🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul25.171557.4574@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.221351.10050@Princeton.EDU> mdd@nextc.princeton.edu writes:
>>No one seems to have mentioned this yet...There are other ways to  
>>distribute solar power besides using an electrical grid. Solar power can  
>>be used to convert water to hydrogen quite efficiently and the hydrogen  
>>could then be transported through an infrastructure similar to the natural  
>>gas infrastructure that already exists. End users would then burn the  
>>hydrogen. Or even better use it to power fuel cells. It is likely (I am no  
>>expert) that is a more cost effective approach to solar energy than  
>>erecting solar panels on the East coast, say. 
>
>     Only two big problems.  1) It is not economical to do so,
>     2)  Hydrogen go boom.
>
>     [stuff deleted]

      I further expound upon this succinct and witty response (saying 
      so myself).  Economics are always left out of the
      discussion.  If it is 'economical' to do this with solar, it
      would be even cheaper to do this with coal or nuclear.  Once
      you see this, you see why it is silly to propose changing the energy 
      distribution infrastructure based on a gut feeling that 
      solar is somehow 'better'.

      Of course, this argument usually comes from people who do not
      believe that nuclear plants are pretty benign.

                                 dale bass
--
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926