...and the carrier doesn't have a facility in place for limiting the number of text messages sent to a particiular device in a given time frame? say max of 1 in any 2 second interval???...and they can't simply block SMS messages that contain non-standard characters in certain known formats that could be exploits??? i know they can filter by sender, receiver, zip code, and pretty much any other relational expression i could come up with. Prior to getting my iPhone, i auto-blocked everything text related except incoming texts from 10 digit formatted numbers from my area code that belonged to residential users. Now i just block ALL texts...
If there's a way for someone to send text without using AT&Ts network, that might be an issue, but I'd also assume that to be a localized phenomenon, and also short lived, as transmitting on those frequencies would be picked up by the towers and quickly triangulated and reported to the FCC and local authorities.
People who want me either call me, e-mail me, or use a chat app. SMS is pointless to me, as is MMS, and I refuse to pay for it... Even the FREE flip phone my wife got from Verizon can send and receive e-mail for free and has absolutely no need for SMS... Between twitter, chat, email, and ordinary calls, anyone who could possibly want me for a legitimate reason with "you need to know now" information was a way to get me from any device they have access to, without ANY surcharge or use fees. WTF should I give AT&T $20 a month for an archaic, limited, technology that's been east to cause greif with for years? all the e-mail that comes to my phone passes through 2 filters first, and I'm damn close to perfectly certain anything I open on my phone via e-amil, even if it got through the scanners, can't hack the phone, as i know of no viruses targeting the mail app or safari in mobile safari on Mobile OS 3.
There are far more "predators" out there we do not know about then those who have been caught and punished. Having such a list, which further does not delineate between violent and non-violent offenders, is simply a false security. It teaches people to avoid individuals, instead of simply beang wary of their general surroundings. It also contributes to the continuing abuse of people who havce been rightly punished, treated, and released, and who have passed a jury of reviewers and psychiatrists and we're assured are no longer a continuing threat to society.
Further, with serieal rapists and child molestors are treated equally to statutory rapists (most of whome were prosecuted by parents at the objection of the "victim" as the 2 kids were actually in love and fully concenting, but because one was under 18 the PARENT sued...), and it also includes people who did "pranks" like streaking, skinny dipping, and other completely non-sexual offences, simply knowing a person is a sexual offender means NOTHING. Also, anyone convicted of such an offence under the age of 18 is not in that database.
Knowing who convicted, treated, and released sex offenders are is pointless for the general public. Yes, police (especially parole and psychiatric review people) need to know where these people are and watch them for 10+ years if they are violent offenders, but the rest of us can simply assume the parole board feels those people are not a threat to us. It's the other 3-5 times this number of people still trolling the streets looking for potential victims you should be worried about, and that list includes your preachers, teachers, babysitters, and many people I'm sure you already socialize with, trust, and let your kids alone with.
You can NOT protect yourself or your family from harm simply by having a list. It's a random chance you'll be a victim of one of these agressive people. Per statistics, there is a known (convicten) sexual offender for approx 1 in 700 americans. less than 15% of registered offenders are Type 3 (aggressive or dangerous, or child molesters, or repeat offenders, approx 50,000 out of 370,000). Considdering on average (some crimes differ in reporting rate) approx 1/3rd of all incidents are reported. 3% of the 15% are repeat offenders. If we take these numbers, that's 1 in 4500 people or so that are considdered dangerous sex offenders, and if that's a third of what's reported, that's 1 in 1500 people who could be out there as a dangerous sex offender. Keep in mind, this includes date rape as well, where at least 1 party believed the sex to be completely consentual or where an objection of rape may not have been made for many days, or was made by a third party. If only 3% of this 1500 people WOULD rape more than once, that's 1 in 50,000. So, for every 50,000 people you meet in your lifetime, one could possibly rape you, and by the FAR margin, this is a FAMILY MEMBER or a DATE, or a highly trusted friend...
Further, the most serious predators, those who picked random victims or had multiple victims before being caught, most spend decade in prison, or will be spending the rest of theirt lives (some have or will be executed). The TRUE predators out there are in their 50s in most cases, castrated by old age or broken wills, and per MULTIPLE psychologists opinions are of NO THREAT if they ever are released. It;s the one's you Don't know about that are your only slim chance of beiong a victim, and chances are if you are, it's someone in your fmaily you should be looking at (90% of unreported child abuse is a family member).
So, you know for a fact the "organic farmers" are not using the exact same genetic varieties as high yield farmers? Around here (the south east USA) ALL of the organic farmers we know are also generic "chemical" farmers, and they plant the exact same crops in both fields, they just shovel shit in one field and fertilizer in the other. In my opinion, I trust the fertilizer more than unfiltered, unsanitized manure...
Now, a "micro" farmer, that's another story... Local farmers who grow high QUALITY crops in small batches, tended by hand, and fully ripened on the vine, grown in special raised beds designed to provide consistant water and nutrient to produce significantly healtier plants; that I do support. It's obvious if you go to any of the local farmers markets (there are 3 near me) and you can see vegetables from a regular farm, an organic farm, and a "micro" farm. The "micro" crop costs about the same if not a touch more than the organic (which is twice the cost of the traditional). Both the organic and traditional look the same, although in many cases the organic will manifest fungus or other probles sooner, and do not last near as long in the fridge or basket as "chemical" crops. The "micro" crops however have much fresher looking produce, larger riper vegetibales and fruit, better color, and both look and taste far superior to the other crops. The microfarmers sell out quick.
microfarmers use fertilizers and to a limited extent some insecticides (though the nauture of the growing beds eliminates most pest problems, and thus the need for extensive chemical use). Microfarmers also have massive variety not just of common vegetables, but of heirloom varieties, exotic veggies, fabulous fresh herbs, and more. Buying thia high quality produce at the market is about 50% more expensive than buying regular grocery in the store, and about the same price as organic in stores (a bit higher than organic in the market).
Well, in my area, AT&T provides stonger signal and much higher reliability than verizon. My wife is a verizon user because her ENTIRE family is, and I'm on AT&T because I was a subscriber when the iPhone came out, and I have not yet found a reason not to have an iPhone, even with the price gouging, as the TCO is about $400 cheaper than a verizon blackberry for me over the 2 year term, once you include software, ringtones, blackberry data plan, replacement phone costs after 2 years (you only get $200 off a new blackberry after 2 years, you get $400 of a new iPhone after only 18months, GPS doesn't cost extra per month), etc.
Anyway, besides why I think iPhone is a good value; we can both be on the phone at the same time in the car. Whether I'm on 3G or edge, I'm always on 3-5 bars, and have exceptional call quality. She'll constantly be asking people to repeat themselves, or repeat herself. She constantly bitches about nthe quality, and laughs everytime a Verizon commercial comes on.
