel and manufacturing the vehicle gives a misleading impression," said Weiss. However, the researchers do not recommend stopping work on the hydrogen fuel cell. "If auto systems with significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions are required in, say, 30 to 50 years, hydrogen is the only major fuel option identified to date," said Heywood. The hydrogen must, of course, be produced without making greenhouse gas emissions, hence from a non-carbon source such as solar energy or from conventional fuels while sequestering the carbon emissions. The assessment highlights the advantages of the hybrid, a highly efficient approach that combines an engine (or a fuel cell) with a battery and an electric motor. Continuing to work on today's gasoline engine and its fuel will bring major improvements by 2020, cutting energy use and emissions by a third compared to today's vehicles. But aggressive research on a hybrid with a diesel engine could yield a 2020 vehicle that is twice as efficient and half as polluting as that "evolved" technology, and future gasoline engine hybrids will not be far behind, the study says. Other researchers on the study were Andreas Schafer, principal research engineer in the Center for Technology, Policy and Industrial Development, and Vinod K. Natarajan (S.M. 2002). The new report and the original "On the Road in 2020" study from 2000 are available at http://lfee.mit.edu/publications under "Reports" (or see below). CONTACT: Nancy Stauffer Laboratory for Energy and the Environment (617) 253-3405 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reports * Comparative Assessment of Fuel Cell Cars (2003), by Malcolm A. Weiss, John B. Heywood, Andreas Schafer, and Vinod K. Natarajan. http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/LFEE_2003-001_RP.pdf * On the Road in 2020: A Life-cycle Analysis of New Automobile Technologies (2000), by Malcolm A. Weiss, John B. Heywood, Elisabeth M. Drake, Andreas Schafer, and Felix F. AuYeung. http://lfee.mit.edu/publications/PDF/el00-003.pdf Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~--> Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give You Thirty Dollars for Trying! http://us.click.yahoo.com/KXUxcA/fNtFAA/uetFAA/FGYolB/TM -~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
