Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Willie Green
H2 is not a fuel and will always require more energy from another source to produce than can be obtained by its use.

That's true of everything that isn't used "raw" as it comes from the source. You spend energy to dig out coal. You spend energy converting crude oil into something you can burn in your vehicle. You spend energy growing and harvesting ethanol, and more converting the grain into ethanol.

I tend to agree about the use of wind power, which just isn't that "dense" an energy source, and is available in a usuable form, in only a few places. Nuclear power however would do the trick. Fusion power, if we can ever get it, would be better yet. Crude oil is really too valuable as chemical feedstock, in the long term, to be burning it all up now.

69 posted on 02/21/2003 6:55:50 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato
That's true of everything that isn't used "raw" as it comes from the source. You spend energy to dig out coal. You spend energy converting crude oil into something you can burn in your vehicle.

No. In those instances, the refined fuel still contains more energy than what was needed to process it.
Hydrogen, OTOH, will always require more energy for processing than what's obtainable when using it.

74 posted on 02/21/2003 7:09:44 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson