Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Undecided with Matt Ferrell" channel.

@m0rthaus Coof is the "correct" spelling, it dates back to two years ago to avoid demonetization on youtube.
5
@tonyhawk123 This is just a bad attempt at philosophy. Yes, many fuels are hydrocarbons. That doesn't automatically mean hydrogen is a good fuel. Oxygen is also part of ozone, doesn't mean you should breathe it. The water electrolysis isn't even the hardest part. Storage and transport is an issue. The claim that investment solves everything doesn't even make sense. Why didn't a group of investors do it as part of competing with oil? Other companies have to drill, you laugh all the way to the bank as you generate all the fuel you want.
5
@tonyhawk123 You're purposefully conflating hydrogen the element and hydrogen the gas molecule. Hydrogen in the sun is used for FUSION energy. This topic is about hydrogen as a combustible fuel that keeps ICE engines running in a zero carbon fashion. Not fusion power plants.
3
500 years is nothing, geologically speaking. The byproducts of the natural reactor at Oklo, Gabon have barely moved in the last 1.7 billion years.
2
@travisgroeneveld5268 that was a legitimate question, I would like to know more about the carbon costs of panel manufacturing...
2
Hydro requires extreme care due to how you're affecting the hydrographic basin. The DoE dragged their feet on LFTR tech. There's a compilation of representatives asking the DoE about them once a year or so and they deflect.
2
@Steellmor Scrubbers are relatively modern. The argument here is a 100 year alternative history of the electric car. This means heavy to moderate reliance on coal power with no concern for polution, no scrubbers, and essentially no renewables except hydro until the last few decades. You can't retroactively apply the benefits of modern tech, even though it's a valid argument for EVs used in the present day.
2
It's still done.
2
@wineberryred Or, they won't offer charging and will keep rent the same while the ones that offer charging will hike their prices.
1
@BonanzaPilot I remember when oil barrel prices increased due to the wars. I guess they've been doing it wrong.
1
@jghall00 "Also, new tech is always more expensive..why would it be any different for vehicles?" - It shouldn't be different. But like everything else, I guess I have no incentive to be an early adopter.
1
@gregbailey45 What do you mean? We control the output of our carbon capture by using different methods. It doesn't have to be flammable.
1
You'd recover more energy from spinning a turbine with exhaust gas.
1
@kevinrusch3627 I'm not really optimistic due to the Stirling's low power to weight ratio. Essentially having a Stirling using the hot coolant coming off the engine would probably not eliminate the radiator unless you were hauling multiple Stirlings in tandem, and there's so much mass and area it actually ends up cooling the fluid. Just the fact that the radiator is still needed to actually cool the liquid properly before it's pumped into the engine again means most energy is still wasted towards the atmosphere. If I'm not mistaken there's cars that do use engine heat to provide cabin heat, which skips the losses in efficiency. In terms of exhaust, I don't think the exhaust would be well used with the coolant (you don't want to re-heat the coolant nor cool the exhaust) so that would mean another Stirling being hauled.
1
@HT-io1eg because otherwise you could just build more solar and wind and get your money back instead of investing in fusion and waiting decades for profit.
1