Sorry, I didn't noticed that my answer to Prof. Mandell (Fred for the people he knows) went under this wrong title/subject of MagneGas Stategic .....
It has nothing to do with any kind of merger or whatsoever. It is just a response to August 8, 2009 message of Fred trying to create confusion on facts:
YES: MagneGas reactors are working. Better say the theory is shown working.
NO: This is far not sufficient as far as economy is concerned
YES: MG can deal with oil based liquids and replacing acetylene (among other gases) is important as health care, security are concerned, but is this sufficient enough for, NOWADAYS, switching from acetylene and other known cutting gases to MagneGas?
Cutting gas is not exceeding 2 to 3 % of the total budget of buildings maybe 10% of the scrap recovery industry. Replacing acetylene and the other existing cutting gases means an ability to be supplied and most probably, at a fast increasing pace, in order to save, economically speaking about 50% of 3%. On a 100 million building, this means 1.5 million saving without being convinced that the new gas will be delivered on time, due to increasing demand as there is no network set up with the risk of the other suppliers boycotting.
One of the most interesting points about MG was its ability to clean waters providing irrigation water. And this opportunity is now already overpassed as with solar energy, for 50% of the install and running cost of MG, we can provide, per unit, 2,700 gallons a day of drinkable water out of even salty waters as sea water. No grid power charges, and practically no maintenance charges or fees. And even there is no solar cells to be stolen: it is just nanotechnology!
So MG is for the time being, just left with the cutting gas market. Ask yourself, where is the most use of cutting gas taking place? When is a new gas market to be set up?
