Re: ENERGY

From: EvMick@aol.com
Date: Thu Feb 24 2000 - 23:13:19 MST


In a message dated 2/24/00 11:04:03 PM Central Standard Time,
Spudboy100@aol.com writes:

> Oh yeah. But for whatever reason Ocean Thermal is non-profitable, or
> technically impractical.

I've been following it for years...to me (a non technical type)....it seems
feasable....but I imagine there is a lot of difference between being
technically feasible and economically feasible....

 I just saw a presentation on CNN about the
> algae/hydrogenase thing. I am still doubtful because CNN presented two
other
>
> breakthroughs that I re-call. One was Nitinol, which also was supposed to
> power civilization.

That's the 'memory metal"?.....that always seem kind of a 'gimmick' to
me...but come to think of it...nitinol might have micro or nano
applications...

 The other was Bogdan Maglich's Migma reactor concept.
> Both proved to be non-developable.

I never heard of that...

You might recall however that the Laser was well known for years and years
prior to it's being used for much of anything. I seem to recall that it was
refered to as
" the phenomena in search of an application" or some such. Today you'll
notice that lasers are everywhere....used in a multiple of applications.

But I agree with you about TV....it is after all....entertainment....

EvMick



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:27:01 MST