The is a proposed offshore windpower plant CapeWind in MA that has been blocked by pols on both side of the aisle. It is billed as being able to produce ~1492000 MWh of electricity per year. This is a big wind power plant by US standards.

It takes ~200KWh of electricty to produce enough hydrogen to equal 1 gallon of gasoline.

If CapeWind were built (I hope it will be) and used soley to produce hydrogen, it would produce roughly the quivilent of 7,460,000 gallons/yr. Going by 2006 numbers, we used ~2.4 billon gallon of gas/yr in MA.

You wrote a well-founded argument and I hope you will continue to think about, research and discuss this issue.

On nuclear power, Anne Lauvergeon is my hero.

” Sorry. Our editor in chief has suggested that our articles be short. Otherwise the bots will get confused when trying to decide which talking points they are supposed to use while spamming us.”

…lmao INDEED!

Perfectly RIPE for a PALIN administration next go round since she wants us to use ALL OF OUR RESOURCES and seems to know her OIL as well as the NEXT YAHOO BUBBLE LIVING MOE RON in Washington!

And wouldn’t be so LIKELY to kiss/hug or bamboozle the Saudis into bombing us again! I’d stand next to her to protect us too!!!

W00T!!

How do we produce hydrogen cheaply and cleanly in the quantities need to replace gasoline and diesel?

If we use electrolysis of water, it takes approximately 200kWh of electricity to produce enough gasoline to equal 1 gallon of gasoline. Assuming 15-cent per kilowatt (much more expensive if solar is used), that would be around $30/gallon of for the equivalent amount of gasoline. Then you need to use additional electricity to compress the hydrogen to a high pressure in storage tanks for sue in vehicles. Take that 200Kwh of electricity per equivalent gallon and multiply it times 148 billion gallons of gas we use a year and you can see that none of us will see even a fraction of the wind power plants and or solar power plant built in our life-time to come close to producing that amount of power. Hydrogen fuel cells (now) are around twice as efficient as a combustion engine but still year away from being ready to replace the internal combustion engine.

The most common and cost effective method used to produce hydrogen now is reforming natural gas with steam. So you take an already burnable fuel and the add energy in the form steam to covert it into hydrogen and carbon products. So for every equivalent gallon (~2lbs of hydrogen) you create around 18lbs of carbon dioxide. Then you still need to use electricity to compress it. I think companies like Shell are salivating over the prospect of selling hydrogen produced with this method.

Using nuclear power to produce hydrogen is an option.

Iceland is leading the way with hydrogen, while Obama, Jarret, Axelrod, and Chu are dragging their feet, and pandering to Saudi Arabia.

Oil and Coal are devastating this country. Our foreign and domestic policies are all based on carbon, destroying our environment and our treasury in the process.

It’s amazing that Iceland–a tiny country whose financial situation is MORE dire than our own–can manage to innovate, but we cannot. Like Brazil, which is now completely energy independent, using something as crazy as sugar cane, Iceland isn’t obstructing its own future. Instead of spewing your paltry defenses of ObamaWorld, you ought to be asking yourself why they aren’t working harder to protect our treasury and our country, not to mention your gasoline prices, which are going UP.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1727312.stm

1. To people in the scientific community, Bush’s hydrogen plan was a joke- a make-believe world where your car runs on clean hydrogen that you fill up at the local hydrogen station or is produced in your garage, and it was about as close to a flux capacitor for your DeLorean as it was to a Honda FCX Clarity in your garage. The problem is that it takes more energy — a lot more with today’s technologies — to create a kilogram of hydrogen than a gallon of gas. And there’s no infrastructure in place to deliver the fuel to the hydrogen cars that quite a few of the car companies also developed at a major loss.
2. Obama’s Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, is a scientist of the 1st order. There is NO reason to think this decision was made on the basis of anything other than good science. This decision by the Obama administration is what happens when you appoint an expert in his field to oversee government programs. Next thing you know, useless boondoggles are being cut and rational decisions are being made.
3. The writer actually refers to Valerie Jarrett as “Iranian born Valerie Jarrett”. That’s a clue as to what level this article was written at.

I cannot think of a better reason to illegally take over a car company than to ensure they continue manufacturing cars propelled by the internal combustion engine, burning fossil fuels.

BINGO!