Re: Remember "Bit-Slice" Chips ?

On 12/9/24 11:46 PM, Rich wrote:

186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

On 12/8/24 7:17 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

On 2024-12-08, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>

And consider the explosive force stored in a 350-700 bar (your AI's
number) pressure vessel that becomes brittle enough to go "bang".
That's one hell of a bang, even without the hydrogen itself
explosively combusting as part of the pressure release.

>
I've seen the results of a 200-bar scuba tank letting go.  And
that's just a little 80-cubic foot tank filled with air.

>
   I've seen that too - close up.  Blew out a reinforced CBC wall
   ......  sheer dumb luck nobody was in the filling room at the time
   or they'd have been Spam.
>

Plus, the walls of the pressure vessel quite effectively become a
'fragmentation grenade' in the process of going bang.

>
<shudder>
>

>
   High-pressure containers - esp ones that have to 'cycle' often -
   are a bomb waiting to go off.  Fatigue/corrosion take their awful
   toll - then BOOM !
>
   If the boom is a flammable gas ... far worse.
>
   Hydrogen CAN have its uses - but at "industrial" sites, not out in
   public.  You can feed it into expensive fuel cells, you can mix
   x-percent with natural gas.
>
   But as a general-purpose 'motor fuel' ...  NO !  Besides, no proper
   infrastructure for it.

 For a 'motor fuel' it is difficult to replace the benefits of liquids
that do not need pressure vessels (beyond their own evaporation
pressure, which is usually quite mild).  We have an entire setup in
place for transporting, storing, and dispensing liquids (gas/diesel
pumps).
 But, to avoid more 'carbon' in the air, the liquids have to be
synthesized somehow from carbon already in the air.  And that we don't
have on a scale large enough to be a source to replace our current
liquid fuels.

   The catalyst people ARE getting better with grabbing
   CO2 and turning it into various 'fuel' hydrocarbons
   again. If there's hope for "CO2 Capture" it's with
   these scientists.
   They don't even HAVE to "break even" - just kinda
   sorta CLOSE. That'd be significant - "good enough"
   Again, as for 'motor fuel', I suggest isopropanol,
   and it has a decent 'octane rating' - around 112.