"Very well said. we had only a couple minutes to talk about it, but I did introduce the points you made into the discussion. Planning to begin a weekly Energy Tech show soon, and we'll have more time to dwell on specific points. -tjq"

This is the e-mail that I sent ...

"It would cost 1 cent a gallon to refine gasoline further to meet solid oxide fuel cell specifications to be 'pollution free' with a natural balance of water and carbon dioxide (soda pop) emissions. It would cost 300 billion dollars to build an infrastructure to 'purify' organic hydro-carbons or hydro-oxygens to fuel a proton exchange membrane. In manufacturing hydrogen either on board or at an upstream source pollutants are exhausted so they do not poison a p.e.m.

A solid oxide fuel cell uses completely all of a hydrocarbon, or pure hydrogen, it's half the size double the output of any p.e.m. proposed. Solid oxide cells cost one tenth to manufacture, uses oxygen as the main charge carrier not a 'proton bomb'.

The 'green movement' raised the alarm 30 years ago about de-forestation not to vapourize our planet into pure hydrogen. Would we not be better off to spend 290 billion dollars on cleaning our planet and 10 billion on a renewable natural gas infrastructure, instead of 300 billion on pure hydrogen and nothing on the evironment.