On Friday, January 28, 2005, at 10:14 PM, Bernard wrote: >> Now YOU tell me: which would be better - the humongous bank of >> batteries and no fuel engine, or an ICE generating electrcity, or a >> turbine engine of the same power and expense as the ICE generating >> electricity? It's a no-brainer, at least as far as I can see. > > A no-brainer indeed. Personally, I would go with the proven technology > and avoid technological dead-ends and vaporware. BTW, you forgot to > include perpetual motion machines in your list of options (since I am > being asked to choose between some options that are available now and > others that may never be viable). Okay, then explain why hybrids and turbine-powered race cars have been banned by the authorities who regulate Formula One! Ardeshir <http://homepage.mac.com/ardeshir/AllMyFiles.html> PS: as for perpetual motion, I guess you've never heard of the atom, in which the electrons ARE in perpetual motion. Dear oh dear.