sci.energy.hydrogen

Stuart Grey wrote:

> On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 21:26:36 +0000, Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>
>
>>Stuart Grey wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 03:02:53 +0000, Dan Bloomquist wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Eventually it will be...
>>>>
>>>>Nope. It will be never doing the science. But then, most of you don't
>>>>understand science......
>>>>
>>>>This 9/11 thing is a non starter. The real issues facing mankind are
>>>>peak oil and the economic disruptions that follow.
>>>
>>>
>>>Oil is no big deal. We're sitting on vast coal reserves, and we can make
>>>oil from coal.
>>
>>CTL in this country would run some $100 billion + per mb/d.
>
>
> Not sure what you mean here. It doesn't appear in the Hirsch report, and
> you're mixing units of dollars and barrels per day. They don't add.

I'll make this simple for you. Build $100 billion + in infrastructure
and you can produce a mb/d equivalent in liquid fuels. This doesn't not
take into account operating and new mining infrastructure. BTW, CTL is
most certainly covered in the Hirsch report. You will find a copy on my
website:

/money/


\>>When do we
>>start? Read the Hirsch report for an in-depth analysis of time required
>>for mitigation.
>
>
> Yeah, 20 years before the peak and the transition would be
> easy. 10 years with some negative impacts. Anything less will have big
> impacts, but we'll survive.

And you gloss over the economic impact. Bernanke has already called out
the helicopters. But, you wouldn't know about that. In case you missed it:
/money/

>>>We can also make oil from nuclear power. We're sitting on even larger
>>>reserves of nuclear power.
>>
>>Cite?
>
> I took the book back to the library. You can check it out yourself.

What book? Now you don't remember the title? As you have read a whole
book on the subject, what are the methods and projected costs?

> < snip blooming idiot's denials when confronted with facts. >

Of course, Stuey creates a 'truth' again........

You are special, (like a retard).