Comments on: Fuel Cell Stimulus Plan

By: Jason Borune

Jason Borune — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:22:53 +0000

The government is a joke. almost none of this is going to jobs. They need to let he corporations go bankrupt so they can pay off there debts.

By: Philip Block

Philip Block — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:21:57 +0000

Good question Mr. Cales. The UK is also going the way of Japan. I refer you to http://www.fuelcelltoday.com. A blurb on that web site will give you some insight on what is going on in the UK. You might consider starting a business doing just that. Logan Energy, located in Atlanta, GA may have some answers and suggestions. They do FC installations. Also, you have to consider what has happened in the U.S. the past 40 years or so. It has become so difficult to start and maintain a major business that most people say it isn’t worth it. How many Steve Jobs or Bill Gates types have you heard of pop up with a major business the past 20 years or so. Recently, it was reported that the founders of Home Depot were supposed to have made the comment that they could not start that same business today under prevailing conditions. Also, many of the companies that could handle a project of that type, are being led by Ivy League clones that do not have the slightest idea of what innovation is or care about it. Their goal is money and power, a 1.2 million dollar office with their name on the door and a don’t make waves philosophy. Japan basically picked up the whole electronics industry from the U.S. after WWII and ran with it. The saw the value of it. So, why do you think they are doing the same thing with the FC? They are not the 2nd largest economy in the world because they are stupid. Sure, they have made their share of mistakes. But they value individual thought and innovation. In the U.S., the socialists squash it. In fact , the whole rest of the world is going to the FC, while the U.S. is dragging its feet.

By: Mike Cales

Mike Cales — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:10:41 +0000

The problem with fuel cells is that residential units are never available to Americans like myself. I need a fuel cell. I build a remote home on the promise they would be available in 2003. I then had to run a diesel generator 24 hours a day for over a year. I now have a solar electric system but it is not adequate for living a normal lifestyle. You can’t run even a singe room air conditioner at night on battery power. Thus a residential fuel cell operating on LP would be perfect for my family. I already have the inverters to make use of the DC power. Yet all effort has been on putting these test units in homes in Japan. Why can’t someone like myself be part of the development by providing a real world test?

By: Philip A. Block

Philip A. Block — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:05:34 +0000

Well David, here we go again. From the tone of your comment, I get the feeling that you are either pulling my leg or are just emotionally wraped up in the mystical concepts of wind, solar, and nuclear power )NP) that have been fostered by the non business and engineering/scientific community on the uneducated of the worlds population (yes, companies like GE is pushing NP and wind because they have huge investiments in them, but also, look at the poor state GE is in). But, I will proceed anyhow.The whole point is not what is an energy source or not. Yes, the Fuel Cell needs an energy source to operate. Hydrogen is the best. Yes, the wind mill needs an energy source to operate.Wind., Yes, a conventional power plant needs a heat source to operate. Any hydrocarbon (methanol), geothermal and nuclear energy. Yes, solar cells need a light source to operate. In the main, light from the sun. Every system has its pros and cons. But, from an engineering and business standpoint, what is the best for a particular situation? As I mentioned previously, wind, geothermal, solar, have their places, albeit, limited. Now, for NP. Great for military propulsion systems. For civilian use? No. The NP ship Savannah proved that. For power generating plants? No. The cost factor alone has proven nuclear power a negative investment.. As mentioned earlier, 90 billion for a big hole in the ground to store nuclear waste? Electric billing in many places still carries a surcharge to pay for NP plants built 30 or more years ago. Go back and read the records about the NP plants built after the war. The people that were not afraid to speak out said they would not do it again if they knew what the results would have been. Not only NP, but the concept of the central power plant died with the ending of the 20th century. Technology has obseleted the concept of the central power plant–of any type. Distributed power is the technology of the 21st century. I am not going to say anything about Fuel Cells in this comment as I think I have covered them fairly well previoously. As I mentioned, I don’t know If you pulling my leg or what, but it appears my previous comment did not register. I would like you to show me (as they say in Missouri), business and engineering wise, the facts for your thinking (as Friday said,” only the facts ma’am”).

By: snbess

snbess — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:39:37 +0000

Wow, David. Those are harsh words, especially coming from The Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Investor newsletter editor. Forgive me if I got your job title wrong. You’ve been around awhile. Why the sour words now?

By: David Redstone

David Redstone — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 20:52:05 +0000

The kind of thinking you express above is precisely what is wrong with fuel cell enthusiasts and the “fuel cell community”.Wind, geothermal and and nuclear are energy sources. Fuel cells are not. You seem to think that the hydrogen required to run fuel cells can be magically produced without using any energy. You are in no position to educate anyone about anything.My suggestion is to build as much renewable and nuclear generation capacity as possible (and as much methanol from waste capacity as possible for transportation fuel in ICEs) as quickly as possible and stop wasting time, money and public attention on fuel cells.

By: Philip A. Block

Philip A. Block — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:21:13 +0000

I would like to comment on Mr Redstone’s Dec. 22, 2008 comment. First, I think a little basic education in science is needed here. People are hooked on the wind because is sounds free ( human nature such as it is, FREE always sparks the greed in us). It is by far free. The wind generators are limited as to location and the cost is high, plus the cost of long and expensive xmission lines, substations, and the subsequent thousands of acres required for the wind generators and xmission lines.Wind generators are fine, but in limited situations. The same goes for geothermal, again good in limited situations. But, the Fuel Cell does not have these limitations and what is so nice about them is they can be situated just about anywhere: shopping centers, basements, on top of buildings, etc., without the landscape being destroyed with wind generators and the associated transmission lines.Installing and servicing Fuel Cells is basically a simple matter. Yes, the Gov’t is being called upon to put up the money-sadley because the private sector in this country has not risen to the challenge. Where are the Buffets, the Soros, etc. with their billions? Do you know that the taxpayers have put up 90 billion, yes ninety billion, to dig a hole in Yucca Mt. (Nevada) to store spent fuel that has been been going on for years and they still don’t know when it will be completed. A few Fuel Cell vehicles? Sure, the auto was first proved practical in 1885 and it took till 1908 that Ford produced a car that was affordable. The American mentally of instant success does not work in the real world. It takes time. It is easy to criticize, but what is YOUR suggestion for the the energy situation.

By: David Redstone

David Redstone — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 05:58:06 +0000

This “Fuel Cell Stimulus Plan” is nothing but a special interest group (the USFCC) asking for a handout from taxpayers. The fuel cell “industry” just got an eight year investment tax credit extension - much longer than real renewable technologies like wind and geothermal. But that wasn’t enough. Now the USFCC wants $1.2B in cash, the biggest chunks to be earmarked for “learning demonstrations” and basic R&D. The promise of “hundreds of fuel cell vehicles” in a world that will soon have over a billion vehicles is pathetic.

By: Philip A. Block

Philip A. Block — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 00:15:32 +0000

The way to go. Now is the time to get this out to the public, politicians, power company executives, and all the schools in the U.S. that have any type of engineering or science courses. Get it into the news. Get it onto billboards. Hold seminars locally and invite the public. Have a public relations blitz. In other words, it is time we got this nation off the nuclear mentality and installed the Fuel Cell mentality.

By: Sarah

Sarah — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 22:36:09 +0000

I think it is great that this has released. Over the past few months a variety of third parties (Center for American Progress, Council on Competitiveness, the Transition to Green Report, etc.) have been announcing their suggested Energy Plans for Obama’s administration. Hopefully the transition team will take some pointers from this plan!