@2: Ok, maybe it will take this time: do you see how to get that hydrogen, you need an established source of energy, which is used up? That is why hydrogen is not a fuel source...it takes more energy to create it than you get out of it. You can do it man, UNDERSTAND IT.
Per my prediction last week re: Driscoll, I wouldn't be surprised if the "six week extended focus break" (what the hell does that even mean?) gets extended, and extended...
"...maybe it will take this time: do you see how to get that hydrogen, you need an established source of energy, which is used up?"
Batteries not required. Solar panels can do the job too. All you need is electricity to crack the water molecule. The problem with hydrogen is it's very flammable and very hard to contain. But getting it out of water just takes electricity.
Look at the motherfucking watchband on that Driscoll dude. Now, THAT is a manly motherfucking watch band. Thick, and wide. That is definitely not some kind of fag watchband, no sir.
@3, maybe YOU should try to understand. You can get AAA batteries right in the grocery store, no energy required! Where do those things come from, anyways? Are they tubers?
I was ready to be impressed by the dude who lived in the woods for 30 years, but the link says he survived by committing over 1000 robberies. I was expecting more setting of rabbit traps and less breaking and entering.
Burger King isn't just buying "a Canadian coffe & doughnut chain", they're buying Tim Horton's! That's a national insult! You might as well sell Waffle House to the Russians!
@7 grasps the essence of the link given @2 that he seemed oblivious to there, so @2 was baiting ('bating?).
Anyway, the point was an improvement in catalysts, not that useful amounts of motive force come from AAA batteries.
One alkaline AAA contains about 1.4 watt-hours of energy. A Tesla automobile uses 220 watt-hours to move one mile; other less-efficient electric cars use more.
Maybe that photo caption should be "Dumb burger chain wants to buy Tim Horton's to avoid US taxes". I don't see why you call Tim Horton's "dumb". Are they any worse than other large chains? At least they have tim bits.
@8 and 9, if you look closer you can see the pancake makeup on his forearm. It's to cover up the tattoo he features so prominently on his Grindr profile.
@2: Hydrogen is not a fuel supply.
@7: Okay, catalytic methods are improved. This just means that you'll lose LESS energy. Still losing energy though.
JBITSMFOTP
@5: The issue is that if you're setting up a solar panel, why not store the electricity produced in a rechargeable battery or similar, instead of converting it to a gas that must be stored under high pressure, is explosively flammable, and has a tendency to leach through solid metal? SRotU's objection to Li-ion batteries is that there's a danger of fire or explosion if they malfunction. Which is funny given the danger of hydrogen gas.
@17: Take your ignorant ass elsewhere, you delusional Nazi fuckwit.
after citizens united, are foreign companies treat with the same rights as citizens for political donations? does this at least prevent BK from making political donations? (i know foreign companies can make donations to PACs as long as the PACs are run by citizens and a few other rules.)
Most of these vehicles will run on fuel manufactured at large industrial plants that produce hydrogen by combining very hot steam and natural gas, an energy-intensive process that releases carbon dioxide as a byproduct.
@24 is correct. Storage from solar is great, but the highest return is passive solar, PV solar has a lower return and efficiency ratio and uses certain materials that may either be in short supply of can be hazardous to create (less hazardous than natural gas fracking or oils sands tho, which are very very very bad)
Please wait...
and remember to be decent to everyone all of the time.
Two shot at a gas station in Kent, another crawling to a Taco Time bleeding to death and now a new stabbing victim in Puyallup.
Where are the militarized police when you need them?! Station some of those armored personnel carriers around town. Please!
Breakthrough tech news:
http://www.futurity.org/water-splitter-a…
Batteries not required. Solar panels can do the job too. All you need is electricity to crack the water molecule. The problem with hydrogen is it's very flammable and very hard to contain. But getting it out of water just takes electricity.
@3, maybe YOU should try to understand. You can get AAA batteries right in the grocery store, no energy required! Where do those things come from, anyways? Are they tubers?
#3
This is of course an advancement in catalytic materials on the back end of the process.
Here's what research is doing for initial production:
http://hypersolar.com/news_detail.php?id…
Yes sir, thick and wide is how he likes it.
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmake…
Anyway, the point was an improvement in catalysts, not that useful amounts of motive force come from AAA batteries.
One alkaline AAA contains about 1.4 watt-hours of energy. A Tesla automobile uses 220 watt-hours to move one mile; other less-efficient electric cars use more.
@7: Okay, catalytic methods are improved. This just means that you'll lose LESS energy. Still losing energy though.
JBITSMFOTP
@5: The issue is that if you're setting up a solar panel, why not store the electricity produced in a rechargeable battery or similar, instead of converting it to a gas that must be stored under high pressure, is explosively flammable, and has a tendency to leach through solid metal? SRotU's objection to Li-ion batteries is that there's a danger of fire or explosion if they malfunction. Which is funny given the danger of hydrogen gas.
@17: Take your ignorant ass elsewhere, you delusional Nazi fuckwit.
--L. Ron Hubbard