Truly Renewable Energy

[wiggin]

Hydrogen is the most abundant resource in the universe. The hydrogen fuel cell has zero toxic waste; just water. You can't get a much greener method of transporting goods or people from A to B.

You mention some of the other concerns with hydrogen fuel: my biggest one is its volumetric energy density, which is nowhere near as good as gasoline, but there are also some safety concerns and efficiency questions (economic efficiency, not point-of-use energy efficiency: making super-pure hydrogen is expensive and energy-heavy, and the fuel cells are fantastically pricey). Furthermore, the overall thermal energy efficiency for using hydrogen for transportation is lower than that of gasoline, while the efficiency of electric cars is much higher than either.

It's possible it will work, but it's nowhere near applicability yet, and its uses are probably limited.

Furthermore, hydrogen fuel has a very bad pollutant - water vapor. That's one of the most potent greenhouse gases around. Of course, that's a bit of hyperbole, but it's definitely a misnomer to suggest putting vast amounts of water vapor into the atmosphere won't count as pollution. Similarly, there are other pollutants from hydrogen fuel cells - notably stuff like NO and the like from weird side reactions during the reaction of air and hydrogen. Better than currently used technologies, yes, but definitely not pollution free.

[']['ear]

Sorry, I thought you meant power as in electrical power, not the general 'power' (as in energy per unit time). Oil accounts for a bit over a third of our energy usage, but a large chunk of that is in transportation and a relatively smaller amount is used to actually make electricity. Wind power and the like is largely for things that are on the grid, which is not going to significantly replace oil (though it will replace gas and coal, which are two biggies).

That being said, an argument can be made that as more and more of our transportation infrastructure is run off the grid (e.g. electric cars, trains, etc.) renewable electricity generation will become more important for reducing oil consumption as opposed to generally reducing our carbon footprint and use of fossil fuels.

As usual, a nice precis. Dude, will you come help me write my grant? Damn but clarity doesn't come naturally to me. Nonlinear, I'm afraid.

Yes, most transportation infrastructure is based on oil. No one has really found a way to haul lots of stuff with a high density fuel that isn't some sort of fossil fuel, and oil is pretty convenient and cheap (coal and biomass used to be the fuels of choice). Airplanes, most trains, boats, and most trucks all run on oil. To replace this with something bulky like wind power you'd need to put the whole system on the grid - which for boats and airplanes, at least, is going to be awfully difficult.

Makes you think that we should be conserving those high energy fuels for where we really need it, eh? But sadly most Americans are driving semi-tanks and care most about how quickly their vehicle gets from 0 to 60.

I'm all for filling the scenery with turbines. We should put them on big kites and fly them in the freakin' jet stream. How else is wind going to replace coil anyway?

Pfagh! We could cover every roof in America with solar panels and rock the grid right off of coal/gas. Or, look at France and its near ubiquitous nuclear. That's the one serious gripe I have with most environmentalists: their hysteria about nukes really screwed us up.

Put sails on them container ships! I wonder how big a sail would have to be to move something that size.... Hmmm.... I bet Khenny could calculate it.

That's neat. I wonder what the cost-benefit is for that. They shoot for small crews on those big freighters. How much maintenance does it require? How much training?

[EyeKhan]

Pfagh! We could cover every roof in America with solar panels and rock the grid right off of coal/gas. Or, look at France and its near ubiquitous nuclear. That's the one serious gripe I have with most environmentalists: their hysteria about nukes really screwed us up.

Nuclear, I agree. But solar's not that simple. There's the night issue, first of all. Then the cost of the panels and the grid infrastructure (which I guess is already there . . .. ). Then the maintenance of such a distributed energy infrastructure - who's going to keep the panels in working order on all those houses?

That's neat. I wonder what the cost-benefit is for that. They shoot for small crews on those big freighters. How much maintenance does it require? How much training?

It can't be that much or that hard.

[Nessus]

Nuclear, I agree. But solar's not that simple. There's the night issue, first of all. Then the cost of the panels and the grid infrastructure (which I guess is already there . . .. ). Then the maintenance of such a distributed energy infrastructure - who's going to keep the panels in working order on all those houses?

You talkin' socialist talk in here, sonny boy? We don't take kindly to that there kind of commu-nist infiltration, no sirree