[dennisw]

You need electric power to make this hydrogen. So what are you going to burn to make it? Oil, gas, coal?

Are you hanging on hydro-electric or nukes to generate the electricty? Are you going to pave over half of New Mexico with photo-voltaic cells? Will you make it with wind turbines?

[MadIvan]

Use nuclear energy and coal - sources which do not require the Saudis.

Regards, Ivan

[Disgruntled_Voter]

Ok, I've read so many of these threads and the inevitable post comes down "How will you make the hydrogen in the first place?" Well I have an answer, take an initial investment in fossil fuels to make some hydrogen to power your fuel cells. Then with your fuel cells, start making more hydrogen by electrolysis. Simple, and self-perpetuating. Why hasn't anyone said this before?

A lot of the literature for fuel cells speaks to this concern of people about the supply of hydrogen, but since it's one of the most commonly occurring elements on the planet (though much is tied up in water)

[WileyC]

You need electric power to make this hydrogen. So what are you going to burn to make it?

That's a good point and needs to be addressed:

• Using centralized sources of power generation (even using the same ol' fuels) reduces overall emissions due to efficiency and reduces transmission losses which means more efficiency.
• A hydrogen economy frees up consumers to use whatever energy technology works best. Or, to put it another way, instead of cars being tied at the hip to OPEC, oil could just be one energy source among many and replaceable as other sources come on line.
• The theoretical maximum operational efficiency for fuel cell vehicles is two to three times that of internal combustion vehicles.

So, to answer your question, we could burn oil to get the power, but we wouldn't have to. And the overall reliance on oil could be significantly less.