The ONLY time i've lost a call in the last 5 months was 1) driving underground though a tunel under a river that didn't have cell repeaters, and 2) when the person on the other end said they were driving through a bad area and THEY dropped the call, and appologized for their own poor reception when they called back several minutes later. That's right, 5 months, not a single dropped call excpet one noone could have maintined underground, and maybe I've dropped a handfull over the last 2 years. My Wife? She dropps a call almost every time we take a ride. Many places I get a signal she does not. She even drops calls in our own house, where she btw gets 3 bars and I have 5 bars on 3G.
She's gone through 4 phones in 2 years, 3 different models. ALL of them have horrible reception and stability in this area, and everywhere we seem to travel to (about 3 hours in any direction, on a regular basis). We're in the capitol city of our state, and you'd think we'd get decent service... nope, Verizon simply sucks. I was on Verizon prior to my now nearly 4 years on AT&T, and when i was on Verizon, their reliability was the reason i switched away from them. I was on Sprint for about 2 weeks and they were worse, been with AT&T since.
We were on vacation recently, and signals were weak at our location (and completely non-existant in the hotel). With WiFi, i was still able to make VoIP calls, and when outside, my 1-2 bars got me good call quality. She had no bars in or outside. Occasionally, she'd get a voicemail notice, or an SMS, but by the time she could react, she'd loose signal again. When we got back, we canceled her Verizon contract, paid the termination fee ($70), and I reactivated my iPhone 1G for her and put her on AT&T. She's actually willing to pay $30 more a month to not drop calls, and since Verizon now has "my 5" or whatever they call it, her family can all still call her AT&T line free (and we ported her existing number to AT&T, which took about 10 seconds, so all we had to do was send a text spam to all of them telling them to add her to their 5 list).
I don't know how they are nation wide, but in the southeast, Verizon sucks ass.
well, since it's a direct competitor to the big boys who have real money in political pockets, there are no grants that projects like this can actually qualify for, let alone be awarded.
This is a small company with 30 or so researchers from a small town. They're moving the technology forward, but until they can collect 10-15 million in investments, they can't build a proof of concept faciltiy. Once they have a system up and running, that's just a POC, and won;t prove the cost points, they'll need about 75 million more to make this go full scale and truly prove it. That's not chump change.
Lab chemistry and bench scale systems proved the process, and it's one that's been proven on large scales in the past using different technologoes, but it was done from necessity, not price reasons, during the war. Hitting under $3 a gallon is something critics will say can't be done until it is. It;s completely irrelevent that the competition can;t hit $10 a gallon without 20 more years of reasearch, and that's not including massive infrastructure expenditures in the tens of trillions, but those people have voices and bought politicians...
As a side effect, through ADDITIONAL processing, we can get water that can be filtered into drinking water, without actually having to run through traditional desalination.
As a dreadful side effect, we'll have a mass of biowaste, and every last contaiminant in the ocean cleaned from the water becomes a toxic sludge waste, which will include large amounts of murcury, other heavy metals, and some farily dangerous compounds mixed in with some poitentially useful organic materials and other compunds. All that crtap then itself needs to be processed, sorted, and disposed of in a varying and complicated array of processes.
Getting ethanol out of algae isn;t so much the issue. Getting the resulting crap out of the tank and safeley disposed of is, and may actually cost more than getting the fuel...
Look into a real technology. dotyenergy.com and see how it compares:
- 300 times more fuel per site (up to 30M gallons anually, not 100,000). - operational costs of about $90M anually, on $225M anual expected revenue. - Fuel (methanol, propanol, ethanol, and several other blends, including higher alcohols and jet fuels too!) that will compete in price with oil at $70/bbl - NO hazardous byproducts, little to no environmental impact - Energy derived from off-peak wind production - CARBON NUETRAL - We've been using this technology for over 50 years (we made deisel fuels using a very similar process in WWII)!
very detailed information, including some actual science data can be found http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels_Sci_Engr_ppt.pdf. (FAR more than other companies I've seen provide) and this research has been confirmed by multiple universities and science firms.
They also have a lot of great data at dotyenergy.com on the undisclosed facts about all of the other alternatives, some real numbers and analysis on feasability and costs, and explanations about a lot of other solutions. They've been researching this process and patenting improvements for over 20 years, and were recently awarded over 60 world patents for their enhancements to this technology.
OK, a massive expensive facility that requires proximity to an ocean, and in one YEAR it can't produce even 20% of what my town uses for fuel in 1 day.
Dow, please get your heads out of your asses and look at an actual viable technology:
dotyenergy.com.
- Sequestered CO2 + Wind Energy = FUEL Propanol, methanol, ethanol, whatever hydrocarbon blend you want...
A 250MW facility running on an annual cost of about $90M will produce nearly 30M gallons of fuels and higher alcohols. (300 TIMES what the algae farm claims to produce, and using less land to do it!).
This is NOT vaporware, RFTS processing to make fuels has been in use since WWII. This is simply an expansion in scientific scope, efficiency, and balanced economics. They can make fuel to compete with Oil at under $70/bbl.
Point 1) XP works fine, and that's our stance too, but that's only part of it. Moving to Vista/7 would require rebuilding tons of images and profiles for distribution, upgrading other apps, configuring new packages for deployment, altering support policies, massive changes to group policy, new version of Antivirus to support the new OS, getting new versions of all our scanning and remediation tools, dealing with multiple differing audit policies during the 1-2 year transition, new alert scripts, modifying code to run in a browser other than IE 6, deal with higher aggregate network traffic, and more. The OS replacement is a FRACTION of the cost of moving to the new OS, and it would be a MASSIVE manhour effort. Just the rolout alone to nearly 15,000 desktops (as nearly all need either a new system or at least a hardware upgrade to run either Vista or 7) would equate to more than 40,000 man hours ($500,000 - $750,000 simply in LABOR!)
2) Retraining? If you use XP today everyday at work, and can't find the start menu, taskbar, a few desktop icons in Wondows 7, and can't adjust from Office 2003 to Office 2007 and IE 6 to IE 8, then YOU'RE FIRED! If your an IT admin or Desktop support specialast, and don't already have betas of Vista and 7 running at home, here's your warning...
We have not migrated to Vista, and still use XP as the standard across out 14+ thousand desktops, but that's not to say we have not "deployed" vista. We have serveral lab systems and developer workstations running Vista (though 8 months ago we had exactly 0 licenses deployed).
By end 2010 I'm sure we'll at least have a few v7 machines running somewhere in the company, and by end 2011 we'll likely have Vista across all desktops, but don't count on even 20% penetration here of vista by end-2010 though. In fact, the ONLY reason we'll be deploying any Vista at all in the near future is we're having trouble finding hardware 100% compatible with XP, and expect that by January, manby systems won't come with XP drivers since Microsoft won't allow new systems to ship with XP by then, and the driver guys want to give up and focus only on Vista, 7, and linux...
