Hydrogen is a dead end, folks. The energy stored doesn’t match the energy consumed. It would take decades to develop the technology and create the infrastructure. Nobody has any incentive to scrap their gas-burners.

But I invite everyone, TPer and troll alike, global climate change believer and non-believer alike, to examine a book by Robert Zubrin, called “Energy Victory” (http://www.energyvictory.net/)where he advocates that Congress do one simple thing to start us down the path to freeing ourselves from dependence on oil. By mandating that all new vehicles sold in the US run on any blend of gas and alcohol (either ethanol OR methanol) we move from an oil-based transportation infrastructure to one based on alcohol. By including methanol in our fuels picture, we reduce the impact of alcohol fuels on food supplies. By moving away from oil we reduce the power of Saudi Arabia to bankroll fundamentalist terrorists to kill us. And we reduce greenhouse gas emissions to boot.

Please, keep an open mind and read the book. Then flame all you want…

Because that is actually new, building on what was already known.

Comment by Alejandro — February 27, 2008 @ 10:22 pm

No, sorry, the results using changes to the nanostructure to increase the efficiency of the energy usage is not new.

Comment by Alejandro — February 27, 2008 @ 9:15 pm

Actually, that advance in using solar is a good leap. Funny thing about advances in science, the next advance builds on it.
Right now you can store 2 gigs on a small SD chip, 1990, a 2 gig comsumer usable Hard Drive was not even on the market yet.

The breakthrough is actually very interesting.

Here is a link about that hydrogen technology that RUCerious mentioned:

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/20134/

Too bad that thing will make about a gallon of hydrogen a day at atmospheric pressure. IOW, it’s actually quite useless as an auto fuel.

A question: does a tank of liquid hydrogen have a lesser explosive value than a comparable tank of gas?

Comment by barfly — February 27, 2008 @ 5:41 pm

If you subtract out the energy it took to compress the hydrogen (and no it’s not liquid; liquid hydrogen would make your car a rocket) then no.

It takes many times the energy you would get from hydrogen to first produce the hydrogen (you can’t dig it out of the ground like oil) then to compress it so that it’s usable.

Hydrogen is one big dead end.

Hydrogen will be the ultimate energy source, because it is completely carbonless, and has the highest specific energy (energy to weight ratio).

Comment by Jason M. Hendler — February 27, 2008 @ 5:24 pm

Hydrogen is NOT an energy source. You have to make H2 from other things. Either H20 or CH4 (which makes CO@ in the process, btw). To make it from water, it takes more energy than you get out. Where does that energy come from? Might as well charge a battery with it.

The answer is wind, wave, solar, etc. and electric cars with batteries.

Nice, RHF… nice!

Kind of a big clue that if these trolls ever took Economics 101, they flunked, LOL

I’m just a hack, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night…

Comment by VA Voter — February 27, 2008 @ 5:10 pm

For 7 years your Republicans had full control.
Why didn’t they pass it then, with all the other crap bills they rammed down our throats?
What is your reasoning on that?

And as far as oil prices and economics:

The record high energy prices and record oil company profits is not a simple case of “supply and demand” and profits.
To have a full understanding of the todays “oil economics” you need to know about the questionable corporate mergers, consolidation of energy infrastructure assets and almost non-existent regulatory oversight of those mergers or the energy-trading markets since the Bush Administration has taken over.

Add the fact that Consumers are paying record prices, not just on gas but every product, because businesses are also hit hard. All while the Oil Companies have raked in record profits.

Not that I expect you tounderstand a damn thing I just said….

Maybe this year will be when we finally trade in fear for hope.

Sen. Reid to defy Bush on foreclosure rescue plan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Wednesday he planned to defy a threatened White House veto and try to win passage of a bill to curb rising home foreclosures by changing bankruptcy law.

“So we are going to do what we think is best for the country,” Reid said. “If we get 67 votes (in the 100-member Senate to override a possible Bush veto), that’s great.”

Has Harry finally found his nutsack?