Re: eer

>On 14 Nov 2003 21:11:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FEerguy9) posted: 
>We don't need oil.
>We don't need batteries. 
>We don't need internal combustion engines. We don't need fusion. 
>We don't need hybrids.
>We don't need hydrogen-powered cars.
>We don't need ethanol.
>We don't need natural gas.
>We don't need methane.
>We don't even need efficiency.
>We don't even need conservation. 
>All we need are the renewable energy sources that God - in His infinite
>wisdom -- provided us. 
>Well we already have that, albeit expensively converted to electricity. 
>What we need (according to you) instead of all of the above, is a piece
>of pie-in-the-sky apparatus that does not exist. Make you think, Frank?
>Thought not =A0 :)
>######################################
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0C'mon now,he did say "we don't even need
>efficiency", And while it may be nice to have, we son't need it at
>first,certainly at first.

Efficiency means little when you have available energy in the Zillions, and a
need in the hundreds.


>Obviously his goal is renewable and sustainable energy, and any kind of
>a fool knows it's going to cost more. 

Not if it replaces fossil fuels, right off the bat!


>But, when you add in the cost of
>warfare to meet our energy needs, which will obviously happen, The cost
>of renewables pales in insignificance.

Right ON!!!



>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Energy independence is my main goal, which ever
>way we can get it. I'd say it's a matter of national security.

Right on!


>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0  I don't know what to say about your comment that the
>apparatus doesn't exist. It quite obviously does.. 


It does?


>Oh ye of so little faith in science !!!  Some here blast every new
development, as if it's all a big scam.  This is exactly what the common man
said about
>automobiles around 1915--Too expensive for me to ever afford. Then,
>along came Henry Ford with his new-fangled assembly line, anf these dire
>predictions just dried up and blew away.
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0I thinkyou efficiency freaks are barking up the wrong
tree here..  The public seldom buys efficiency, performing performance instead.
 

This is not an efficiency gain - it is a way to capture COMPLETE efficiency.


>You really should visit a few new car showrooms to
>find out what's selling.  The efficiency freaks have been hammering away
>for decades,for light,high mileage automobiles, yet people are still
>buying Cadillacs and Hummers.  This willl likely be what happens with
>the hydrogen economy many out here are completely fed up with big
>centralized utilities selling thempower atpolitically set prices,and
>they want to have a go at making their own power, and storing it as
>hydrogen. 

There will BE no hydrogen economy.


>We all recognize this is going to cost more than utility power
>and gasoline, but that just isn't the point.

It's NOT?


> The point is getting off
>the grid and away from the politics involved. And, arguments of
>efficiency don't even register on my, and many others, radar screens.  
>

Perhaps that is because you have not consideder the DEGREE of efficiency
available with eer.


Frank