The H2 in the ceiling can stay there for hours unless the parking garrage happens to be in a particulary windy area (not the case underground). Ventalation systems are designed to move air around, but do not have vents in every hollow in the ceiling. I have also seen people in parking structures flick ciggarettes at the ceiling... wierd enough to see, usually they flick them at sprinkler heads out of some sadistic nature...
Parking garages also have speakers, electrical wiring, lights, and other sources of sparks up there. At home, think garage door opener... I can actually see the blue electrical ark in the motor in mine when it's running...
Oh, and it only takes a 2% mixture of H2 in air, to combust, not a high concentration at all. just 1 gram of H2 will create a 100% saturation of 3cuft of space at room temperature and pressure. Given that it would rise to the ceiling, and dispurse across it, and a 2 car garage is about 400sqft, 1g leaked of H2 would make the top 6" near the ceiling about 3% concentrated. That's enough man, JUST 1GRAM!
The proposed industry standard for the carbon shell tanks rated for 12,000 PSI planed to be used in H2 vehicles has a standing leak rate at 2.1grams per hour...
To house such a tank in your garage involves implementing a vapor control system, H2 detectors, and a system for PUMPING the H2 out of the garage past a small flame/spark so it can combust in real time instead of collecting. Shold an actual leak be detected beyond the standard outgasing from the tank walls, the whole system has to shut down, cut all power and seal the garrage, and needs to auto-notify authorities for clean up.
This is why a smart person has no direct correlation between online user account names between multiple accounts, nor should you ever register for a service using actually valid personal information unless you expect the service to actually send you something in the mail you want to receive... Preserving anonymity online is an art form. I have about 15 different user names online, with very little correlation amoung them. The only ones that line up are accounts with legitimate services (mostly the utilities and bills i pay online), but my e-mail user name is unique from all my other personal accounts, and i have a unique username with each bank. I also have some "filtering" e-mail accounts I access only through web services that I use to register for these other services and accounts so that none of them have my real e-mail address.
Without a log of my online activity (which is security erased each time I close the browser, or if the machine has been idle for more than 15 minutes), and without being able to correlate my online activity to a specific machine, or specific user account tied to me, they have NOTHING, even if they find files that match the ones their warant is looking for. I have tens of thousands of MP3s on my computer. Popular ones mostly, it's entirely plausible I had the same files as the person they're looking for.
The IP of my computer is dynamic, assigned by the router. I don't have my wireless network open to the world... I have a guest portal, isolated by firewall on a seperate SSID from my internal network on the same router (multi-radio, multi-SSID routers are awesome!). I simply chose to use the same dynamic IP range on both networks, so it's possible for someone in either network to have the same IP address. I also have the IP lease set at 2 hours, and since my systems all hibernate regulary, they're constantly changing IP addresses. Guests can only connect to the net when in their VLAN, and I can connect to guests from inside my firewall, but it's completely secure. This saves me from having to give out my complex hex password to every Joe Schmoe that comes over, and saves me from having to virus scan their PC first before allowing it connectivity. I run a secure network at home, and have connectivity to a jhighly secured network environment at work, and security protocols I have to maintain. I can't have my Mom's PC letting a virus into my subnet when she comes for a week to see the baby, so she and all other guests get their own...
Timing around my 8-5 work habits? gee, I wonder how many of my neighbors within a 1/4 mile radius also work 8-5 jobs?
Also, they'll find no trace of a P2P application on my home PCs. I have a TON of music, the large part ripped directly from CD, and a smaller but also large chunk recorded legally from streaming media sources using StreamRipper or other similar programs. That's not to say there might not be P2P files intermixed in my collection, but they will find no record of my systems having been to a P2P site, no installed software, no cached account information, no evidence.
If I was going to P2P (which I do not do), knowing it's illegal, I'd do so by using a read-only bootable OS from external media, and have a very tiny shared folder (only enough to get a good number of active streams), and would download all my files to a seperate media path. Only after I knew the downloads were safe and scanned would they get merged into my real media library, and further still only they were scrubbed for watermarks or other data by being converted into another format, converting the tag data into a format consistant with all my ripped files, and replacing the album art.
If their computer forensics folks came knocking with a warent and took my PC, they'd not find a binary match to any files the warent claims I downloaded, would find no account information and no trace of logged evidence of activity, and then I'd counter sue the RIAA for loss of use, false accusation, and emotional distrubance.
so, you're assuming what, we hook up catheders to every animal, and run sewers to every remote country farm?
Considder also, our current water treatments processes "filter" water. They use catalysts and bacteria to break down the contaminants, and clean the sludge from the water, leaving just the water. Actually removing Urea from water, without destroying the udea, is a problem that took many decades of scientific effort to solve, and would be a rediculously complicated to introduce into our water treatments systems. Not to mention increasing the size of those systems by about 20 fold to handle the load.
"Your honor, I have a generic wireless router, with an after market 7w anteanna, and an effective range of nearly 1/4 mile. It's set to broadcast it's SSID and allow guest access. No, i don't have a lot of guests, i just bring different machines home from work occasionally, and I hate having to type in the password. besides, those passwords can be cracked in under a minute by anyone who wants to, does a google search, and downloads some free software, so why bother right? The wireless covers about 300 houses in area, and ANYONE, even someone simply parked in the area, could have made those downloads. Is it illegal to have my wifi open like that? no. OK, thanks, i rest my own case."
Since it's not against the law to have open wifi, there's no case for negligence...
Everyone can't be issued an IP, but I HAVE ONE. So MY IP address IS personally tied to me. When I was single, and lived alone, it was even more obviously mine. My IP is also tied to my domain name, and this in a who-is, you can gleam some personal data about me.
Yup. And phone numbers don't identify people either, just phones.
It's already been ruled that a phone number is protected information, and if you have chosen to make it unlisted, it takes a warent to get the phone company to reveal it. Why is an IP any different? It may identify a device (a mobile phone connected online over wifi), it may identify a router (and by extension your address, and thus the head of household or name on the account of the deive), or it might identify an access point in a coffee shop.
It may be safe to say an IP does not ALWAYS correlate to personal information, but since there's no method of validation, it should be ASSUMED to be protected information until such a point in time as it can be proven otherwise.
I don't care how much less it is... There is simply not enough urea made in the entire country on a daily bases to produce enough H2 for fuel for even a small city.
Really, how many gallons a day do you piss? Considder then that urea is only a fractional percentage of that pee. (about 95% of typical urine is water, the rest is a combination of mostly urea as well as other contaminants removed by the kidneys).
