[pillbox_girl]

I've looke this up. Here's the basic process:

C = Carbon (from charcoal)
O = Oxygen (from the air)
Zn = Zinc
H = Hydrogen (from water)

The first reaction to produce metallic zinc:

2·ZnO + C + heat ==> 2·Zn + CO₂
The second reaction uses the zinc to release hydrogen from water:

Zn + H₂O ==> H₂ + ZnO
And finally, the hydrogen is burned to release energy and produce water:

2·H₂ + O₂ ==> 2·H₂O + energy

The promoters of the so called "hydrogen economy" spend all their time and energy concentrating on the third equation. "Look," they say, "there's no pollution, only water."

What they foolishly fail to notice, or dishonestly fail to mention, the that CO₂ lurking up there in the first equation. They never bother to look at their process in full, and combine all the equations for total inputs for total outputs. If we do that here, we get:

2·ZnO + C + heat + 2·Zn + 2·H₂O + 2·H₂ + O₂ ==> 2·Zn + CO₂ + 2·H₂ + 2·ZnO + 2·H₂O + energy
Now we need to remove the cancelled terms:

2·ZnO + C + heat + 2·Zn + 2·H₂O + 2·H₂ + O₂ ==> 2·Zn + CO₂ + 2·H₂ + 2·ZnO + 2·H₂O + energy
And this yields the resulting total equation:

C + O₂ + heat ==> CO₂ + energy
This, of course is the same chemical reaction as simply burning coal to get energy, except the people promoting this source for hydrogen to fuel the "hydrogen economy" have added in so many complications (not to mention inefficiencies) they no longer recognise it.

The promoters of the "hydrogen economy" are so intent on pushing hydrogen fueled cars that they fail to recognize or admit that some methods of generating hydrogen emit more greenhouse gasses per watt of energy than conventional fossil fuels. And this is one of those methods.

For an alternative fuel to be a true option for the future, it needs to meet two major requirements (and a bunch of minor ones I won't mention). It will need to allow us to be energy independent, and it needs to be carbon neutral. The inefficiencies of using hydrogen as a fuel make it very unlikely it will satisfy the first requirement any time soon. And using methods like the one proposed by this article are actually absolutely contrary to the second requirement.

[.cnI redruM]

C + O2 + heat ==> CO2 + energy


That won't solve global warming. It will get rid of Tropospheric Ozone in large urban areas, however.

[neverdem]

Nice analyses. Some element other than carbon needs to be oxidized.