Hydrogen power
Maureen Lorenzetti's article (OGJ, Feb. 17, 2003, p. 31) on hydrogen power presented arguments of both sides in a balanced fashion. The two sides do not hold equal credibility, however. First of all, Daniel Becker is dead wrong. The President's policy will help achieve energy independence as Kennedy's policy to place a man on the moon within a decade also reached fruition. Energy policy is a mandate, and the environmental groups are either for hydrogen or against it. To be against something at this conceptual stage shows total lack of vision and commitment to their own world view of an oil free vehicular future. To state publicly that $1.2 billion is not enough is a ludicrous statement, underscoring the far left rhetoric of Mr. Becker and his unfailing tendency to negate any possible good from conservative capitalism. In fact, most of the cost will be handled by capitalists taking the risk. The $1.2 billion is seed money only.
That said, the current state of hydrogen fuel cells is ahead of research and development required for hydrogen production, storage, and distribution. ExxonMobil is correct about hydrogen's safety, and it matters not who states this obvious issue as the statement is practical recognition of a surmountable challenge to be met. Do we use hydrides? High pressure? Metal/ceramic cellular structures? Something we haven't thought of yet?
How do we distribute the least-dense substance known, understanding that transportation cost per pound (or btu) will be extraordinary compared to present fuels? How do we contain it in passenger vehicles knowing its 60,990 btu/lb gross heating value presents an explosive danger significantly above gasoline in a crash fire situation?
Nay saying by the left is status quo, and why we pay attention to it is beyond my comprehension. Environmental groups are really anticapitalist groups, and my prediction is that any energy scheme showing profitability will be their next target.
I challenge Mr. Becker to a public debate on this issue. He has an opinion not buttressed by fact.
John Lagace
Kingwood, Texas
Perceived motives
Your magazine is one of the ones I take on the airplane with me. Your editorial and comments are so far reaching. From comments on TWA's fuel tank (I passed copies on to quite a few captains in my travels) to political items.
What I want to pass on to you is my grave concern over how the current buildup is perceived in the Middle East. I lived in the region 9 years and have traveled there for 30 years. I was in Egypt, Saudi, Kuwait, and the UAE for 3 weeks this past January.
It was a shock, even to me, how people who are US educated see our moves as nothing more than more "Israel building." My feeling was that, as Khomeini managed to do in Iran (he got the masses to believe him), so is the Al Qaeda getting this message to the masses, who appear to believe Osama's people more than anyone.
If this "adventure" is going to have any success without catastrophic consequences, we had better "come clean" with the locals insofar as the plan for the Palestinians. I lived in Lebanon for some years, and the folks who lived in camps are still in those camps. They have no nationality, or any other rights where they live.
When our troops are massing there, the Arab world now becomes "unitized" in what they see as a threat. Hard to believe, coming from folks who not so long ago were ducking Saddam's Scuds.
Anyway, I've read plenty of your fine material, so I thought it was time to pass some comments to you. Thanks for "listening."
Oscar Gallo, Vice-President
IPD
Torrance, Calif.
Attack on Iraq
To characterize the imminent attack on Iraq as "liberation" is either ignorant or deceitful (OGJ, Feb. 3, 2003, p. 19). While it is agreed Saddam is a tyrant, most Iraqis had something to eat, clean water, educational opportunities, and more than adequate healthcare prior to the devastation of Desert Storm followed by lethal sanctions and more bombing. To add to this suffering an aerial bombardment that is predicted to involve in 48 hr more ordnance than was used during the entire Gulf War of 1991 is unconscionable. I don't think death from an exploding cruise missile is the kind of liberation Iraqis yearn for.
Carl Johnson
Totowa, NJ
