KD in CA Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 It will just prolong the dependence on old technology and delay the investment in new. Bullsh--. There is absolutely no reason to draw such a conclusion and no reason why the marketplace wouldn't continue to pursue other technologies if they believe there is a market, regardless of what is happening with oil/gas drilling. All you are doing is putting your eggs in one basket, and you will be wrong again (just as Tom astutely points out 2 posts above - ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Currently the most economical way to make hydrogen produces more pollution that the energy equivalent of gasoline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Bullsh--. There is absolutely no reason to draw such a conclusion and no reason why the marketplace wouldn't continue to pursue other technologies if they believe there is a market, regardless of what is happening with oil/gas drilling. All you are doing is putting your eggs in one basket, and you will be wrong again (just as Tom astutely points out 2 posts above - ). I agree- we really do need to start drilling- the drilling alone should result in lower prices for foreign oil- you know, the way the threat of actually using our reserves used to. We don't need to drill everywhere though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 I agree- we really do need to start drilling- the drilling alone should result in lower prices for foreign oil- you know, the way the threat of actually using our reserves used to. We don't need to drill everywhere though. If oil prices stay where they are, they will be close enough to incentivize accelerating technology to extract oil from oil shales which is aplenty in our own backyard. Without any links to support this - I think $80 was the price point at which Canadian oil sands became feasible as an oil source & $150 is when oil shales reach that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Currently the most economical way to make hydrogen produces more pollution that the energy equivalent of gasoline. I am not really up on this crap... Do you have any links? Honda just released into production their H car... Again, what does H production take? And I am being straight serious Wacka... I just never really bothered to read up on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 From the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden , CO (part of the DOE): "The simplest and most common element, hydrogen is all around us, but always as a compound with other elements. To make it usable in fuel cells or otherwise provide energy, we must expend energy or modify another energy source to extract it from the fossil fuel, biomass, water, or other compound in which it is found. Nearly all hydrogen production today is by steam reformation of natural gas. This, however, releases fossil carbon dioxide in the process and trades one relatively clean fuel for another, with associated energy loss, so does little to meet national energy needs. For high purity needs, a small amount of hydrogen is produced by electrolysis, but this again is only as good as the energy source used to produce the electricity used." It will take several decades to make other methods as economical. They list other methods on their web site. I and other conservatives are not against researching alternative fuels, but they will not solve all our problems and be available tomorrow or even in 10 years. I personally have reservations about the reservoir storing the high pressure hydrogen gas in the car. What happens in an accident- massive fireball ala the Hindenburg? I read once that for solar power to equal one nuke plant, Rhode Island would have to be covered with solar cells and the sun shine 24/7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 From the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden , CO (part of the DOE): "The simplest and most common element, hydrogen is all around us, but always as a compound with other elements. To make it usable in fuel cells or otherwise provide energy, we must expend energy or modify another energy source to extract it from the fossil fuel, biomass, water, or other compound in which it is found. Nearly all hydrogen production today is by steam reformation of natural gas. This, however, releases fossil carbon dioxide in the process and trades one relatively clean fuel for another, with associated energy loss, so does little to meet national energy needs. For high purity needs, a small amount of hydrogen is produced by electrolysis, but this again is only as good as the energy source used to produce the electricity used." It will take several decades to make other methods as economical. They list other methods on their web site. I and other conservatives are not against researching alternative fuels, but they will not solve all our problems and be available tomorrow or even in 10 years. I personally have reservations about the reservoir storing the high pressure hydrogen gas in the car. What happens in an accident- massive fireball ala the Hindenburg? I read once that for solar power to equal one nuke plant, Rhode Island would have to be covered with solar cells and the sun shine 24/7. Thanks! What about that guy in Texas that supposedly came up with a carb that ran on water and powered the