"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message
...
Steve Firth wrote:

Jon Porter wrote:

[unsnip]
| | As pointed out elesewhere in this thread, when dealing with emerging
| | technologies
it is well to keep a more open mind rather than put forward a
rigid point of view

"If only you believed" eh?

Even if you believe that it's unlikely to ever become commercially
viable, that does not excuse your assumption that hydrogen generation
will continue to be as environmentally inefficient as it currently is.

as well as rubbishing/trying to discourage others from
pursuing the research.

I'm not trying to dissuade anyoen from research. However farcical
publicity stunts without any relevant end application such as these
crazy bus scheme do nothing positive.




Why do you not consider running buses on hydrogen to be a "relevant end
application"?

It's not research,

Does this mean you think that the results of this trial won't lead to
either a better design of hydrogen bus or an abandonment of the idea?

all it is is cynical marketing at its worst.

What IYO makes it "cynical"? Do you regard every publicity stunt as so?

If such attitudes prevailed in the 1960s we'd have
neither cheaper air travel or non stick frying pans.

We probably would by now. Many of the most important discoveries come
from basic research rather than R&D.

Utter ********. If any body proposes something with as far reaching
consequences as a change to hydrogen as a fuel then they had better damn
well ahve *done* their research.

And there's an awful lot of research to do. This is only a small part.

Not be asking the rest of us to follow along as an act of faith.

Just how exactly are the hydrogen bus builders doing that???

Fuel cells are a diversion from the real issues. Claiming hydrogen to be
"zero emission" is a dioversion from the facts and does the proponents
of a hydrogen economy no favours.




Apart from H2O and heat, there are no emissions - it will actually
reduce the amount of pollution in the air.

Hydrogen generation is a different issue. It can be zero emission and I
expect that in the future most of it will be. However, you should
remember that this is only a trial of the hydrogen buses. At this stage
it is best to get hydrogen from the most readily available source,
whatever that is.

Precisely! Well said!

The problem with Mr. Firth, is that he has no idea who is trying to lecture,
something he tried to accuse me off a week or so back. As in other things he
was wrong.
His knowledge of the subject he is trying to lecture on is inadequate and
out of date. He carefully snips out replies that are inconvenient to his
argument, and in some of his answers tries to give credibilty by an
inflating his own importance. Words such as *clients* and *advisor* are
slipped in as if to impress. I'll be charitable, and put it down to the
exuberance of youth. His quoted source of information (The DfT report) is
partly available on the internet, but more importantly is still being
written and updated on a monthly basis. It is largely produced by AEA, an
organisation that I have close connections with. The internet version being
about three months behind the ones being seen by the DfT officials, which
take account of the later developments. By contrast some of those he takes
issue with are working at the leading edge of this energy producing
technology.

http://aeat-env.master.com/texis/mas...l&order=r&n=20
Is a link that will let those wishing to learn more about fuel cell
technology get a more balanced opinion. The one overriding feature of the
executive summaries in most of these reports, is that trials and research
have to begin now, not ten years down the line. It is also a highly active
area of research and it is fair to say some (a minority) share some of Mr.
Firth's view that sustainable, clean, hydrogen production is still some way
off. The recent advances in hydrogen production techniques have brought many
more into the fold of supporting the idea of such fuel cells. The best way
to test such fuel cells is in actual usage conditions, hence the buses, and
the locomotives (USA).