Bush Pushing Hydrogen Fuel As Alternative

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON -- President Bush stared inquisitively down into the nozzle of a hydrogen fuel hose on Wednesday, then pumped the fuel into a blue compact car as he renewed his plea for Congress to pass a wide-ranging energy bill.

But with the cost of hydrogen double that of premium gasoline, even the president acknowledged that seeing today's children take their driver's tests in pollution-free cars is a long-term goal.

"This is the beginning of fantastic technology," Bush said at a Shell station in northeast Washington, the first retail hydrogen and gasoline fueling station in North America. "Hydrogen is the wave of the future. We're too dependent on foreign sources of energy."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/25/AR2005052500886.html

[ClassWarrior]

1. I wish he really meant it.

Criminal.

NGU.

[babylonsister]

2. Where can we send the blivet to keep him busy today? nt

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. Well...actually,

it's the energy companies that are pushing for the hydrogen based technology. I noticed this about a year ago when one of the sites I was researching (BP) had in their job description these words: "As we move toward a hydrogen-based economy" ...

[Javaman]

50. BP is a little bit more progressive then the rest of the oil companies...

They are actually the second largest investors in wind technology. They see the writing on the wall. All the rest are part of the morons* denial club.

[The Donkey]

4. I find it hard to believe

that the long term cost prognosis for hydrogen is that it will be twice as expensive as gasoline. Isn't it the most abundant element in the universe?

[hatrack]

9. Yes, but free hydrogen doesn't exist on Earth . . .

. . . except, of course, as a result of chemical processes (dissolving zinc in sulfuric acid, for example) or using electricity to break H away from water molecules, or "washing" natural gas with superheated water.

There's a fundamental problem, though - each form of hydrogen produced through these methods is a net energy sink - it takes more energy to produce the hydrogen than you get when you run the hydrogen through a fuel cell or ICE or whatever.

Think of it this way - you have a million barrels of gasoline. You have two choices:

1. Burn the gasoline in cars and trucks to move them from place to place;

2. convert the million barrels to hydrogen, or run it through vehicle fuel cells and get the equivalent of 900,000 barrels of energy to move cars and trucks from place to place

Hmmm . . . .

[Tux]

22. Yet

We do need a renewable energy source. Hydrogen would require more energy to get the hydrogen but it doesn't shoot down the need for renewable fuel. I'm all for bio-diesel and maybe bio-gasoline. Organic matter like feces could be the basis of it. We produce tons of feces daily.

As for plastics:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0904/p12s02-sten.html
http://usinfo.state.gov/gi/Archive/2004/Aug/24-641357.html
http://www.springerlink.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=f45903a9f30040549b836291f8ff880f&referrer=parent&backto=issue,6,6;journal,5,28;linkingpublicationresults,1:105721,1
http://md1.csa.com/partners/viewrecord.php?requester=gs&collection=TRD&recid=200203D60063MB&q=corn+based+plastics&uid=1066303&setcookie=yes
and
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=cache:zvszNowrPjAJ:www.chemsoc.org/networks/learnnet/green/docs/plastics.pdf+corn+based+plastics

This should help farmers by encouraging domestic growth of corn and soy.

[Javaman]

51. Yes and include more roughage in their diet, sorry couldn't resist.

[iconoclastic cat]

55. "Organic matter like feces could be the basis of it. "

"We produce tons of feces daily."

Yes, but I really don't want to wear that hose while I'm driving. Also, will this require that I visit Taco Bell twice a week?

[Tux]

56. LOL

No, we'll get it from sewage or Republicans speeches. No difference really. :hurts: :spank:

[mahina]

29. Once true,not any more.

At UH researchers are using solar energy to get hydrogen from water. For the military. It is being done, it will be done on a massive scale.
Just not by the US. Our window for developing clean energy is closing if we don't use it fast. Part of the problem is what people are so sure they know, that is no longer true. http://clean-air.org/

http://www.rmi.org/

[hatrack]

34. Still doesn't change the thermodynamics

There's no reason that the system you describe wouldn't produce hydrogen.

That still doesn't mean the process will produce a net energy gain, provided that the energy, materials and transport for the solar panels/systems are included in the energy accounting.

And, as I noted in the post above, there will be some limited applications for this technology. But it still will not replace oil.

[orwell]

39. You are correct sir.

This is another boondoggle. This is an energy sink pushed by the hydrocarbon industry. (Guess where they want to get the hydrogen from.)

Solar, even with recent developments, is an energy sink as well.

