Posted on 06/23/2005 4:15:57 PM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
DIAMOND BAR, California - Conservatives and liberals seem more divided than ever these days. But there is one issue that has become so critical, it is bringing some from even the far Right and far Left together -- breaking America's addiction to foreign oil. A broad coalition is forming to take the country in a new way -- the hydrogen highway.
There are some down sides to American drivers' gas-guzzling, do-your-own-thing way of life.
For instance, the jam-packed streets of New York, the clogged roads into Washington D.C., and the maxed-out freeways of Los Angeles, all places where millions of drivers everyday are poisoning themselves, and all those around them. And helping to keep America dangerously dependent on oil from often-hostile states.
The war on terror and 9-11 have rammed home the reality that sheikhs and ayatollahs can now hold the oil-addicted West hostage because most of the world's oil is beneath their sands. And terrorists could attack oil facilities or pipelines over there almost anytime and send prices skyrocketing.
It used to be mostly the environmentalists who were anti-oil. But now that it is a vital national security matter, many more people, even among the oil companies and automakers, are saying that this oil-addiction must be broken.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbn.com ...
There are some down sides to Hydrogen Highway:
COST: $100,000 + car
Travel apx. 100 miles
Hydrogen is not a primary energy source like oil. It is more like a battery where energy can be stored. It takes energy to produce hydrogen. Where will that energy come from? Foreign oil, coal, nuclear energy.
There are some reasons to like hydrogen (as a mobile energy source, it is less polluting than gas). But conservatives who buy into this hydrogen/foreign oil nonsense are buying into a lot of granolaish causes that are decidedly not conservative.
This line of argument (hydrogen will save us from foreign oil) is being carefully advanced by a bunch of leftist hard-greens to advance their agenda. They know it is nonsense but don't care because they believe there are a lot of wishful thinkers out there who will uncritically accept a completely stupid argument.
Yeah. For starters, hydrogen production is a little more complicated than a bowl of water and a potatoe masher.
How much energy does it take to produce the hydrogen?
Lets put it this way. If it was economically feasible with current energy prices we would already be doing it. And we're not doing it commercially now. Does that help? Either the price of energy goes up so hydrogen is competitive or we get a technology breakthrough which makes production costs fall (or some combination thereof).
It actually (in practice) takes significantly more energy to take hydrogen from water than you get from burning hydrogen (to get water).
Why is hydrogen always touted as the solution? Why not natural gas, electric, coal-powered steam engines, etc. etc.
Any number of solutions could provide an answer in the future, maybe even a Mr. Fusion under the hood.
We could build a phlanax of nuclear power plants.
I have.
Natural gas and propane is a major source for Hydrogen.
True, but unfortunately when you get Hydrogen from a hydrocoarbon, you release oodles of that nasty greenhouse gas CO2 that those Envirowackos are all about. You lose the only environmental reason to use Hydrogen in the first place.
The Space Shuttle uses Hydrogen Fuel Cells for its Electrical Systems.
As another poster said, Hydrogen is more like a battery where you can store energy for later use, but you use more energy creating the hydrogen than you get out of it.
Several Landfills throughout the country use Methane Fuel Cells for power.
Several landfills throughout the country use methane to run internal combustion engines to turn generators.
I am looking forward to helping subsidize the fortunes of the Mr.HydrogenRockefeller and Mr.HydrogenCarnegie.
I will NEVER support any government subsidy which forces, or even strongly encourages hydrogen technology. When the time comes in an economically correct fashion, those Mr's and others, will emerge with the proper technology in the proper time, and I will purchase their products.
Keep the government out of this area - all I want them to do is to discontinue any and all government policies and protections that deter those Mr's from solving our energy problems.
You are correct. Hydrogen would be best produced via nukes that we don't and probably won't have anytime soon. There is however, one more problem with hydrogen. That is how to safely store it in a vehicle. That's areal pucker factor knowing you have a compressed gas cylinder (high pressure) in the trunk just waiting to be rear-ended.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.