[FastCoyote]

Bwahahaha, I read this as boondoggle. There are already reports that the gasoline required to run the farm machinery to make the corn requires almost as much energy as produced. Even with their claim of 60% efficiency (which is quite optimistic), it's still nearly a wash, especially with all the storage problems of hydrogen.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

ping

[usafsk]

You are confused. First, post "some report" that supports the idea that the fossil fuels used to grow an acre of corn and produce ethanol is greater than the potential energy output of the hydrogen produced in this process. Secondly, this is not about large scale storage of hydrogen. The idea is simplify and shrink the hydrogen production reactor so that hydrogen is not stored, but produced and used as needed from a less volatile (ethanol, which is no more volatile than gasoline) source.

[Moonman62]

Bwahahaha, I read this as boondoggle. There are already reports that the gasoline required to run the farm machinery to make the corn requires almost as much energy as produced. Even with their claim of 60% efficiency (which is quite optimistic), it's still nearly a wash, especially with all the storage problems of hydrogen.

I don't think the hydrogen is stored in this process. It's used as soon as it's extracted.

[antidisestablishment]

It is a net loss, period. The 60% refers exclusively to the efficiency of the combustion process and it doesn't account for the energy used in the processing. It's another shell game.

I am all for alternative energy, but the junk science and this government mandated insanity has got to stop. The crap methanol blend they force on us now burns more valves than anything else!