I'm a bit disappointed

[pnutbutr]

With the decision to cut federal funding for hydrogen vehicle research. The reasoning is that the technology is 10-20 years away yet companies like Mazda, Ford and BMW have been building hydrogen powered vehicles for almost 2 decades in some cases and all three have them on the roads today. Mazda actually sells them in Japan and has an RX-8 model that will run on both hydrogen and gasoline. Ford has a fleet of busses in Florida that run on hydrogen and BMW has been providing it's hydrogen powered vehicles to people like Ed Norton to promote.

I just see huge potential with hydrogen. The main complaint is that it takes more energy to produce then you get out of it. Use freekin solar or wind instead of coal generated electricity. The infrastructure to distribute could be minimized by building fueling stations that are independent and produce their own hydrogen with renewables. Solar panels on the roof and maybe in combination with small wind turbines would provide the power necessary to continually produce and store hydrogen at these stations. I'm sooooo disappointed right now.

[RandomThoughts]

1. It would completely change ownership of the raw material to fuel cars

Currently Oil has to come from certain locations, and go through a few corporations, that gives big oil a big opportunity to 'central control' of a big part of the economy.

If anyone could set up a windmill and create a gas station, then energy supply and delivery would be decentralized, and competition would ruin the big oil monopolies.

Also, when thinking about viability or cost, you have to factor in savings from simpler refinement, and almost no drilling cost, or transportation cost of oil or gas.

Some buses in Portland Oregon have had hydrogen fuel cells for a long time now.

[pnutbutr]

2. exactly

We could even eventually run these types of setups at home or even for an apartment complex, businesses etc... Big oil needs to use it's massive profits to jump on board early and push this as a viable future for vehicles fuel instead of fighting it tooth and nail until it's too late and they get beaten to the punch. Businessmen just confuse the hell out of me sometimes.

[KharmaTrain]

3. The Government Can't Fund Everything...

I'm a longtime advocate of liquid hydrogen and hydrogen fuel cells as one solution to energy needs. The government can't do this all themselves...here's a job where the free market can and should thrive. Instead of funding, here's where tax credits and breaks can be the real catalyst for change and stimulation. It will encourage companies to produce hydrodren-powered vehicles and get them onto the market, energy companies that will produce the cells and fuels to gear up and build the infrastructure and redefine the auto industry.

[madokie]

4. You have to remember that hydrogen is not an energy source

I'm sure there is niche markets where it would be good but for our transportation it isn't.

[pnutbutr]

7. oh

I was unaware that hydrogen produces no energy when burned. Learn something new every day.

[madokie]

9. I didn't say that

I said it is not an energy source. It has to be made and making it takes lots of energy.

[pnutbutr]

12. so does

making gasoline and electricity and ethanol and everything else.

[KharmaTrain]

8. Oceans Aren't An Energy Source?

I first heard of liquid hydrogen in the 70's...the "original" energy crisis. Over the yeras, I've also heard many reasons for why its not an "energy source". It's either too combustible (as though gasoline isn't?) or too hard to synthesize or too costly to produce and distribute on a national scale. But then I also see that NASA thinks otherwise...they find it quite a useable energy source.

There will be many solutions to energy sources...or should I say, there must be...if anything to keep from going from one monopoly to another. Necessity is the mother of inventions. I'm up for a lot of mothers competing out there.

:hi:

[madokie]

11. What I mean it's not something that we mine

to get at it, we have to make it if I understand it right.

[KharmaTrain]

14. Refine It...

In a way you mine Hydrogen...just like you have to mine gold or get petroleum. All these products need to be refined to have any value...and that's where the rubber hits the road. Right now the costs for producing large amounts of liquid hydrogen is expensive and difficult due to the lack of processing centers and advances in technology. It's a cart and horse thing...if there were a greater need, the marektplace would find ways to make more at lower prices. Without the need, there hasn't been the investment.

Again...one answer among many out there. I've been looking at mining methane as a resource...not as clean as hydrogen, but very abundant.

[pnutbutr]

6. Government interest

Unless the government shows an interest in this technology, not many will jump on board. I agree with your idea of tax credit and incentives to help the push but the government needs to stay in the game to show it supports the technology and the change to it.

[KharmaTrain]

13. Six Of One, Half A Dozen Of Another...

The government can be involved...R & D money and grants are valuable ways to push new technologies forward, but it also can be a boat anchor if it becomes a beauracracy where the government is the sole pipeline for innovation. There needs to be partnerships between public and private sectors. An example would be NASA...the R & D money that went to sending a man on the moon resulted in microwave ovens, video cameras, laptop computers and better tasting Tang. The ultimate government interest are votes...answer the problems and it will return votes for years to come. Or so I hope.

Cheers...

[Odin2005]

5. Fuel cells are a scam. Electric is far better.

[pnutbutr]

10. fuel cells produce electricity n/t

existing combustion engines can run on liquid hydrogen and produce 0 emissions. The problem with straight electric and batteries is the range and recharge time.

[Odin2005]

15. It takes electricity to make hydrogen.

I am not opposed to hydrogen fuel in and of itself, but electric-battery power should be the usual power source and hydrogen only used as back-up when the batteries run out and there is no time to recharge them. straight electric is more energy efficient then hydrogen fuel cells because the extra steps of going from electricity to hydrogen and back to electricity wastes energy because you have to add energy to make pure hydrogen, it's an endothermic reaction. So ideally as batteries get better hydrogen will be needed less and less.

[pnutbutr]

16. or you could just

use liquid hydrogen to power conventional internal combustion engines and not have to worry about batteries and weak electric motors.