View Single Post
Old 10-17-2008, 03:19 PM   #22 (permalink)
ZeroFuel
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 50

ZeroFuel 1,2,3 - '96 Geo Metro
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by conradpdx View Post
I did read that part of wiki. It just didn't have any bearing to the topic, and I'm a bit surprised that you'd point that all out since in an offhand way it exposes another eco-hazard (one that I did pick out right away, but didn't really want to get into).

And thats got to do with what happens when it's spilled? That much fertilizer spilled into a river or lake could be devastating to that body of water. Not only would directly kill higher organisms, it would also feed the algae (which already really like this stuff) which could choke out nearly all other lifeforms. Sure the other plants in the lake would love it, but they being a more complex organism process the nutrients slower than the algae can and slower than the algae can reporduce.

As it now in the ocean we have what are called green tides and dead zones where nothing lives. It was a mystery that has been recently was figured out, and it is algae and other smaller organisms for some unknown reason undergoing a massive population growth and choking out all the fish that didn't escape the cloud. If this happens in a system as big as the pacific ocean imagine the results in a smaller body of water.

This is also one of the goals of "green" soaps and detergents. They try to remove the fertilizer elements of soap so that it wont go down the drain into the water table. Just for this reason.

Let me cut off the oil spill retort to this. Oil floats and though it's messy and ugly is is containable, your product is water soluble there would be impossible to clean it up, and in fact would dramatically change the chemical composition of the body of water.

My last point is I didn't read the side bar. I'm one of many that wont. I'm not going to risk it on a thread that someone posts after creating a new account from left field promising in vague language to have solved the fossil fuel problem. And personally I'm not sure I'm all that excited about something that doesn't even have running prototype yet.

Now after all this I do wish you good luck, and I can appreciate people efforts into looking for solutions. After all science is the process of getting it wrong a thousand times hoping to get it right once. But I don't see how any product is going to compete with electricity, the distribution aspects are already in place and it's getting "greener" everyday.
I learned a long time ago that you can't please everyone. So that being said I will answer you, but have no expectations.

After reading your first post I had assumed that you had not looked at the slide deck. Coming onto this thread without having at least some aspect of the process & relying on a wikipedia site, I find intellectually dishonest. There is more then enough info on our site to show viewers that this is a novel approach, to a serious problem, by people who have been involved with energy since the 1970's. Being afraid of a pdf download is a pretty lame excuse.

I brought up the synthetic process just to prove the point that you do not understand the technology.

OK, you have painted this dooms day effect of a ZeroFuel spill, which is now highly diluted with water. Lets say two tanker trucks crash into your lake, what would be the end result. ZeroFuel would have less of an impact then fossil fuel.

Lets raise the stakes (because you like electricity) how about a nuclear accident, say at Indian Point. We are pro nuclear, but your argument of a carbamide disaster has many holes.

The DOT rates Carbamide at the safest standard they can issue. 0-0-0-0. Flammability, corrosion, toxic, and overall environmental rating. one of the reasons the fuel got its name. Even in it's solid state before we water it down. (We can use salt water also, just in case you had a problem with that.) Take a look at some of the fossil fuel ratings & compare.

You have no idea at what stage the project is in except it has not been installed on a vehicle. We have bench tested a unit that is ready to be produced for vehicles. Quick history lesson. Back in WWII (the big one) when the Germans invaded Belgium they confiscated all the fossil fuel. The Belgium's had a supply of ammonia & retrofitted their public transportation system. Pretty good idea. Zerofuel is ammonia on demand, a big step forward.

OK, your a big fan of electricity. We like it also, but It has it's pro & cons like all fuels. But right now on the big scale there are more cons. Lets start with range. We don't have it & until technology can store 100kwh, long range is out of the question. Cost of replacing batteries are high. Can we meet the new demand of an electric fleet? Not to mention the dead of winter in Detroit or the Heat of summer in Dallas, your range has been dropped dramatically by outside temperature, heat, A/C, wipers, etc.

The ICE generates free heat & we do have a patent pending on free A/C.

Making hydrogen from natural gas is still cleaner then electricity from coal, there for a plus for ZeroFuel.

I see you edited your post from what was shown in my email. I got to tell you I'm glad you changed it because I was going to rip you a new one on your opinion of patent holders.
  Reply With Quote