I'd have to piss somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 gallons a day to have enough fuel just to handle my daily commute. Then there's the energy loss seperating the urea at the water treatment plant, hooking houses on septic up to sewers to collect the additional urine (about 35% of the country doens't have a sewer), then transport of the seperated urea to an H2 processing plant, and THEN, what do you plan to DO with the H2? We can't afford to run it in our cars... (current fuel cells cost about $750,000 once you take away the government subsidies. They THINK they can make em for about $100,000 in 15-20 years....
Had to buy mine online too. Can't remember the brand, but it was not GE.
Actually, i have found the "name brands" actually make some pretty shitty CFLs... i guess it's in their best interest, part of debunking the technology so they can remain competitive. the brands I get online not only have better color, and better lumens per watt, but they cost less too.
It's not snake oil, I promise. They've been working on this 20 years, and it's already a technology used in WWII to make deisel fuels.
All their ideas focus on improved heat exchangers, a new electrolysis chamber, making parts of the process symbiotic, new catylist systems, systems for flow and containment of the process; it's very much logistical systems improvements, with a few pretty impressive new invetions thrown in (actually their heat exchanger design has a lot more applications than this), and all materialized into a single system.
It can all be done today, using seperate systems for each phase in the fuel making process, but at about $1500 a barrel if you wanted to do it on your own, not $80 as they predict.
Their initial investment will make a facility about 2-3 times the size of a typical mall store, and a few stories high. They'll be able to tweak and prove out the larger scale process using that "lab scale" facility. They'll make only a few gallons a day at that scale, and use a couple of MW doing it. Phase 3 is a 75MW facility that will make hundreds of gallons a day (size sclaes very well up to a point for this process). The real things are 250MW, completely modular, and premanufatured for efficiency. We'll need a few thousand of them in the USA to replace 100% of our fuel use. They'll cost somewhere north of about 100M each to build. The cost is a fraction of what it would take to deploy an H2 infrastructure. They'll be profitable at about 2X what oil-based gasoline is.
It's ordinary fuels, in any blend they want. Methanol is the easiest. Propanol, ethanol, and more are also easy. The process actually makes a semi-random blend (with some predictabiltiy). It;s gasoline, refined anywhere from 80 octane to high grade jet fuels over 120.
It ruses, yes. Look above you next tome you;re in your garrage or a parking structure and think of where all that light fuel is going to go....
Yea, it will slowly leak out and disipate. Given typical leak rates of spun carbon tanks, that's not a real issue. However, considder the leak rate of an aging seal on the fill cap, the fuel lines running to the engine, microfractures in the aother parts of the system connected to the tank and engine that will contain H2. These things are METICULOUSLY designed and cost over a million dollars per car today to run safely as highly maintained show cars. Imaging the lowest bidder assembly process and how much risk there is for even a mild, slow leak from a fuel line...
In MINUTES you could saturate a ceiling panel with enough H2 to reach 5% mix, and then all someone has to do is smoke a ciggarette, or clip their anteanna on a ceiling tile. BOOM!
Gas tanks in cars very rarely explode, then simply conbust. The initial reaction is usually several seconds after the leak begins, and is actually the VAPOR that causes the bang.
H2 tanks, don;t just leak, and they don;t need a flame. The simply CONCUSSIVE FORCE of releaseing 930 atmospheres (nearly 16,000PSI) is enough to kill a peson at some distance, not to mention the shrapnel the car will become. This is FAR more powerful than a typical scuba tank explosion (which is just an O2 blend, not even a flamable gas), and far more VOLUME of gas as well...
Though parking garages have airflow (some of them) there are still corners in ceiling tiles that do not get adequate air flow. A leaky seal in one car could put off enough H2 in a half hour to create a hazardous condition. In your garrage (btw, i have no entry, i have a frog above, and due to buolding codes, it;s quite well sealed). it's even easier to build up a sufficient charge for combustion. It only takes 2%...
Want some proof of how H2 can become captured? Put the cap on a milk jug, cut off the bottom. Punch a small hole in the top. and insert the end of a glass straw, seal the edges with wax, and then tape shut the top of the straw. This is essentially now a mini bun son burner.. Clamp the jug to a pole in the ground a few feet off the ground, open end facing the ground, straw up. Fill the jug from underneath with H2 gas. It will float up into it and push the regular air out. give it a minute or two to settle, then take the tape off the straw and light it.
You'll get a nice little blue flame, that on just the air in the jug, and room pressure, will burn for several minutes. When the pressure of the H2 trying to rise out the straw equalizes with the pressure around, the flame will drop down into the jug, where the small amount of H2 remaining has mixed with air. The resulting boom from this tiny amount of H2 will probaly set off your car alarm, and neighbors will come running... We had a science professor do this in high school and he got fired for it.
Your NASA filling system, perhaps you didn't notice that in the end the resulting tank that's full end up being about -250C. That's a problem. See, the spun carbon tanks in cars are not insulated or designed to actually get that cold. They'll simply shatter at those temps. The liquid H2 stored underground needs to bleed into the tank slowly, and come up to pressure to re-liquify. If the tank goes much below -100C in the process, you have a huge issue.
1) I don;t have pleanty of time to fill my car. I only commute 20 minutes to work and back, but that means filling a 200 mile range H2 tank about once a week, if I never drive anywhere byt work. Since I'm 6 miles from the closest filling station, once a week I'd have to campo out there. 2) The H2 leaving the tank is not venting anywhere NEAR quick enough to drop it to -250C. under normal conditions driving a fuel cell vehicle, the tank rarely gets cold enough to frost... 3) if i filled the tank to below -140C, it would crack. 4) most of my trips are short, meaning warn tanks 95% of the time I;d fill up.
Why do this when i can use wind energy to make unlimeted regular gasoline to run in my current car, pumped from my current gas station, at about $3 a gallon, and without adding a cinlge gram more CO2 to the air then is already going there from non-car sources...
The average car is on the road 17 years. The average person will not be able to purchase an H2 poewred car, even one that uses an ICE, without a massive goverment subsidy (which if we all do it, means we're all paying that tax to pay that subsidy for everyone, aka, we all payt that anyway as part of the price of the car). Fuel cells are not predicted to be under $100,000 for 20 years. (they're about 750,000 now).
Even if you can make H2 safe, and cheap, WE CAN'T AFFORD THE CAR TO RUN IT IN! Plus the transport, plus the pumping infrastructure, plus the redical and expensive maintenance of fuel cells (which mostly can not be repaired), plus the factories to make it all, etc.
We can make clean, safe, fuel that works with EVERYTHING we have today, and without any new CO2, WHY persue H2?????
Slashdot Mirror
...and the carrier doesn't have a facility in place for limiting the number of text messages sent to a particiular device in a given time frame? say max of 1 in any 2 second interval??? ...and they can't simply block SMS messages that contain non-standard characters in certain known formats that could be exploits??? i know they can filter by sender, receiver, zip code, and pretty much any other relational expression i could come up with. Prior to getting my iPhone, i auto-blocked everything text related except incoming texts from 10 digit formatted numbers from my area code that belonged to residential users. Now i just block ALL texts...
