Thank you and I hope your's is a great day as well! Take care.
CBS carried it here as well as DirecTv. I couldn't switch to others before the 30 seconds was over. The DirecTv was actually a little before the 2:00 time stamp and had music. CBS seemed to be at 2:00 exactly and I never heard a "tone". Typical hype over nothing.
Absolutely Ron Paul...period.
Now...on to the "hydrogen" cars and the 100MPG carburetor that was suppressed (supposedly).
Unless you can package the hydrogen in it's liquid form there isn't enough power density in the storage system to have a cruising range that would attract any more buyers than there is now for the VOLT. To do this makes a $20k car cost several times that...who would buy it? This is sill a free market and you can't sell what NO ONE will spend their $ on.
To get 100mpg from a carb would mean that you would have about 15,000 BTUs to go one mile. Look up the conversion of BTUs to horsepower and you will see that a 100 mpg carb would allow for about a 5 horsepower engine. Who woud buy a car like that?
The LAWS of physics and thermodynamics DO apply to automobiles.
There has NEVER been a battery for automotive use that overcomes the biggest problem...WEIGHT. Don't buy into technolgy supression..it's purely economics. I built satelites at MIT Lincoln Labs in the early 80s and we had the best batteries that the smartest people on the planet could come up with. There was no economical way to adapt the tech for automotive use...period.
The biggest problem is the people who buy cars have very precise expectations for the $ spent. It has to work from North Dakota at minus 50 to Florida where it is hot and humid. It has to work EVERY time you turn the key and not have a maintenance cost that exeeds the purchase price during the vehicle's life (battery replacement) From your article:
"Despite promising signs, the electric car will need to navigate a bumpy road before it can become a viable option for many drivers. Challenges to mass adoption include high sticker prices, limited battery life and travel range, and building charging stations and other infrastructure to support electric vehicles."
The engine in that Vette typically will eat around 600 CFM of air at WOT with a 14.1 to 1 air fuel ratio being maintained by the onboard computer. It may be tuned a little richer than that to protect he pistons from burning in a lean mixture environment. The otto cycle engine power output is based on BTUs. Horsepower and BTUs have a direct correlation. Why didn't he mention horsepower before and after? Every engine builder I have known would have ran that on a dyno before and after. I build racing engines and as an ASE Master Tech I can tell you that he has simply added a LITTLE hydrogen and tuned his MAF with a translator device.
Ask yourself how all the engineers and engine builders in Formula One, NHRA Drag Racing and NASCAR haven't come up with a way to do this and they are way smarter than that guy at building engines.
Long story short BULLSHIT.
Sorry to throw a monkey wrench into this, but.....Notice how 90% of this is high school chemistry. I know how to generate hydrogen as do most people. Notice how the hood was never opened. Notice how there was NO mention of corrrect air / fuel ratios. No mention of how the hot wire mass air flow sensor was retuned for a different gas density, as in: Air only vs hydrogen + air. No mention of knock retard or timing alterations. He didn't show how the fuel was metered into the fuel stream. He didn't address power density of fuel or explain that hydrogen has a wider range of explosive air to fuel ratios than does gasolne. He also didn't mention how many cubic feet of gas and at what pressure he was storing it.
Thank you Tony. I love having your words of faith to reflect on each day.