[mahina]

45. Please take a closer look at those links and see.

I am not interested in arguing for the idiot king. I'm just saying there is great opportunity for a renewable energy economy, one that is not based on fossil fuel. The work IS being done. Of course it's not a net energy gain in the development stages, but that is only the case for the initial phase. Very shortly that reverses. Here's another valuable wealth of information for you, hope you find reason to revisit your opinion.

http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid171.php#20H2Myths

[havocmom]

16. Nah, and they are gonna push the use of coal plants to make it.

And that is not good for the air, the kids, just about anything except the bank accounts of the energy industry that has been getting their ducks in line for this.

Remember back in the olden days, last year, when these same people were pooh-poohing peak oil? They were just putting off the discussion until they had the alternative all sown up in their greedy little paws. Not about to let anybody new into the top 1% club. Can't let any real innovators and entrepreneurs make a killing on some new energy drug for the addicted nation.

[rjbny62]

26. won't it be a lot less expensive when you can no longer get gasoline

at any price?

[Gregorian]

5. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Just remember- if bush approves of it, then....


The ONLY reason he's going for this is because it will require 1.5 times the amount of petroeum that is being used now. Burning gasoline is more efficient. OK, it has it's advantages. But the real issue is how to make hydrogen. If he were promoting photovoltaic technology, I'd be shouting with glee. But no, bush lets us down, yet again.

[aden_nak]

6. Bush plans to double the cost of oil, so we'll all switch to Hydrogen.

Now THAT'S problem solving.

[rooboy]

7. I swear this idiot looks in the mirror and sees Thomas Edison. n/t

[hatrack]

8. "Fantastic technology" as in "fantasy"

There may be some limited applications, but it is not going to replace oil.

But hey, why waste a perfectly good photo-op? After all, you get to look like Mr. Clean while funneling billions in tax cuts and giveaways to the oil industry for the Magic Someday Fuel. :eyes:

[havocmom]

18. Not gonna replace oil!?! `

Ya mean all that plastic stuff our society (and medical care) depends on can't be whipped up with hydrogen? ;)

[hatrack]

35. But . . . but . . . but . .

What about my plastic tiki-god garden lights that I got a Wal-Mart?!?! Say it ain't so! :evilgrin:

[sweetheart]

10. He's saying, "Do i put this in my nose?"

No bush, you stuff it up your ass.

[dubyaD40web]

11. Bush and hydrogen don't mix.

[Javaman]

52. bush* and oxygen don' t mix.

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. And where is he going to get the hydrogen?

Isn't most hydrogen today processed out of fossil fuels?

Where's the net gain in this?

[Justin54B20L]

14. See my post #13.

[Justin54B20L]

13. You may or may not realize, a move to hydrogen, in *'s plan, uses more oil

because the process he's proposing is not using Nuclear reactors to produce the hydrogen, which would be cheaper, but instead using a process that removes hydrogen from hydrocarbons, such as gasoline.

This move would only further increase the cost in oil, as it is more efficient to use gasoline than hydrogen from hydrocarbons, and it would greatly increase profit margins for oil companies who switch refining properties to make hydrogen fuel.

Not to mention that the problem with hydrogen based fuel, currently, is that it still requires a vast amount of space to store it in a vehicle, and vulnerabilities to immediate releases, such as vehicle crashes.

[mahina]

31. Have you checked out the hypercar?

Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain institute solved those two problems a few years ago and gave the techonology to the auto companies so it could not be suppressed. That is why there are prototypes now from most manufacturers. BWM has several iterations already. Please take a look at the links I posted above. Things are changing fast in this area.
Agreed we can't sensibly derive the hydrogen from oil, coal or nuclear.

AND no single technology is the answer, we will need a number of solutions. Solar, PV, hydrogen, wind, etc.

[Justin54B20L]

37. Sweet. Thanks for the updated info.

[mahina]

43. No, thank you for keeping an open mind!

Just as the mantra "I'm just one person, what difference can I make?" is just what the empire wants us to believe, "It can't be done" is another.
Waiting for "them" to do it is about as futile as anything I can think of...but WE can go ahead and move mountains without them anyway. Keep the faith baby!

[garybeck]

15. FOLKS, HYDROGEN IS ***NOT*** AN ALTERNATIVE FUEL!!

Hydrogen is a scam. Bush wants it because it only means more oil use.

Hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is only an energy storage. In order to get Hydrogen you have to use energy. All the conventional sources of fuel - coal, oil, nuclear, will be used to create hydrogen fuel.

This is nothing but a scam.

Only if renewable energy sources are used to create hydrogen, which is possible, does it create any kind of a solution. But the renewable energy sources are not a part of his plan and they could just as well be used to create electricity for our existing energy demand, without switching over to hydrogen.