If there's a way for someone to send text without using AT&Ts network, that might be an issue, but I'd also assume that to be a localized phenomenon, and also short lived, as transmitting on those frequencies would be picked up by the towers and quickly triangulated and reported to the FCC and local authorities.
People who want me either call me, e-mail me, or use a chat app. SMS is pointless to me, as is MMS, and I refuse to pay for it... Even the FREE flip phone my wife got from Verizon can send and receive e-mail for free and has absolutely no need for SMS... Between twitter, chat, email, and ordinary calls, anyone who could possibly want me for a legitimate reason with "you need to know now" information was a way to get me from any device they have access to, without ANY surcharge or use fees. WTF should I give AT&T $20 a month for an archaic, limited, technology that's been east to cause greif with for years? all the e-mail that comes to my phone passes through 2 filters first, and I'm damn close to perfectly certain anything I open on my phone via e-amil, even if it got through the scanners, can't hack the phone, as i know of no viruses targeting the mail app or safari in mobile safari on Mobile OS 3.
There are far more "predators" out there we do not know about then those who have been caught and punished. Having such a list, which further does not delineate between violent and non-violent offenders, is simply a false security. It teaches people to avoid individuals, instead of simply beang wary of their general surroundings. It also contributes to the continuing abuse of people who havce been rightly punished, treated, and released, and who have passed a jury of reviewers and psychiatrists and we're assured are no longer a continuing threat to society.
Further, with serieal rapists and child molestors are treated equally to statutory rapists (most of whome were prosecuted by parents at the objection of the "victim" as the 2 kids were actually in love and fully concenting, but because one was under 18 the PARENT sued...), and it also includes people who did "pranks" like streaking, skinny dipping, and other completely non-sexual offences, simply knowing a person is a sexual offender means NOTHING. Also, anyone convicted of such an offence under the age of 18 is not in that database.
Knowing who convicted, treated, and released sex offenders are is pointless for the general public. Yes, police (especially parole and psychiatric review people) need to know where these people are and watch them for 10+ years if they are violent offenders, but the rest of us can simply assume the parole board feels those people are not a threat to us. It's the other 3-5 times this number of people still trolling the streets looking for potential victims you should be worried about, and that list includes your preachers, teachers, babysitters, and many people I'm sure you already socialize with, trust, and let your kids alone with.
You can NOT protect yourself or your family from harm simply by having a list. It's a random chance you'll be a victim of one of these agressive people. Per statistics, there is a known (convicten) sexual offender for approx 1 in 700 americans. less than 15% of registered offenders are Type 3 (aggressive or dangerous, or child molesters, or repeat offenders, approx 50,000 out of 370,000). Considdering on average (some crimes differ in reporting rate) approx 1/3rd of all incidents are reported. 3% of the 15% are repeat offenders. If we take these numbers, that's 1 in 4500 people or so that are considdered dangerous sex offenders, and if that's a third of what's reported, that's 1 in 1500 people who could be out there as a dangerous sex offender. Keep in mind, this includes date rape as well, where at least 1 party believed the sex to be completely consentual or where an objection of rape may not have been made for many days, or was made by a third party. If only 3% of this 1500 people WOULD rape more than once, that's 1 in 50,000. So, for every 50,000 people you meet in your lifetime, one could possibly rape you, and by the FAR margin, this is a FAMILY MEMBER or a DATE, or a highly trusted friend...
Further, the most serious predators, those who picked random victims or had multiple victims before being caught, most spend decade in prison, or will be spending the rest of theirt lives (some have or will be executed). The TRUE predators out there are in their 50s in most cases, castrated by old age or broken wills, and per MULTIPLE psychologists opinions are of NO THREAT if they ever are released. It;s the one's you Don't know about that are your only slim chance of beiong a victim, and chances are if you are, it's someone in your fmaily you should be looking at (90% of unreported child abuse is a family member).
So, you know for a fact the "organic farmers" are not using the exact same genetic varieties as high yield farmers? Around here (the south east USA) ALL of the organic farmers we know are also generic "chemical" farmers, and they plant the exact same crops in both fields, they just shovel shit in one field and fertilizer in the other. In my opinion, I trust the fertilizer more than unfiltered, unsanitized manure...
Now, a "micro" farmer, that's another story... Local farmers who grow high QUALITY crops in small batches, tended by hand, and fully ripened on the vine, grown in special raised beds designed to provide consistant water and nutrient to produce significantly healtier plants; that I do support. It's obvious if you go to any of the local farmers markets (there are 3 near me) and you can see vegetables from a regular farm, an organic farm, and a "micro" farm. The "micro" crop costs about the same if not a touch more than the organic (which is twice the cost of the traditional). Both the organic and traditional look the same, although in many cases the organic will manifest fungus or other probles sooner, and do not last near as long in the fridge or basket as "chemical" crops. The "micro" crops however have much fresher looking produce, larger riper vegetibales and fruit, better color, and both look and taste far superior to the other crops. The microfarmers sell out quick.
microfarmers use fertilizers and to a limited extent some insecticides (though the nauture of the growing beds eliminates most pest problems, and thus the need for extensive chemical use). Microfarmers also have massive variety not just of common vegetables, but of heirloom varieties, exotic veggies, fabulous fresh herbs, and more. Buying thia high quality produce at the market is about 50% more expensive than buying regular grocery in the store, and about the same price as organic in stores (a bit higher than organic in the market).
Well, in my area, AT&T provides stonger signal and much higher reliability than verizon. My wife is a verizon user because her ENTIRE family is, and I'm on AT&T because I was a subscriber when the iPhone came out, and I have not yet found a reason not to have an iPhone, even with the price gouging, as the TCO is about $400 cheaper than a verizon blackberry for me over the 2 year term, once you include software, ringtones, blackberry data plan, replacement phone costs after 2 years (you only get $200 off a new blackberry after 2 years, you get $400 of a new iPhone after only 18months, GPS doesn't cost extra per month), etc.
Anyway, besides why I think iPhone is a good value; we can both be on the phone at the same time in the car. Whether I'm on 3G or edge, I'm always on 3-5 bars, and have exceptional call quality. She'll constantly be asking people to repeat themselves, or repeat herself. She constantly bitches about nthe quality, and laughs everytime a Verizon commercial comes on.
The ONLY time i've lost a call in the last 5 months was 1) driving underground though a tunel under a river that didn't have cell repeaters, and 2) when the person on the other end said they were driving through a bad area and THEY dropped the call, and appologized for their own poor reception when they called back several minutes later. That's right, 5 months, not a single dropped call excpet one noone could have maintined underground, and maybe I've dropped a handfull over the last 2 years. My Wife? She dropps a call almost every time we take a ride. Many places I get a signal she does not. She even drops calls in our own house, where she btw gets 3 bars and I have 5 bars on 3G.
She's gone through 4 phones in 2 years, 3 different models. ALL of them have horrible reception and stability in this area, and everywhere we seem to travel to (about 3 hours in any direction, on a regular basis). We're in the capitol city of our state, and you'd think we'd get decent service... nope, Verizon simply sucks. I was on Verizon prior to my now nearly 4 years on AT&T, and when i was on Verizon, their reliability was the reason i switched away from them. I was on Sprint for about 2 weeks and they were worse, been with AT&T since.
We were on vacation recently, and signals were weak at our location (and completely non-existant in the hotel). With WiFi, i was still able to make VoIP calls, and when outside, my 1-2 bars got me good call quality. She had no bars in or outside. Occasionally, she'd get a voicemail notice, or an SMS, but by the time she could react, she'd loose signal again. When we got back, we canceled her Verizon contract, paid the termination fee ($70), and I reactivated my iPhone 1G for her and put her on AT&T. She's actually willing to pay $30 more a month to not drop calls, and since Verizon now has "my 5" or whatever they call it, her family can all still call her AT&T line free (and we ported her existing number to AT&T, which took about 10 seconds, so all we had to do was send a text spam to all of them telling them to add her to their 5 list).
I don't know how they are nation wide, but in the southeast, Verizon sucks ass.
well, since it's a direct competitor to the big boys who have real money in political pockets, there are no grants that projects like this can actually qualify for, let alone be awarded.
This is a small company with 30 or so researchers from a small town. They're moving the technology forward, but until they can collect 10-15 million in investments, they can't build a proof of concept faciltiy. Once they have a system up and running, that's just a POC, and won;t prove the cost points, they'll need about 75 million more to make this go full scale and truly prove it. That's not chump change.
Lab chemistry and bench scale systems proved the process, and it's one that's been proven on large scales in the past using different technologoes, but it was done from necessity, not price reasons, during the war. Hitting under $3 a gallon is something critics will say can't be done until it is. It;s completely irrelevent that the competition can;t hit $10 a gallon without 20 more years of reasearch, and that's not including massive infrastructure expenditures in the tens of trillions, but those people have voices and bought politicians...
Well, no.
As a side effect, through ADDITIONAL processing, we can get water that can be filtered into drinking water, without actually having to run through traditional desalination.
As a dreadful side effect, we'll have a mass of biowaste, and every last contaiminant in the ocean cleaned from the water becomes a toxic sludge waste, which will include large amounts of murcury, other heavy metals, and some farily dangerous compounds mixed in with some poitentially useful organic materials and other compunds. All that crtap then itself needs to be processed, sorted, and disposed of in a varying and complicated array of processes.
Getting ethanol out of algae isn;t so much the issue. Getting the resulting crap out of the tank and safeley disposed of is, and may actually cost more than getting the fuel...
Look into a real technology. dotyenergy.com and see how it compares:
- 300 times more fuel per site (up to 30M gallons anually, not 100,000).
- operational costs of about $90M anually, on $225M anual expected revenue.
- Fuel (methanol, propanol, ethanol, and several other blends, including higher alcohols and jet fuels too!) that will compete in price with oil at $70/bbl
- NO hazardous byproducts, little to no environmental impact
- Energy derived from off-peak wind production
- CARBON NUETRAL
- We've been using this technology for over 50 years (we made deisel fuels using a very similar process in WWII)!
very detailed information, including some actual science data can be found http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels_Sci_Engr_ppt.pdf. (FAR more than other companies I've seen provide) and this research has been confirmed by multiple universities and science firms.
They also have a lot of great data at dotyenergy.com on the undisclosed facts about all of the other alternatives, some real numbers and analysis on feasability and costs, and explanations about a lot of other solutions. They've been researching this process and patenting improvements for over 20 years, and were recently awarded over 60 world patents for their enhancements to this technology.
OK, a massive expensive facility that requires proximity to an ocean, and in one YEAR it can't produce even 20% of what my town uses for fuel in 1 day.
Dow, please get your heads out of your asses and look at an actual viable technology:
dotyenergy.com.
- Sequestered CO2 + Wind Energy = FUEL Propanol, methanol, ethanol, whatever hydrocarbon blend you want...
A 250MW facility running on an annual cost of about $90M will produce nearly 30M gallons of fuels and higher alcohols. (300 TIMES what the algae farm claims to produce, and using less land to do it!).
This is NOT vaporware, RFTS processing to make fuels has been in use since WWII. This is simply an expansion in scientific scope, efficiency, and balanced economics. They can make fuel to compete with Oil at under $70/bbl.
VERY detailed data is available here: http://dotyenergy.com/PDFs/WindFuels_Sci_Engr_ppt.pdf
If you want MORE details, you can purchase a hardcopy of theiur detailed design document for a whoping $45...
This is Real stuff folks, which is probably why you have not heard of it...
(I am not paid or compensated for my comments in any way).
Thank you for brightening my day! That is one of the funniest true statements I've heard in weeks!
Point 1) XP works fine, and that's our stance too, but that's only part of it. Moving to Vista/7 would require rebuilding tons of images and profiles for distribution, upgrading other apps, configuring new packages for deployment, altering support policies, massive changes to group policy, new version of Antivirus to support the new OS, getting new versions of all our scanning and remediation tools, dealing with multiple differing audit policies during the 1-2 year transition, new alert scripts, modifying code to run in a browser other than IE 6, deal with higher aggregate network traffic, and more. The OS replacement is a FRACTION of the cost of moving to the new OS, and it would be a MASSIVE manhour effort. Just the rolout alone to nearly 15,000 desktops (as nearly all need either a new system or at least a hardware upgrade to run either Vista or 7) would equate to more than 40,000 man hours ($500,000 - $750,000 simply in LABOR!)
2) Retraining? If you use XP today everyday at work, and can't find the start menu, taskbar, a few desktop icons in Wondows 7, and can't adjust from Office 2003 to Office 2007 and IE 6 to IE 8, then YOU'RE FIRED! If your an IT admin or Desktop support specialast, and don't already have betas of Vista and 7 running at home, here's your warning...
We have not migrated to Vista, and still use XP as the standard across out 14+ thousand desktops, but that's not to say we have not "deployed" vista. We have serveral lab systems and developer workstations running Vista (though 8 months ago we had exactly 0 licenses deployed).
By end 2010 I'm sure we'll at least have a few v7 machines running somewhere in the company, and by end 2011 we'll likely have Vista across all desktops, but don't count on even 20% penetration here of vista by end-2010 though. In fact, the ONLY reason we'll be deploying any Vista at all in the near future is we're having trouble finding hardware 100% compatible with XP, and expect that by January, manby systems won't come with XP drivers since Microsoft won't allow new systems to ship with XP by then, and the driver guys want to give up and focus only on Vista, 7, and linux...
