Comments on: Don’t flush yet! Why Joe Romm is wrong http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/2008/08/dont-flush-yet-why-joe-romm-is-wrong/ is your source for the latest information on fuel cells. Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:45:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Fuel Cell Insider » Are you listening, Dr. Chu? http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/2008/08/dont-flush-yet-why-joe-romm-is-wrong/#comment-2876 Fuel Cell Insider » Are you listening, Dr. Chu? Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:40:25 +0000 http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/?p=62#comment-2876 [...] it is not possible to know which technologies will be the market winners but given that our global climate and future mobility are at stake, we must pursue all promising [...] [...] it is not possible to know which technologies will be the market winners but given that our global climate and future mobility are at stake, we must pursue all promising [...]

]]> By: Philip A. Block http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/2008/08/dont-flush-yet-why-joe-romm-is-wrong/#comment-248 Philip A. Block Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:14:01 +0000 http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/?p=62#comment-248 Sadly, Joe Romm is just another Al Gore, no science education, but an expert on science subjects. "Man will never fly heavier than air objects", "Edison dosn't know what he is doing because he does not have a University degree (Phd)", "Who would ever want a telephone?", ect., ect. Batteries?-any battery scientist (the honest ones) will tell you the so called super battery is a myth. The science just dosn't exist. The battery companies have been trying for a hundred years to produce a battery that would be acceptable for a practical auto. Today, the battery technology has leveled off and further development is minor. The trouble with rechargeables is that for every recharge, the energy the battery can contain diminishes. It is as though every time you fill up your gas tank, the amount of gas the tank can hold is one gallon less.The average auto is approx. 15% efficient. 85 cents of every dollar goes off in heat. The electric motor is 65% to 95% efficient (depending on type and usage).The Fuel Cell 50% and more. Plus, it takes a lot less energy to make an all electric/Fuel cell car than an ICE. Joe, your essay is as obselete as the 20th century. I will gladly debate the subject with you any-time, after you take a decent science course. Sadly, Joe Romm is just another Al Gore, no science education, but an expert on science subjects. “Man will never fly heavier than air objects”, “Edison dosn’t know what he is doing because he does not have a University degree (Phd)”, “Who would ever want a telephone?”, ect., ect. Batteries?-any battery scientist (the honest ones) will tell you the so called super battery is a myth. The science just dosn’t exist. The battery companies have been trying for a hundred years to produce a battery that would be acceptable for a practical auto. Today, the battery technology has leveled off and further development is minor. The trouble with rechargeables is that for every recharge, the energy the battery can contain diminishes. It is as though every time you fill up your gas tank, the amount of gas the tank can hold is one gallon less.The average auto is approx. 15% efficient. 85 cents of every dollar goes off in heat. The electric motor is 65% to 95% efficient (depending on type and usage).The Fuel Cell 50% and more. Plus, it takes a lot less energy to make an all electric/Fuel cell car than an ICE. Joe, your essay is as obselete as the 20th century. I will gladly debate the subject with you any-time, after you take a decent science course.

]]> By: Fuel Cell Insider » Recent Reports Highlight Commercialization Targets and How We Can Achieve Them http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/2008/08/dont-flush-yet-why-joe-romm-is-wrong/#comment-242 Fuel Cell Insider » Recent Reports Highlight Commercialization Targets and How We Can Achieve Them Wed, 03 Sep 2008 19:11:47 +0000 http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/?p=62#comment-242 [...] three of these studies agree, and as I mentioned in my recent post, a portfolio approach is necessary as we look down the road towards a carbon-free [...] [...] three of these studies agree, and as I mentioned in my recent post, a portfolio approach is necessary as we look down the road towards a carbon-free [...]

]]> By: michael Halpin http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/2008/08/dont-flush-yet-why-joe-romm-is-wrong/#comment-232 michael Halpin Fri, 29 Aug 2008 02:53:42 +0000 http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/?p=62#comment-232 Poor Joe. He reminds me of the guy who spent a lot of time, money and research on the Bumble Bee. He crunched all the numbers weight to wing ratio and came to the conclusion it can not fly.He is now spending the rest of his days trying to convince any one that will listen that he is right and we are wrong. Thanks to Honda I can see with great 'Clarity' a highly sophisticated car that can fly along the highway with zero pollution. Joe thinks it's a Mirage. Mike H. founder HYDROGENHEADS Poor Joe. He reminds me of the guy who spent a lot of time, money and research on the Bumble Bee. He crunched all the numbers weight to wing ratio and came to the conclusion it can not fly.He is now spending the rest of his days trying to convince any one that will listen that he is right and we are wrong.
Thanks to Honda I can see with great ‘Clarity’ a highly sophisticated car that can fly along the highway with zero pollution. Joe thinks it’s a Mirage.

Mike H. founder HYDROGENHEADS

]]> By: Kyle Stewart, Fuel Cell Store http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/2008/08/dont-flush-yet-why-joe-romm-is-wrong/#comment-229 Kyle Stewart, Fuel Cell Store Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:40:36 +0000 http://www.fuelcellinsider.org/?p=62#comment-229 Bob makes a great point that progress in any direction for alternative fuels is a good direction. There is no reason to snub a particular technology based on speculation of its future potential. If we want to make a strong move toward energy independence and reducing our impact on the environment it will be a combination of not only technologies but people combining different solutions to power to the world. Sorry Joe but we already have a divided country we don't need to divide alternative energy. Bob makes a great point that progress in any direction for alternative fuels is a good direction. There is no reason to snub a particular technology based on speculation of its future potential. If we want to make a strong move toward energy independence and reducing our impact on the environment it will be a combination of not only technologies but people combining different solutions to power to the world. Sorry Joe but we already have a divided country we don’t need to divide alternative energy.

]]>