Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010

From: Tkalbfus1 (tkalbfus1_at_aol.com)
Date: 09/29/04 

Date: 29 Sep 2004 14:42:59 GMT

>I can think of only *one* application where this isn't true. For the
>chemical processes where hydrogen is a byproduct, and the process is already
>profitable, it makes a LOT of sense to recover the hydrogen. This implies
>that the chemical engineering types could purposefully attempt to bias
>process design towards chemistry that favors hydrogen as a byproduct.
>However, even if this was successfully done, I doubt that enough hydrogen
>would be generated to displace fossil fuels, as fossil fuel consumption in
>the U.S. is truly immense.
>

And I suppose people will happily abandon their homes in coastal communities
when the Ocean Levels rise as they are willing to pay any price to keep on
using fossil fuels. Now imagine the Ocean levels rise 30 feet. What is the
value of al that real estate that is lost to the Ocean? A lot of people pay top
dollar for a house with an ocean view, and because of global warming, they may
lose those houses. Warming the Earth's oceans also fosters the conditions for
the creation of Hurricanes, how many homes will that wreck? My question is what
price extra are people willing to pay to avoid these calamities? Your saying
not a single red cent extra for their automobile fuel? But apparently your
saying that people are willing to pay the price in other ways except at the gas
pump. Now tell me, does that really make sense? I'm willing to pay extra to
avoid future climate change, because at least if you pay extra for fuel, you
are paying on the installment plan instead of all at once when you lose your
home. The use of hydrogen does not add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.
Technically you can say water vapor is a greenhouse gas, but the amount we
would add would be as nothing compared to what evaporates off the oceans, and
that hydrogen has to come from somewhere.

Producing hydrogen is like tree farming, if a farmer plants trees, takes care
of them and then harvests them 10 years later, he is actually paying the price
for bringing the lumber to market, yet he has to compete with the lumberjack
who somply chops down trees in virgin forests denuding the landscape and not
paying the price for growing those trees, he just aquires the trees with the
land he bought and once all the trees are chopped down, he simply buys some
more land and moves on. Now the clearcutting lumberjack can offer you cheaper
prices for the lumber to build your house with, but you have to ask yourself,
is it worth the price of buying the more expensive lumber from the tree farmer
who uses the same land over and over again, or would you rather save a few
pennies and turn forset into desert? Its the same sort of situation between
gasoline and hydrogen, if all you do is pay attention to the dollar price of
motor fuel and nothing else, your going to pay for all that savings later on,
or your children will.

Tom