The H2 in the ceiling can stay there for hours unless the parking garrage happens to be in a particulary windy area (not the case underground). Ventalation systems are designed to move air around, but do not have vents in every hollow in the ceiling. I have also seen people in parking structures flick ciggarettes at the ceiling... wierd enough to see, usually they flick them at sprinkler heads out of some sadistic nature...
Parking garages also have speakers, electrical wiring, lights, and other sources of sparks up there. At home, think garage door opener... I can actually see the blue electrical ark in the motor in mine when it's running...
Oh, and it only takes a 2% mixture of H2 in air, to combust, not a high concentration at all. just 1 gram of H2 will create a 100% saturation of 3cuft of space at room temperature and pressure. Given that it would rise to the ceiling, and dispurse across it, and a 2 car garage is about 400sqft, 1g leaked of H2 would make the top 6" near the ceiling about 3% concentrated. That's enough man, JUST 1GRAM!
The proposed industry standard for the carbon shell tanks rated for 12,000 PSI planed to be used in H2 vehicles has a standing leak rate at 2.1grams per hour...
To house such a tank in your garage involves implementing a vapor control system, H2 detectors, and a system for PUMPING the H2 out of the garage past a small flame/spark so it can combust in real time instead of collecting. Shold an actual leak be detected beyond the standard outgasing from the tank walls, the whole system has to shut down, cut all power and seal the garrage, and needs to auto-notify authorities for clean up.
This is why a smart person has no direct correlation between online user account names between multiple accounts, nor should you ever register for a service using actually valid personal information unless you expect the service to actually send you something in the mail you want to receive... Preserving anonymity online is an art form. I have about 15 different user names online, with very little correlation amoung them. The only ones that line up are accounts with legitimate services (mostly the utilities and bills i pay online), but my e-mail user name is unique from all my other personal accounts, and i have a unique username with each bank. I also have some "filtering" e-mail accounts I access only through web services that I use to register for these other services and accounts so that none of them have my real e-mail address.
Without a log of my online activity (which is security erased each time I close the browser, or if the machine has been idle for more than 15 minutes), and without being able to correlate my online activity to a specific machine, or specific user account tied to me, they have NOTHING, even if they find files that match the ones their warant is looking for. I have tens of thousands of MP3s on my computer. Popular ones mostly, it's entirely plausible I had the same files as the person they're looking for.
The IP of my computer is dynamic, assigned by the router. I don't have my wireless network open to the world... I have a guest portal, isolated by firewall on a seperate SSID from my internal network on the same router (multi-radio, multi-SSID routers are awesome!). I simply chose to use the same dynamic IP range on both networks, so it's possible for someone in either network to have the same IP address. I also have the IP lease set at 2 hours, and since my systems all hibernate regulary, they're constantly changing IP addresses. Guests can only connect to the net when in their VLAN, and I can connect to guests from inside my firewall, but it's completely secure. This saves me from having to give out my complex hex password to every Joe Schmoe that comes over, and saves me from having to virus scan their PC first before allowing it connectivity. I run a secure network at home, and have connectivity to a jhighly secured network environment at work, and security protocols I have to maintain. I can't have my Mom's PC letting a virus into my subnet when she comes for a week to see the baby, so she and all other guests get their own...
Timing around my 8-5 work habits? gee, I wonder how many of my neighbors within a 1/4 mile radius also work 8-5 jobs?
Also, they'll find no trace of a P2P application on my home PCs. I have a TON of music, the large part ripped directly from CD, and a smaller but also large chunk recorded legally from streaming media sources using StreamRipper or other similar programs. That's not to say there might not be P2P files intermixed in my collection, but they will find no record of my systems having been to a P2P site, no installed software, no cached account information, no evidence.
If I was going to P2P (which I do not do), knowing it's illegal, I'd do so by using a read-only bootable OS from external media, and have a very tiny shared folder (only enough to get a good number of active streams), and would download all my files to a seperate media path. Only after I knew the downloads were safe and scanned would they get merged into my real media library, and further still only they were scrubbed for watermarks or other data by being converted into another format, converting the tag data into a format consistant with all my ripped files, and replacing the album art.
If their computer forensics folks came knocking with a warent and took my PC, they'd not find a binary match to any files the warent claims I downloaded, would find no account information and no trace of logged evidence of activity, and then I'd counter sue the RIAA for loss of use, false accusation, and emotional distrubance.
If they find my col
so, you're assuming what, we hook up catheders to every animal, and run sewers to every remote country farm?
Considder also, our current water treatments processes "filter" water. They use catalysts and bacteria to break down the contaminants, and clean the sludge from the water, leaving just the water. Actually removing Urea from water, without destroying the udea, is a problem that took many decades of scientific effort to solve, and would be a rediculously complicated to introduce into our water treatments systems. Not to mention increasing the size of those systems by about 20 fold to handle the load.
OK, so for one day we could fuel the entire east coast. After that we all have to walk. And for the bostonians, that might be a good thing :)
yup, about 25 miles commute...
...oh yea, I forgot this too. When WiMax comes out, the IP used could be any IP within oh, 15 miles of the tower?
"Your honor, I have a generic wireless router, with an after market 7w anteanna, and an effective range of nearly 1/4 mile. It's set to broadcast it's SSID and allow guest access. No, i don't have a lot of guests, i just bring different machines home from work occasionally, and I hate having to type in the password. besides, those passwords can be cracked in under a minute by anyone who wants to, does a google search, and downloads some free software, so why bother right? The wireless covers about 300 houses in area, and ANYONE, even someone simply parked in the area, could have made those downloads. Is it illegal to have my wifi open like that? no. OK, thanks, i rest my own case."
Since it's not against the law to have open wifi, there's no case for negligence...
Everyone can't be issued an IP, but I HAVE ONE. So MY IP address IS personally tied to me. When I was single, and lived alone, it was even more obviously mine. My IP is also tied to my domain name, and this in a who-is, you can gleam some personal data about me.
Yup. And phone numbers don't identify people either, just phones.
It's already been ruled that a phone number is protected information, and if you have chosen to make it unlisted, it takes a warent to get the phone company to reveal it. Why is an IP any different? It may identify a device (a mobile phone connected online over wifi), it may identify a router (and by extension your address, and thus the head of household or name on the account of the deive), or it might identify an access point in a coffee shop.
It may be safe to say an IP does not ALWAYS correlate to personal information, but since there's no method of validation, it should be ASSUMED to be protected information until such a point in time as it can be proven otherwise.
I don't care how much less it is... There is simply not enough urea made in the entire country on a daily bases to produce enough H2 for fuel for even a small city.
