[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Fuel cells
Hi Herve,
Thanks for the info. A very useful site to subscribe to, which I have done.
Good if you have interest in shares in these companies as well !
Regards,
Karl.
----- Original Message -----
From: Herve Jaubert <caribsub@coqui.net>
To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2000 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Fuel cells
> here is an interesting link on a update fuel cells technology
> http://216.51.18.233/fcnews.html
>
> Herve Jaubert
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Captain Nemo <vulcania@interpac.net>
> To: <personal_submersibles@psubs.org>
> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 4:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Fuel cells
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <CWall@swri.edu>
> >
> > " Pat, I haven't seen this one, but I'd suspect it is a PEMFC running on
> > methanol."
> >
> > Hi Craig!
> >
> > Nope. It wasn't hydrogen or methanol either. As I recall, it was some
> kind
> > of solid chemical with no off-gassing problems at all. That's what
makes
> it
> > revolutionary, and why I thought it might have some potential in a
> minisub.
> > Sure wish someone would recall that URL.
> >
> > "Just remember that while the exhaust from a PEMFC running on neat
> hydrogen
> > gas is water vapor, operation on methanol yields CO and CO2. And
besides
> > the requirement for oxygen, you have to get the gaseous waste products
off
> > the boat...and they'll be at low pressure. You'll have to compress them
to
> > get them overboard."
> >
> > Thanks for reminding me that gaseous waste products need to be
collected,
> > compressed, and ejected from the closed environment; and if I may take
> this
> > conversation in what might hopefully be an even more constructive
> direction,
> > please note that I wasn't insulted and didn't berate you for thinking I
> > didn't already know this. ;-)
> >
> > You know, Craig, I've been in some heated exchanges here myself.
> > Fortunately, these guys are still talking to me; and I say "fortunately"
> > because (no matter what anyone might have told you) the people who share
> > their knowledge on this website are actually pretty sharp, and one can
> > definitely benefit from an association with them.
> >
> > Your propane ballast system idea has pros and cons. Generally, I don't
> > think you're going to find much acceptance in this safety conscious
group,
> > if only for the reason that propane is inflammable, while compressed air
> is
> > not. The concern may not only be for you, but also for others who read
> and
> > are influenced by the concepts presented here. At PSUBS, there's a
> > prevailing tendency towards protecting the information pool from ideas
> that
> > could be unusually dangerous. If the guys think what you're suggesting
> > might be a little too unsafe, they're going to let you know about it,
and
> > that's just how it is. (Check out some of the responses I got to my
> > "underwater dragster" idea!)
> >
> > Anyway, you've presented your ideas to the members; gotten their
> responses;
> > and argued your point according to your own beliefs. But (and this is
> > something I learned the hard way) there comes a time when it's 'nuff
> said,
> > and one should just let it go.
> >
> > Nobody said it more eloquently than Vance did. I could only cosign his
> post
> > by adding that, in my opinion, when people with years of hard experience
> in
> > real submarines are willing to freely share the insight they had to work
> > for, those still in the theoretical stage would be wise to listen.
> >
> > Time to give it a rest, bud. Come on back and talk to us about
something
> > else.
> >
> > VBR,
> >
> > Pat
> >
> > BTW: Happy Veteran's Day, everybody! ;-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>