Please don't be fooled (or fueled) into thinking hyrdogen is a renewable energy source. It is not.

Gary Beckwith
Solar Bus Educational Project

http://solarbus.org/index.shtml

[pinkpops]

20. Hydrogen = nukes - the only viable source for electrolysis

[garybeck]

32. not necessarily true

any energy source can be used for electrolysis. I have perosnally used solar energy (photovoltaics) to produce hydrogen.

solar, wind, hyrdo, nuclear, oil, coal, you name it.

hydrogen is just a way of storing energy. it is fairly efficient in doing so. the overall efficiency of the energy cycle depends on many things inlcuding how the hydrogen is used (can be burned in an internal combustion motor just like gas, or run through a fuel cell to produce electricity) and other factors.

the reason this is a scam is because it does not even address the issue of hydrogen production. it's just a way of appearing to be environmental when the real problem is not even being raised.

by the way, the dems are just as bad on this. i've seen dems touting hydrogen as the solution to the energy problem without even addressing how it would be produced. either they are uniformed, stupid, or deceiptful. I don't know which.

either way, we can't allow them to scam us into thinking hydrogen in itself is an energy source or even remotely a solution to a problem.

[shadowknows69]

17. he shoveled us this sh*t 5 years ago

and Gods help me I almost believed him then. Where's my hydrogen car George. Oh wait first, where's my decent job so I can afford my hydrogen car?

[fryguy]

19. a boon for his coal industry friends

since his plan calls for the overwhelming bulk of the hydrogen to come, not from renewable sources, but from converting fossil fuels such as coal. coupled with the lax regulations for coal burning and mining, and this "green" energy source will cause more pollution than regular internal combustion cars.

if * really wanted to reduce our dependency on foreign energy sources he'd call on legislation requiring increases to the MPG standard, lower the speed limit, and pump money into research on fuel efficiency measures.

this is just a dog and pony show to hide the windfalls he's giving to his oil & gas friends.....

[Puzzler]

28. The cost of hydrogen

Promoting hydrogen is a double "win" for Bush:

1) He knows (or his puppet-masters know) that it will take decades for this to become a viable fuel source, in the US anyway. Thereby making it look like he's doing something now, when he knows that it will not have any impact on the oil industry in the foreseeable future.

2) Even though hydrogen is abundant, it is not abundant on earth in a gas form. It's mainly found in water, which requires lots of energy (read: coal, oil and nuclear electrical power) to "produce" the hydrogen. A win for Bush and his energy-buddies again, if the idea ever gets off the ground


Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the promotion and investigation of alternative fuel technologies (like hydrogen). But if Bush really was serious about US oil-consumption, then he would do something about the promotion of hybrid cars and the manufacture of smaller more fuel-efficient American cars. That's something that can be done right now (today!!!). And as we know, he (and his cronies) have zero interest in doing this. Is it going to take the collapse of GM to change is mind? For the wrong reasons, of course.


-P

[Old and In the Way]

21. A centralized, cost intensive energy source.

The whole idea here is to maintain the means of production/sale in the hands of a few.

Why not look to decentralized energy solutions (solar, wind, wave)? Because that does not fit with the Bush/Big Oil energy gouging model.

[Massachusetts]

23. "We're too dependent on foreign sources of energy."

[the other one]

24. Hydrogen as a by-product of petroleum, of course.

[NAO]

25. How about reliable, efficient, top-quality publicly owned mass transit

as an alternative to the "everyone has their own car that burns fuel"?

Now that is a REAL alternative. That would go farther toward making us foreign oil independent and putting us on a TRULY SUSTAINABLE course than any modification of the (whatever) fueled car.

A few weeks back I saw a story on the news about how bad traffic has become. They gave statistics about how much time people spend commuting and how many billions of dollars were lost in commute time and they showed clips of super wide freeways packed full of cars and gridlocked.

No mention was made of how GM and Standard Oil were charged with conspiracy back in the 1950s for buying up and dismantling the public transit systems that would have prevented this catastrophic loss of time and burning of fossil fuels.

[Canuckistanian]

27. Really? How much per barrel does Hydrogen cost?

I suspect the price will go up as soon as people begin buying hydrogen powered cars.

[The_Casual_Observer]

30. The 2X premium gas price sounds wrong and incredibly low

No way is it that cheap. That story is a scam, that fueling station is a fake.