car with H... In the 1930's before the Hindenburg... I think he was the inventor of the first traffic light? The Hindenburg probably put a huge stigma on this... Also I recall the talk about H embrittlement and how it wrecks havoc on metal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Grist for the mill, from a blog: http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2008/06/mccain-energy-p.html June 19, 2008McCain Energy Policy - Drain America First By Cernig We all know that McCain is now following the Bush line to start drilling for oil in Alaska and offshore. It's a flip-flop propelled by campaign donations from big oil, but does it make sense? Well, it might eventually (around 2010) take 6 cents off the price of a gallon but Cheryl Rofer at WhirledView has been crunching some numbers and says that the Bush/McCain policy amounts to a serious national security misstep in that it amounts to a policy to Drain America First. The first ten countries, in decreasing order of reserves, are Saudi Arabia Iran Iraq Kuwait United Arab Emirates Venezuela Russia Kazakhstan Libya Nigeria The United States is number 11. The first ten countries, in decreasing order of production, are Saudi Arabia Russia United States Iran China Mexico Norway Canada Venezuela United Arab Emirates The difference in these two lists suggests that the famous peak oil hypothesis is not the whole story. In some countries, like the United States, production has peaked, due to what a colleague called the drain-America-first policy. He argued that it would have made more sense to keep our oil in the ground and use up other countries’ reserves first. We can see that President Bush belongs to the drain-America-first faction, urging that American production be increased, when it is already high in proportion to our proved reserves. Russia is following a similar policy of depredative nationalism. This articulates my chief point: in 30 years, if the free market in oil breaks down due to a gross imbalance in supply ad demand, the last countries standing will be those with their own oil supplies. Do we want to be Kuwait, with an ace in the hole, or another tapped-out Mexico? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Currently the most economical way to make hydrogen produces more pollution that the energy equivalent of gasoline. But in ten years the technology to do it through solar and wind power may progress to the point where it is a practical mass production solution. Honda has a pretty good track record of making the right business decisions, and their president is confident that the infrastructure to support the cars will grow as consumer demand does. People used to laugh at the Japanese and their funny little cars back in the 70s too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 But in ten years the technology to do it through solar and wind power may progress to the point where it is a practical mass production solution. Honda has a pretty good track record of making the right business decisions, and their president is confident that the infrastructure to support the cars will grow as consumer demand does. People used to laugh at the Japanese and their funny little cars back in the 70s too. Technology can never overcome the laws of physics and chemistry. Most of the hydrogen discussed in these sources has a source with carbon attached to it. So even if technology can extract said H2 economically, the question of disposing of the carbon (or dioxide) still remains and may become an even bigger lightning rod for criticism in the future. Secondly, as I mentioned, splitting water takes an enormous amount of energy and generating from a renewable source is the only logical solution. So, as I said in a previous post, there are several aspects to this situation and when you put the entire value chain together (production, distribution, storage, by-product disposal and usage) it doesn't add up to a attractive picture no matter how much advanced technology is developed to solve a production-related problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 I am not really up on this crap... Do you have any links? Honda just released into production their H car... Again, what does H production take? And I am being straight serious Wacka... I just never really bothered to read up on it. Knock yourself out ... http://www.h2fc.com/technology.html Warning - By the time you finish reading the section on for and against arguments you will rush to the main board clamoring for an Edwards-JP debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 But in ten years the technology to do it through solar and wind power may progress to the point where it is a practical mass production solution. Honda has a pretty good track record of making the right business decisions, and their president is confident that the infrastructure to support the cars will grow as consumer demand does. People used to laugh at the Japanese and their funny little cars back in the 70s too. Its not making the H powered car thats the problem, its producing the actual hydrogen thats the problem. What the hell is the point of having a "clean" hydrogen car when the process to make the hydrogen is more polluting than a fossil fuel car? And again, who is going to foot the bill for the completely new hydrogen delivery infrastructure needed? As fan