OT: Some good news for Harry?

[Chris Hogg]

Researchers at Glasgow University have claimed a breakthrough in producing hydrogen fuel from water. They said their process is fast, clean and cheap. It can store energy from the sun and wind.

Writing in the journal Science, the Glasgow researchers said their process is thirty times faster than the current method. Without using any more energy, it is claimed to store the hydrogen in a carbon-free liquid.

Writing in the journal Science, the Glasgow researchers said their process is thirty times faster than the current method. Without using any more energy, it is claimed to store the hydrogen in a carbon-free liquid.

[The Natural Philosopher]

??? I suppose Salmond has put them up to this.

[Chris Hogg]

Just found the abstract to the original article:

[The Natural Philosopher]

Which says 'its not more efficient, you wont get any more hydrogen, you will just get it a bit safer a bit more reliably and in a smaller space'

Who gives a toss anyway? renewable energy is dead.

[Adrian]

So it uses the exact same amount of energy as the old process?

Since the problem with the old process was the amount of energy required, rather than the time taken, that's not a great step forward.

[Brian Gaff]

Erm somewhat vague and I was waiting for the but, in it, that no doubt only will be admitted after they get a grant to develop it. Brian

[The Natural Philosopher]

The BUT is purely that it isn't actually that interesting.

Its not a silver bullet, its juts a very lightly modified lead bullet that is interesting from an electrochemical standpoint, but doesn't merit even a mention outside its sphere.

Hence why I put two and two together, and thought 'ticks scotland, ticks renewable energy, that's why its being mentioned at all'

There is a huge industry devoted to drip feeding press releases into the public perception to maintain the delusion that science is about to polish the renewable energy turd somehow, or that anything good came out of Scotland beyond shortbread.

[Robin]

I say old chap, I do rather think that's a bit harsh even for Usenet. Have you really never rated any of - to pick just a few -

single malt, Adam Smith colour photos Thomas Telford (canals etc) logarithms (for those old of us to remember them) James Clerk Maxwell (where to start ...) haggis [ :)) ] and Aberdeen Angus beef?

[The Natural Philosopher]

most of those inventions and discoveries were made by people who had left scotland.

[Nightjar]

I thought from the subject line that this was going to relate to the new royal baby, which will put Prince Harry on place further from the throne :-)

[Brian Gaff]

Hmm, well, dunno. I guess you cannot do what cannot be done as someone once said. Brian

[Brian Gaff]

Were Dundee cakes invented in Dundee? Brian

[Brian Gaff]

I never understood the line of accession to the Throne myself. I'd have thought it should be the eldest. We don't want any more child kings. Brian

[Nightjar]

I don't see it really matters, given that the monarch no longer leads troops into battle and really only acts as a rubber stamp on decisions made by Parliament.

Not that we would get a child ruler. For George to become king, the monarch and the next two in line would all have to die before he reached the age of 18. Even then, a Regent would be appointed, which, under the Regency Act of 1937 would currently be Harry as both next in line and over 18 years old.

[Tim Streater]

In article ,

[Nightjar]

John Logie Baird J M Barrie Alexander Graham Bell Joseph Black (thermodynamics and properties of CO2) Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Sir James Dewar Adam Ferguson (sociology) Sir Alexander Fleming Peter Higgs, of the Higgs boson Lord Kelvin William Rankine Robert Louis Stevenson Charles Mackintosh Robert Watson-Watt (radar) James Watt

Beta blockers Bovril The Carronade Criminal fingerprinting Dolly the sheep The hypodermic needle Macadamised roads MRI scanning The pneumatic tyre The Stirling engine Ultrasound scanning The Waverley pen

A working tractor beam (admittedly only at microscopic levels)

[Martin Bonner]

Not at the moment she can't. One of the rules is that she is only allowed to select someone who can command the confidence of the House.

At the moment there is only one person who can do that (much as I dislike him). IF the Lib Dems had said "we won't vote down either party" THEN she would have been able to choose - but the chances of the Lib Dems doing something like that are vanishingly small.

[polygonum]

On 12/09/2014 13:36, "Nightjar

[charles]

It is the eldest:

1. Charles
2. William
3. George

3a the unborn

1. Harry
2. Andrew

[charles]

you've missed "Irn Bru" ;-)