[hatrack]

36. I agree - that's way, WAY too cheap

But then, Bush uses Potemkin audiences, so why not Potemkin hydrogen pumps? :eyes:

[bunny planet]

42. Yes, I can't imagine that the fueling station is a reality. Hydrogen is

expensive to tranport, piping and distributing it is fraught with problems, leaks are common and it is extremely corrosive to pipelines (and engines) and highly, highly explosive. Not a safe or cheap alternative at all.

WTF

Try carpooling and conservation instead Preznit. Try reviving mass transit, like light rail on a countrywide basis.

Oh never mind.......:mad:

[hatrack]

49. An example: the lowly tanker truck

An average gas station along a busy interstate or federal highway will sell, on average, about 25 tons of gasoline a day. Currently, this demand can be met by one trip by one 40-ton tanker truck.

Now, consider hydrogen. Given the extremely high pressures at which hydrogen would have to be confined, most of the truck's weight, whether loaded or empty, would consist of the containment system(s), yielding a truck able to transport about a ton of compressed hydrogen, give or take.

If you're talking about the concept of simply "replacing" oil with hydrogen, consider what this simple fact means. Consider the number of fuel trucks it implies will be necessary. Multiply by 25 (give or take) the number of tanker trucks on the road, and don't forget that each truck will demand fuel, lubricants and energy/resources for their construction.

Liquid hydrogen? Well, maybe, assuming that the BP or Amoco station on the corner has the capacity and electric/cryogenic capability to do what only NASA has any record of doing on a really large scale in the United States.

[patcox2]

33. Hydrogen is an alternative to batteries, not to fossil fuels.

hydrogen is not an energy source, it is an energy storage system. When will the press figure that out and call this idiocy what it is. bush only touts hydrogen because then we will have to build 100 nuke plants to make the hydrogen.

[Rosco T.]

54. and batteries can run electric motors...

in pure electric cars.

You could use Wind power to generate the juice to make the Hydrogen.

I guess Halliburton must have figured out how to make money, so now it's on the table.

[Dissenting_Prole]

38. There's more hydrogen in a gallon of gas...

than there is in a gallon of hydrogen. Strange.

[triguy46]

40. THIS IS A FRAUD

Please, someone, stop this insanity. Hydrogen is NOT the answer! Hey, you don't have to take my word for it. Read The Long Emergency. It'll scare the you know what out of you.

[bunny planet]

41. Perhaps he should read 'The Long Emergency' by Kunstler.

There is a whole chapter devoted to all of the possible alternative fuels. Hydrogen is just not practical, inexpensive, or most of all safe. It is not a viable alternative for automobiles at least as far as this book reports.

I know His Fraudulency only reads one page papers and short books about goats, but perhaps he can manage a chapter.

[shantipriya]

44. Bush & Hydrogen

Does the bufoon know what is Hydrogen? I doubt it.

[Vogon_Glory]

46. Subtext: Bush Touts Hydrogen To Extend Status Quo

I think that it's becoming clear even to former English majors like yours truly that Dear Leader's touting of hydrogen as an alternate energy source is a smokescreen for extending the use of fossil fuels as the chief source of energy supply here in the US. Even though the cost for fuel cells is beginning to decline, manufacturing, storing, and shipping hydrogen is expensive and there are lots of bugs yet to be worked out. About fifteen years out, say the pundits, and I remember that's at least as long as many of those same pundits said that hydrogen fusion would be practical, too.

Personally, I think touting hydrogen means touting an expensive, glitch-ridden technology that would insure that fossil fuels and internal combustion motors would be the status quo for years to come.

If this country was smart (We aren't; our fellow citizens voted for Gee Dubya twice and have been electing Republican majorities since 1994), we would be working on fuel cells that use carbohydrates like alcohols and sugars, which would be more energy-efficient and less-polluting. We would be ramping up production of hybrid cars. We would be working on much better batteries and ways to make solar panels far, far cheaper.

:argh:

[Lisa]

47. classic pic of him looking into the nozzle ...

"Hey! There's nuthin' in here. Too dark to see proper ... lemme light a match."

[hunter]

48. And my next car is going to be powered by fairy dust!

:sarcasm:

We would all do well to remember that everything George W. Bush touches turns to shit. (If we could develop shit powered cars, maybe we'd really have something...)

[Lisa]

57. yeah -- if we could develop engines that ran on BS ...

... * could solve the peak oil crisis all by himself. (Good call, hunter.)

[zanne]

53. What's up with that?

We all know this guy. What's in it for him?

[Megahurtz]

59. Yeah, perfect call!

What's in it for him? We could all probably figure that one out.

[tabasco]

58. Maybe we can import the hydrogen from Mars.

Why doesn't he propose conservation and other alternatives that will ACTUALLY WORK ?