<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Schwarzenegger’s “Green Hummer” plan sparks cultish following]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by kurapika http://www.grist.org/article/griscom-hummer/ Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:34:44 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/griscom-hummer/1 I am a car guy

Even though I'm a car guy, I won't even get into how stupid this rig is. I do, however, have a bone to pick with the line "...a $100 million initiative to build hydrogen refueling stations can't be a bad thing."

First of all, practical, afforadable fuel cell cars are decades away. Direct hydrogen combustion is certainly do-able (as it's done here) but still expensive and inefficient.

The important question is: "Where does the hydrogen come from?" Most industrial grade hydrogen is cracked from natural gas through the process of steam reforming. The whole hype on hydrogen was kicked off by the Bush Administration's clever "bait n' switch." They'll have you think they're progressive and advocates for alternative fuels, when it's just the same oil and gas (and soon coal) companies creating the hydrogen. The energy conversions are also extremely inefficient and wasteful.

A much better solution is to continue pushing hybrid-electric technology, displacement on demand, etc. for cars. And most importantly, to invest in, and promote real alternative energy like solar and wind power. While a perfect world might envision such technologies creating the hydrogen, which they can do, it's simply not efficient enough right now. Too many conversions, too much entropy. Every megawatt of energy added to the electric grid via renewables, displaces the need for an equal amount of dirty generation somewhere else.

No it can't be a bad thing, but it CAN be a total waste of money. And how to trade stocks is hard to do.

Sorry for the rant.

]]> I am a car guy

Even though I'm a car guy, I won't even get into how stupid this rig is. I do, however, have a bone to pick with the line "...a $100 million initiative to build hydrogen refueling stations can't be a bad thing."

First of all, practical, afforadable fuel cell cars are decades away. Direct hydrogen combustion is certainly do-able (as it's done here) but still expensive and inefficient.

The important question is: "Where does the hydrogen come from?" Most industrial grade hydrogen is cracked from natural gas through the process of steam reforming. The whole hype on hydrogen was kicked off by the Bush Administration's clever "bait n' switch." They'll have you think they're progressive and advocates for alternative fuels, when it's just the same oil and gas (and soon coal) companies creating the hydrogen. The energy conversions are also extremely inefficient and wasteful.

A much better solution is to continue pushing hybrid-electric technology, displacement on demand, etc. for cars. And most importantly, to invest in, and promote real alternative energy like solar and wind power. While a perfect world might envision such technologies creating the hydrogen, which they can do, it's simply not efficient enough right now. Too many conversions, too much entropy. Every megawatt of energy added to the electric grid via renewables, displaces the need for an equal amount of dirty generation somewhere else.

No it can't be a bad thing, but it CAN be a total waste of money. And how to trade stocks is hard to do.

Sorry for the rant.

]]> Comment #2 by Revolutionary http://www.grist.org/article/griscom-hummer/ Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:54:23 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/griscom-hummer/2 Hydrogen I.C.E. Ready to Roll

Aside from the cost of building an electrolyzer, hydrogen fuel needed to support a hydrogen economy can be produced for free and indefinitely any place where there's rain, wind and sun. And an electrolyzer can be built at extremely low cost, certainly enough to justify the cost of building one when you consider that hydrogen fuel can be produced for free thereafter, and indefinitely. So that resolves one side of the equation.

And regarding the other side of the equation, converting existing vehicles to run on hydrogen, the Robinsons of Intergalactic Hydrogen and others have mastered doing that for many years now. Although there's countless drawbacks to hydrogen fuel cell (F.C.) technology, and at present the materials it requires prevent it from ever being mass-marketable, no such drawbacks exist with hydrogen I.C.E. technology. Hydrogen I.C.E. technology has been ready for mass-marketing for many many years now, and is far superior to anything commonly on the roads now.

So what's holding the hydrogen economy back? Answer: No good reason, none whatsoever. Just a lot of baseless reasons is all.

]]> Hydrogen I.C.E. Ready to Roll

Aside from the cost of building an electrolyzer, hydrogen fuel needed to support a hydrogen economy can be produced for free and indefinitely any place where there's rain, wind and sun. And an electrolyzer can be built at extremely low cost, certainly enough to justify the cost of building one when you consider that hydrogen fuel can be produced for free thereafter, and indefinitely. So that resolves one side of the equation.

And regarding the other side of the equation, converting existing vehicles to run on hydrogen, the Robinsons of Intergalactic Hydrogen and others have mastered doing that for many years now. Although there's countless drawbacks to hydrogen fuel cell (F.C.) technology, and at present the materials it requires prevent it from ever being mass-marketable, no such drawbacks exist with hydrogen I.C.E. technology. Hydrogen I.C.E. technology has been ready for mass-marketing for many many years now, and is far superior to anything commonly on the roads now.

So what's holding the hydrogen economy back? Answer: No good reason, none whatsoever. Just a lot of baseless reasons is all.

]]>