CaptainJJack

Ethanol vs. Natural Gas or Coal: Comparison Not Even Close

While I agree with the comments on Ethanol, I have to say that there is a closely related compound, Methanol, that is far, far more promising.

Methanol for fuel is an idea that is 100 years old. The original process was developed by the Germans using coal, and it is what drove their war machines in the world wars.

Methanol is usually made from natural gas, today, but it is also being used in recycling wood products

I became interested after reading a book by George Olah: THE METHANOL ECONOMY. Olah was awarded the Nobel prize in Chemistry in 1994.

Olah is currently working on making methanol by adding hydrogen atoms to carbon dioxide, using pure hydrogen developed from cracking water at very high temperatures thereby addressing the cost issues with hydrogen production, and addressing global warming.

As a by product, he is solving the ultimate storage and transportation problems involved in a transportation fuel.

Essentially, all fuels are mechanisms for transporting hydrogen. Oil, gasoline, and natural gas are far superior as carriers to alternatives, especially ethanol and hydrogen.

But, methanol isn't bad both in terms of energy in versus energy out, and in ease of storage and transportation.

The hydrogen process Olah is looking at produces hydrogen as a by product in a nuclear reactor (i.e. the reactor produces HEAT for both electrical generation and for hydrogen generation --electrolysis is NOT used)

Picking Goldman's Brain for Long / Short Strategies

What I can never seem to get from Goldman or anybody else is the extent to which the REITs are obligated with their mortgages. I cannot find it directly addressed in any of the prospectuses I read, either.

If a REIT owns a property, and it fails to make the mortgage payments and goes into foreclosure, is the REIT obligated beyond turning over the keys to the building? If the answer is yes, then REITs are still horrible.

However, if the answer is "no" (and I believe the answer is no based on no more than my own sense that if the answer were yes, it would be called out in the prospectuses and by the analysts directly), then REITs could turn out very well since the losses on a given property are limited to the equity value, the current valuations already reflect a large portion of the equity write-offs.

And, the buildings are still around, but now are selling at lower valuations. Anybody who lived through the 1990 cycle saw buildings changing owners over and over until the prices paid were justified by the building operating cash flow.

So, the question is, are they like stock holders whose losses are limited to the equity in the building, or are they like private developers who often use the equity of one building as a guarantee of performance for another building?