Talk:Hydrogen infrastructure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Proven, really?

How can this technology be proven when the supporting source is taken from a DOE workshop? There's also no mention of "appropriate technology" or safety concerns about the use of hydrogen infrastructure. I don't think you can call a technology proven until it's widespread use with little to no incidents-- also with all things potentially going into practical utility use, there's little to no mention anywhere about the impacts on development and right-of-way. Bad encyclopedic form like this lends the "facts" in there articles to be abused and propagated clouding the real rational debate behind topics such as this.

This article smells of original research and unverified claims by a futurist or a design engineer. It's already pretty much been proven in an urban planning and real estate development outlook that hydrogen infrastructure is completely inappropriate in development densities past 2 development units per acre. Primarily due to leaks and 'pooling' of hydrogen but also due to mitigating concerns over the caustic nature of hydrogen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.204.199.52 (talk) 19:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

do you have any references for your statements ? in the meantime read reference 7 on Hydrogen station.Mion (talk) 20:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)