Perhaps it's not what it's hyped up to be.
Summation:
"Packaging, distributing, and using hydrogen is too complicated, expensive, and dangerous to ever be a realistic alternative. But even that doesn't particularly matter, because in order to create the pure, non-oxidized form of hydrogen needed for fuel, you have to expend more energy than you eventually reap. The entire hydrogen dream is basically a hoax."
EVERYTHING at first was too expensive Bubba. But as more people wbegin to ex[periment then the technology improves and it becomes viable. i have read a great deal about this and it certainly seems logical to me to breakdown sea water to get hydrogen. Just one more possibility that is better than fossil fuels. BB
ReplyDeleteIt suffers from the same problem as ethanol: The net energy equation is in the minus column. More energy is consumed in production than is created in the end product.
ReplyDeletePlus the infrastructure required is problematic.
Perhaps we should concentrate on developing better technology so that electric might actually be practical for our vehicles
Fossil fuels are used to produce the electricity so what good is electric cars going to do us?
ReplyDeleteI agree that as of the present the cost of producing is greater than the end product ussing hydrogen. This is again ALWAYS the case with new production. These problems can, and will, be worked out.
I have blogged on several alternatives; even using cow dung for fuel to produce electricity as is being done in Texas. Diane Davis blogs a great deal on alternative fuels on her site. This isn't pie in the sky stuff because it is being done. Germany is now getting 20% of it's energy from renewables, including wind, solar, hydro and biomass.
Bubba, I really hate to disagree with you but you're wrong in this instance. The use of dirty fossil fuels is indeed killing the planet. And, there are better and clearner and healthier ways.
"Fossil fuels are used to produce the electricity so what good is electric cars going to do us?"
ReplyDeleteBattery technology needs to improve for electric vehicles. That's a renewable source.
Nuclear is going to be the best provider of electricity in the future (again).
"The use of dirty fossil fuels is indeed killing the planet."
If you are referring to "global warming" and CO2 emissions, you are wrong.
Particulate emission matter is another story, but it is not a contributor to "global warming".
As a matter of fact, many would argue that "pollution" is a countering factor.
As far as greenhouse gas is concerned, CO2 is responsible for only a small amount of this category (water vapor is BY FAR the largest contributor), and the anthropogenic CO2 an even smaller amount of the total.
In fact, human contribution to greenhouse gas is significantly less than 1/2 percent of the total.
Must I remind you it was the "conservative" President George W. Bush who stoop at the podium endorsing a hydrogen based economy.
ReplyDeleteI knew then it wouldn't work. I may be a dumb old truck driver turned poet but one of the products I delivered in my 30+ years on the road was hydrogen, I've seen state of the art production and knew all along hydrogen would require more fossil fuel to make than the energy it provides but this is par for thr course of the oil lined pockets of the Bush Administration-- convert to hydrogen and use even more oil than we do now.
By the way, my StreetPlane get 100 MPG on regular gasoline-- the only thing stopping me from turning it into a car is an obscure year 2001 law signed by the President himself. Tes same idiot president who started an un-winable war in Iraq.