>Paul,
>
>Sorry that before I posted my comment on Sunday I didn't get chance to read
>several of your previous email traffic on the entire hydrazine hydrate (HH)
>fuel discussions. I thought you were just talking about hydrazine and not HH
>liquid fuels.... my apology.
Thanks much, Feng!
And I apologize that my words were not as clear as they should have been.
Bit by bit, topic by topic, it takes time to learn words that are
less likely to be confusing...
>However, I still believe that "lugging our transportation to the energy of
>the Sun" is the best bet for the long (or even short) term profitability of
>the automakers or for the US competitiveness and national security in the
>increasingly global economy. Yes, there may be a need of a transition period
>to use GEM plug-ins liquid fuels before the EVs could come to dominate the
>commercial market.
If we do everything right... I am glad that I do not know exactly
what the optimal mix
will be that emerges, in the future, between liquid fuels and direct
electricity storage (and X...),
if the human economy keeps making progress. Knowing that would
be a distraction from the task before us, of trying to get cars out
there that give
consumers and energy producers a choice... so that the marketplace can decide,
and also so that all producers can have maximum incentive to provide us
with more secure sources of fuel.
-----------------------
Long-term... it is also possible that HH might survive as a fuel for
aircraft and spacecraft (where
the weight of batteries would be a more serious problem) even if it
doesn't for cars and trucks.
Running airplanes without permission from OPEC is also an issue..
Best regards,
Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment