>> I didn't really find this piece, overall, to be as compelling an >indictment of H2 as the >> author I guess intended. He did not mention what I have said before is my >own top >> objection to H2 (the global H2 depletion argument... seldom mention or >respected by >> anyone). > >While H2 depletion is an on going thing at an extremely slow rate ( at the >very highest edges of the atmosphere ), I doubt that it is anything that >needs to be worried about for several hundreds of thousands of years. The >earths gravity will insure that it will be a slow process.
Under circumstances of keeping the status quo, your calculatins would probably be somewhere close to correct. In fact, I doubt H2 depletion would have much meaning. However, under circumstances where we propose a worlwide shift in human behaviour and industry, costing trillions of dollars, that will involve permanently freeing up uncountable numbers of Hydrogen Atoms from their regular bonds every day on into the foreseeable future, a circumstance that would not ever apparently have occurred in nature up until now, then I doubt your equations apply. When one proposes a global permanent shift in industrial behaviour, performing an environmental impact assessment may involve taking into account that some chemical circumstances may change, on a global scale. To my knowledge (very hard to expand because this is not an oft-discussed topic), H2 does not occurr naturally, by itself, on Earth. Hydrogen seems to be almost always found bonded to other elements, and it is human industry over the last few hundred years that has caused it to be un-bonded on occassion for lengthier periods of time than might occurr during a normal chemical reaction. [I'm not sure, but I question, during a normal chemical reaction, how much H2 if any might be liable to end up not bonded to other elements.] When un-bonded in this non-natural way, that of it which escapes confinement (and some of it always does) tends to rise up and, (over what time period I'm not sure), escape the Earth's pull. This escape happens also with Helium, and I'm told this is why it is found only in pockets beneath the Earth's surface. Obviously, a massive increase in the amount of pure H2 confined in pipelines and other storage, such as one would find in a "global H2 economy" would also massively increase the amount of H2 escaping Earth's pull in this way. Whether the amounts would be sufficient to cause environmental impact concern is something that interests me. So far as I can see, the calculation you present briefly applies more to a pre-H2-economy situation, and not to H2-global-economy conditions. >If need be. we >can use that time to learn how to mine the gas giants directly for H2, and >the ort cloud for ice. Perhaps by then, we will have fusion or anti-matter. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