in chicago said, you cant simply change the laws of physics and chemistry and *assume* that in 10 years we will have an economical, clean, safe way to mass produce hydrogen. It must be nice to live in pasta joe land where you close your eyes, click your heels together 3 times, spin around and voila, you have inexpensive clean hydrogen powered cars with a full infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Its not making the H powered car thats the problem, its producing the actual hydrogen thats the problem. What the hell is the point of having a "clean" hydrogen car when the process to make the hydrogen is more polluting than a fossil fuel car? And again, who is going to foot the bill for the completely new hydrogen delivery infrastructure needed? As fan in chicago said, you cant simply change the laws of physics and chemistry and *assume* that in 10 years we will have an economical, clean, safe way to mass produce hydrogen. It must be nice to live in pasta joe land where you close your eyes, click your heels together 3 times, spin around and voila, you have inexpensive clean hydrogen powered cars with a full infrastructure. One thing I've noticed in this argument is that in many of the posts (speifically PJ's) you can replace "hydrogen" with "magic" and not lose any of the semantic content. Generally, if that's the case, the argument is probably a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 One thing I've noticed in this argument is that in many of the posts (speifically PJ's) you can replace "hydrogen" with "magic" and not lose any of the semantic content. hydrogen = magic = change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 Its not making the H powered car thats the problem, its producing the actual hydrogen thats the problem. What the hell is the point of having a "clean" hydrogen car when the process to make the hydrogen is more polluting than a fossil fuel car? And again, who is going to foot the bill for the completely new hydrogen delivery infrastructure needed? As fan in chicago said, you cant simply change the laws of physics and chemistry and *assume* that in 10 years we will have an economical, clean, safe way to mass produce hydrogen. It must be nice to live in pasta joe land where you close your eyes, click your heels together 3 times, spin around and voila, you have inexpensive clean hydrogen powered cars with a full infrastructure. How's your Ostrich Inc. buggywhip business doing? Are you getting alot of customer calls on the partyline on your dial phone? Keeping track of your sales on your abacus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 20, 2008 Share Posted June 20, 2008 How's your Ostrich Inc. buggywhip business doing? Are you getting alot of customer calls on the partyline on your dial phone? Keeping track of your sales on your abacus? Pretty good actually. In 10 years, we expect there will be a full development and incorporation of new technology that will make ostriches the cleanest, cheapest and most efficient transportation system in the U.S. So when that happens in 10 years, we'll really be pulling in the big bucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 ya, but ... Where is the hydrogen going to come from ? Wicked laws of nature have intricately linked hydrogen with carbon molecules and these things called hydrocarbons are widely present in usable form in natural gas, coal and crude oil. So if the end goal is to reduce our dependence on these sources, we are SOL. If purely from a environmental perspective, using hydrogen to power transportation is good but what I said above implies that separating hydrogen will leave behind carbon which will have to be disposed off in some enviro-friendly fashion. There are ofcourse other pesky factors as to production plants for hydrogen, fill-up stations etc. which are a major barrier to the utopian 'hydrogen economy'. If the goal is to produce on-board hydrogen, it still needs a feed which will most likely have a carbon-related by-product. The ultimate solution will be to split water (a highly energy intensive process) using solar energy to get hydrogen and oxygen. Sucky situation, eh ? I merely used the hydrogen car as an example. The pot of gold will be there for someone who invents a new method to power a car. I really don't know enough about hydrogen production to have an intelligent discourse on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 I merely used the hydrogen car as an example. The pot of gold will be there for someone who invents a new method to power a car. I really don't know enough about hydrogen production to have an intelligent discourse on the subject. Fair enough and I don't expect everyone to know chemistry either save for those in politics and media who spout the virtues of hydrogen without understanding the entire picture. It is their job to understand what they are advocating and influencing policy about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Fair enough and I don't expect everyone to know chemistry either save for those in politics and media who spout the virtues of hydrogen without understanding the entire picture. It is their job to understand what they are advocating and influencing policy about. ... and that is usually in direct opposition to them keeping their job .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts