[hopespringseternal]

Or, you can use solar cells to generate the weak electrical field to break the H2O bond (a href="http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,64797,00.html"> Link

LOL

A lot of energy is released when hydrogen and oxygen burn. To generate that potential again by cracking water, you have to put just as much energy in. TANSTAAFL.

And solar cells are hardly "free" energy. The reason why solar cells and windmills haven't caught on is it can cost more to make them than they will ever produce, especially when you factor in maintenance.

The liberal answer is just to subsidize them, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize the energy has to come from somewhere first.

[Boot Hill]

8	“To generate that potential again by cracking water, you have to put just as much energy in. TANSTAAFL.”

Agreed! Here's a graphic that makes it abundantly clear...

Energy Balance Sheet
Starting with equal values of energy into the electrical generator (line 2)

process	natural gas (kWh)	hydrogen (kWh)
Energy used to create the fuel	0.00	1.25
Energy value of fuel recovered for generation	1.00	1.00
Electrical energy generated         (50% efficiency)	0.50	0.50
Electrical energy diverted to create more fuel	0.00	1.25
Net electrical energy for consumer use   (deficit)	0.50	(–0.75)

From the deficit shown in line five of the above table we can see that...

• H2 is not a true fuel, because it has a lower energy value than the energy required to produce it.
• Hydrogen is a net energy sink, not an energy source.
• The process of converting H2O to H2 and back to H2O, is a net endothermic (energy absorbing) process.
• There is a big difference between "poor efficiency" and a "negative efficiency".
• Hydrogen has a negative efficiency, therefore, hydrogen is not a true fuel.

--Boot Hill