Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010
From: Tkalbfus1 (tkalbfus1_at_aol.com)
Date: 09/25/04
- Next message: charliew2: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Previous message: Tkalbfus1: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- In reply to: william mook: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Next in thread: K. Jones: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Reply: K. Jones: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 25 Sep 2004 17:55:27 GMT
>Energy is a strategic resource. That means its cost impacts the rate
>at which the economy grows or doesn't grow. Look at the price changes
>over the past 30 years following the rise of OPEC. There is a clear
>correlation between the cost of primary energy and the rate of
>economic growth. Plainly providing a subsidy that hides the true
>cost of a technology that in the end increases the cost of energy is a
>recipe for economic disaster.
>
Energy throughout history has always cost something. In the past, when gasoline
was more expensive in current dollar terms, the economy still grew and became
more efficient. As the economy became more efficient, more efficient ways of
getting oil out of the ground and getting gasoline from that oil became
available. But when you get down to it, no matter what technology was applied,
the Middle East always had more oil than we did so the technology made getting
oil from the middle east just as much cheaper as getting it on our own
territory. The problem with switching energy sources is that hydrogen cannot
compete with gasoline, since there is no current profit from the manufacture of
hydrogen for cars, there is no incentive to make the extraction of hydrogen gas
less expensive while their is plenty of incentive to make the extraction of
crude oil from the middle east and the extraction of gasoline from that oil
less expensive. All these savings of course go into the pockets of the OPEC
member nations instead of our own. I'd rather not look at the oil that OPEC has
to sell. You see there is always the threat of real cheap oil that prevents us
from developing alternate energy sources in the private market. Oil has a huge
downside risk, so no one would dare compete with OPEC too much. Now OPEC can
always tighten the oil supply and retrieve revenue from us while keeping down
competition from us by threatening to produce under our costs if we do.
Government can come to the rescue with an industrial policy that makes gasoline
gradually more expensive and makes hydrogen less so. Part of the hydrogen
subsidy can come from a gas tax, but the majority must come directly from the
taxpayer because private industry will not deliberately lose money they way the
government must to make this happen. the cost will slow growth for a time, but
then the economy will become more efficient in other areas to compensate. One
way it will compensate would be by producing more power plants. A hydrogen
economy would have a greater electrical demand than now, so the power companies
will build more power plants to meet the demand. If there are enough power
plants, then the price of electricity will go down and this will reduce the
cost of hydrogen. One result of the hydrogen economy is that untimately your
electrical utilitiy bills will drop as the power companies will scramble to
generate electricity more efficiently to meet demand.
Tom
- Next message: charliew2: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Previous message: Tkalbfus1: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- In reply to: william mook: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Next in thread: K. Jones: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Reply: K. Jones: "Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|