Well done that man who realised that burning H2 produces NOx (nitrogen oxides). Since Hydrogen is a _very_ high octane fuel (it's also a highly effective anti-knock additive - the difficulty is in adding it) it would probably be combusted at higher temperature/pressure than gasoline, thus creating more NOx. Hello performance-reducing and dirty-to-manufacture catalytic converter.
Extraction problems have been fairly well covered - it would be a nightmare.
I live in the UK - when I hear USAians bitching about fuel taxes I don't know whether to laugh or cry. 50%? Try 550% - that's right, for every 100p spent on fuel, 85p is tax.
Fission reactors would, as others have posted, be an excellent energy source, especially if combined with available reprocessing technology. (Please mod up the poster who described the process - useful info). Today's reactors are safe - people prate on about Three Mile Island because it was the most recent occurrence in the Western world. It happened over two decades ago and was caused by _human error_ - if nobody had touched any of the controls from the moment the first alarm sounded there would have been no disaster.
Fusion reactors would be even better. Unfortunately, the USA has jeopardised future fusion research by pulling out the ITER project (details on http://www.fusion.org.uk) This seems a curious action by the world's number one user of energy per capita.
Why the opposition to alcohol? It may not be viable to grow crops specifically for fuel production, but ethanol can be brewed from _any_ plant matter - including waste. Its also the only renewable with anywhere near the specific energy of fossil fuels.
Worried about inappropriate collection of cellphone 'content'? Here in the UK, Echelon (www.echelonwatch.org) listens to all cellphone communications and all microwave relays (some of which transmit 'landline' calls) already. Big Brother may not be watching yet - but he's listening vey hard.
Slashdot Mirror
I think one of the greatest benefits of this program will be to get Linux into schools - showing a whole generation that there are alternatives to M$.
Where to start?
Well done that man who realised that burning H2 produces NOx (nitrogen oxides). Since Hydrogen is a _very_ high octane fuel (it's also a highly effective anti-knock additive - the difficulty is in adding it) it would probably be combusted at higher temperature/pressure than gasoline, thus creating more NOx. Hello performance-reducing and dirty-to-manufacture catalytic converter.
Extraction problems have been fairly well covered - it would be a nightmare.
I live in the UK - when I hear USAians bitching about fuel taxes I don't know whether to laugh or cry. 50%? Try 550% - that's right, for every 100p spent on fuel, 85p is tax.
Fission reactors would, as others have posted, be an excellent energy source, especially if combined with available reprocessing technology. (Please mod up the poster who described the process - useful info). Today's reactors are safe - people prate on about Three Mile Island because it was the most recent occurrence in the Western world. It happened over two decades ago and was caused by _human error_ - if nobody had touched any of the controls from the moment the first alarm sounded there would have been no disaster.
Fusion reactors would be even better. Unfortunately, the USA has jeopardised future fusion research by pulling out the ITER project (details on http://www.fusion.org.uk)
This seems a curious action by the world's number one user of energy per capita.
Why the opposition to alcohol? It may not be viable to grow crops specifically for fuel production, but ethanol can be brewed from _any_ plant matter - including waste. Its also the only renewable with anywhere near the specific energy of fossil fuels.
Worried about inappropriate collection of cellphone 'content'?
Here in the UK, Echelon (www.echelonwatch.org) listens to all cellphone communications and all microwave relays (some of which transmit 'landline' calls) already.
Big Brother may not be watching yet - but he's listening vey hard.