Really, how many gallons a day do you piss? Considder then that urea is only a fractional percentage of that pee. (about 95% of typical urine is water, the rest is a combination of mostly urea as well as other contaminants removed by the kidneys).
I'd have to piss somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 gallons a day to have enough fuel just to handle my daily commute. Then there's the energy loss seperating the urea at the water treatment plant, hooking houses on septic up to sewers to collect the additional urine (about 35% of the country doens't have a sewer), then transport of the seperated urea to an H2 processing plant, and THEN, what do you plan to DO with the H2? We can't afford to run it in our cars... (current fuel cells cost about $750,000 once you take away the government subsidies. They THINK they can make em for about $100,000 in 15-20 years....
Had to buy mine online too. Can't remember the brand, but it was not GE.
Actually, i have found the "name brands" actually make some pretty shitty CFLs... i guess it's in their best interest, part of debunking the technology so they can remain competitive. the brands I get online not only have better color, and better lumens per watt, but they cost less too.
It's not snake oil, I promise. They've been working on this 20 years, and it's already a technology used in WWII to make deisel fuels.
All their ideas focus on improved heat exchangers, a new electrolysis chamber, making parts of the process symbiotic, new catylist systems, systems for flow and containment of the process; it's very much logistical systems improvements, with a few pretty impressive new invetions thrown in (actually their heat exchanger design has a lot more applications than this), and all materialized into a single system.
It can all be done today, using seperate systems for each phase in the fuel making process, but at about $1500 a barrel if you wanted to do it on your own, not $80 as they predict.
Their initial investment will make a facility about 2-3 times the size of a typical mall store, and a few stories high. They'll be able to tweak and prove out the larger scale process using that "lab scale" facility. They'll make only a few gallons a day at that scale, and use a couple of MW doing it. Phase 3 is a 75MW facility that will make hundreds of gallons a day (size sclaes very well up to a point for this process). The real things are 250MW, completely modular, and premanufatured for efficiency. We'll need a few thousand of them in the USA to replace 100% of our fuel use. They'll cost somewhere north of about 100M each to build. The cost is a fraction of what it would take to deploy an H2 infrastructure. They'll be profitable at about 2X what oil-based gasoline is.
www.dotyenrtgy.com
It's ordinary fuels, in any blend they want. Methanol is the easiest. Propanol, ethanol, and more are also easy. The process actually makes a semi-random blend (with some predictabiltiy). It;s gasoline, refined anywhere from 80 octane to high grade jet fuels over 120.
It ruses, yes. Look above you next tome you;re in your garrage or a parking structure and think of where all that light fuel is going to go....
Yea, it will slowly leak out and disipate. Given typical leak rates of spun carbon tanks, that's not a real issue. However, considder the leak rate of an aging seal on the fill cap, the fuel lines running to the engine, microfractures in the aother parts of the system connected to the tank and engine that will contain H2. These things are METICULOUSLY designed and cost over a million dollars per car today to run safely as highly maintained show cars. Imaging the lowest bidder assembly process and how much risk there is for even a mild, slow leak from a fuel line...
In MINUTES you could saturate a ceiling panel with enough H2 to reach 5% mix, and then all someone has to do is smoke a ciggarette, or clip their anteanna on a ceiling tile. BOOM!
Gas tanks in cars very rarely explode, then simply conbust. The initial reaction is usually several seconds after the leak begins, and is actually the VAPOR that causes the bang.
H2 tanks, don;t just leak, and they don;t need a flame. The simply CONCUSSIVE FORCE of releaseing 930 atmospheres (nearly 16,000PSI) is enough to kill a peson at some distance, not to mention the shrapnel the car will become. This is FAR more powerful than a typical scuba tank explosion (which is just an O2 blend, not even a flamable gas), and far more VOLUME of gas as well...
Though parking garages have airflow (some of them) there are still corners in ceiling tiles that do not get adequate air flow. A leaky seal in one car could put off enough H2 in a half hour to create a hazardous condition. In your garrage (btw, i have no entry, i have a frog above, and due to buolding codes, it;s quite well sealed). it's even easier to build up a sufficient charge for combustion. It only takes 2%...
Want some proof of how H2 can become captured? Put the cap on a milk jug, cut off the bottom. Punch a small hole in the top. and insert the end of a glass straw, seal the edges with wax, and then tape shut the top of the straw. This is essentially now a mini bun son burner.. Clamp the jug to a pole in the ground a few feet off the ground, open end facing the ground, straw up. Fill the jug from underneath with H2 gas. It will float up into it and push the regular air out. give it a minute or two to settle, then take the tape off the straw and light it.
You'll get a nice little blue flame, that on just the air in the jug, and room pressure, will burn for several minutes. When the pressure of the H2 trying to rise out the straw equalizes with the pressure around, the flame will drop down into the jug, where the small amount of H2 remaining has mixed with air. The resulting boom from this tiny amount of H2 will probaly set off your car alarm, and neighbors will come running... We had a science professor do this in high school and he got fired for it.
Your NASA filling system, perhaps you didn't notice that in the end the resulting tank that's full end up being about -250C. That's a problem. See, the spun carbon tanks in cars are not insulated or designed to actually get that cold. They'll simply shatter at those temps. The liquid H2 stored underground needs to bleed into the tank slowly, and come up to pressure to re-liquify. If the tank goes much below -100C in the process, you have a huge issue.
1) I don;t have pleanty of time to fill my car. I only commute 20 minutes to work and back, but that means filling a 200 mile range H2 tank about once a week, if I never drive anywhere byt work. Since I'm 6 miles from the closest filling station, once a week I'd have to campo out there.
2) The H2 leaving the tank is not venting anywhere NEAR quick enough to drop it to -250C. under normal conditions driving a fuel cell vehicle, the tank rarely gets cold enough to frost...
3) if i filled the tank to below -140C, it would crack.
4) most of my trips are short, meaning warn tanks 95% of the time I;d fill up.
Why do this when i can use wind energy to make unlimeted regular gasoline to run in my current car, pumped from my current gas station, at about $3 a gallon, and without adding a cinlge gram more CO2 to the air then is already going there from non-car sources...
The average car is on the road 17 years. The average person will not be able to purchase an H2 poewred car, even one that uses an ICE, without a massive goverment subsidy (which if we all do it, means we're all paying that tax to pay that subsidy for everyone, aka, we all payt that anyway as part of the price of the car). Fuel cells are not predicted to be under $100,000 for 20 years. (they're about 750,000 now).
Even if you can make H2 safe, and cheap, WE CAN'T AFFORD THE CAR TO RUN IT IN! Plus the transport, plus the pumping infrastructure, plus the redical and expensive maintenance of fuel cells (which mostly can not be repaired), plus the factories to make it all, etc.
We can make clean, safe, fuel that works with EVERYTHING we have today, and without any new CO2, WHY persue H2?????