Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

(39,166 posts)

3. Um, no. It's not more "practical".

Mon May 13, 2013, 09:19 AM

May 2013

It's much more expensive, more convoluted, more involved. Just like pretty much anything involved with fuel cells and cryogenic liquids.

(Right?)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

NRL Shatters Endurance Record for Small (Fuel Cell-)Electric UAV [View all] OKIsItJustMe May 2013 OP

And, god knows, the technology isn’t useful for anything else. OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #2

Um, no. It's not more "practical". wtmusic May 2013 #3

Apparently you didn’t read the OP OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #4