"Steve Firth" wrote in message
.. .
Jon Porter wrote:

We already can as you must well know, but of course that is inconvenient
to
your argument. I've already posted the sources as you also well know. No
I
don't work for Serco. I could reveal it, no contractual limitations and
others may already know who I work for, but I and at least two others
who
have read this thread prefer to just let you carry on in you own
ignorance,
simply because your arrogance and lack of knowledge, combined with a
prejudice that is almost mind blowing, (considering what you do
currently)
is most entertaining!
To sum up, you deny hydrogen fuel can be made cleanly,

No, I deny that it came be made cleanly and economically. I have severe
doubts about the sanity of the entire cycle of production by any means
but you appear to know little or nothing about the energetics of
hydrogen production and while you are long on words, you have been
entirely bereft of facts.

Seems I, and others here, know more than you (and about you for that
matter!) Do some research and stop being so lazy! (Students today want it
all on a plate!)

The web pages that you pointed me and others towards are simply
references to marketing hype. Not very helpful.

Then go to the library or order the info from the links, certainly those
reading this thread may find it useful even if you don't wish to.


it already can be and
industrial trials are under way in Canada and USA. As pointed out it
uses
waste biological material, glucose mixures and has nickel/tin as a
catalyst
instead of platinum. Low temperature process (450c) Emission neutral,
and
cleaner than petro-chemical processes.

yawn How much? Not how much has been made, but that's a moot point
too, how much does it cost to produce?

You obviously didn't read the link and the subsequent links from that, the
figures were all there. But I expect you'll be able to tell everyone how
much it will cost to produce diesel in 5 years time? No ? Using the
processes devised and todays prices , cost of Hydrogen at 2.80pnds a litre
to produce,(diesel is 23p) will be reduced to around 61p a litre. The
relevant costs are likely to reverse in time as oil prices rise with
scarcity and hydrogen production costs come down.. The raw material for
hydrogen production being renewable and the energy/material costs being
lower. Remember low temperature and no need for a platinum catalyst.
Additional benefits can be gained by the use of the taxation system. The
less emissions, the lower the tax


You deny the need to build vehicles to put fuel cells in,

At this stage, yes. It's the wrong end of the problem. We know we can
make vehicles containing fuel cells, it's hardly a challenge in
engineering terms, just as it's not a challenge to produce vehicles
running on LPG.

Incorrect read on.


Producing hydrogen powered vehicles today isn't research, it's
showboating.

prototype vehicles are needed to prove engineering principles and new
materials. All well and dandy going straight into production and then
finding things break.

Oh dear, engineering really isn't your subject is it? I'd stick to
something you do understand.

Well it's plainly not yours now is it? As for me I get by on the salary I
get paid for, well, engineering actually.

Now, think. Hydrogen has a lower calorific value, therefore any vehicle
powered by it needs to have a lighter body to gain any advantage over diesel
engined vehicles. That means using some fairly exotic alloys and plastics
that are rarely seen outside the motor racing or aircraft industry. If you
think I or any other responsible engineer is going to sign a certificate of
design acceptance on a passenger carrying vehicle to be mass produced
without prototype testing, then it shows you know very little about
engineering. Hence the initial costs are high as with any prototype. But in
the overall scale of things small beer when the production run is started.
Mercedes happen to be rather good at what they do, rather better I fear than
someone not long out of sixth form.

"One of my clients is *the* leader in the development of small fuel
cells."

No they're not, you cannot prove that any more than the companies themselves
can. Even if such a relationship existed they're hardly your clients at all
are they? It's like me claiming the Government is "my" client, when in fact
they are clients of my employers and I simply write the report on behalf of
my employers. It's a fantasy trip for you to claim as such, bit like the
Firth Consultancy on the organisation part of your postings.
You can rant, troll and snip on all you like, maybe your grant is being paid
by a company that stands to lose out in the long run? We know some oil
producers are a tad concerned at the progress made, hence their attempts to
buy certain patents. Why would oil producers try to buy the patent on
something being freely shared amongst research institutions, if not to
stifle it's development? Unless of course they think in a few years cheap
hydrogen production from renewable sources part of their business? In
future, you may find it helpful, when quoting from DfT reports as support
for spurious arguments, it helps if you read the full report and the
subsequent links to see who the author of that same report is. That way you
do not find yourself using just half the information to support all of your
argument against the person who produced the data in the first place.

http://www.manwillneverfly.com/

In the meantime I suggest we propose Steven Firth, as a member of the above
society.