Bryan said:
Hammy070 said:
Bryan said:
I want to emphasize the point I made before by pointing out that the statement above is equivalent to saying: "Batteries have to pass a point where they can be produced on a large scale reliably."
See my point?
Batteries are just a way to STORE energy, and so is hydrogen. You can't go "mining" for batteries to power the nation, and neither can you do that for hydrogen! Hydrogen has no function as a primary source of energy. Including hydrogen is any discusssion of potential future energy sources is irrelevant and highly misleading.
Hence, why I said "produced on a large scale reliably". I'm highlighting hydrogen's function, flexibility, and abundance. To depend on hydrogen, means we can use any form of energy to make it. If we depend on oil, we cant turn any form of energy into oil. Hydrogen being an energy dense liquid has the best of oil, but not the worst, and is
created, not simply sucked out from wherever it is, and of course, very clean. The challenge is to develop a multiple-energy source system, that doesn't have a single overlydominant source produce it all.
I think it would be far cheaper to make hydrogen wherever needed, than to drill holes, build rigs, geoanalyze, build silly pipelines that cause wars etc. We make it, however much we want, wherever we want, and it doesn't ever travel far. Persian gulf becomes free of all American bases! Middle east problems gone. etc etc etc, it's all so wonderful.
Trouble is, corporations will find it difficult to control if hydrogen supplies are determined by desire, from the individual, to the town, city, region or nation. If supply is that customized, then so is demand, then so is price. Not much money in something that doesn't require a multimillion pound investment just to see if the stuff is there or not.
Do you see? :shock:
It seems like you've gone back to being confused about hydrogen again!
Hammy, if you haven't heard, we're in an ENERGY CRISIS here. Converting energy into hydrogen (once you have the energy) is a relatively trivial operation. The big problem with making hydrogen is GETTING THE ENERGY TO DO IT. Even if we start using hydrogen to store our energy and we're still using oil as the
source for that energy, we will STILL have the same problems you mentioned above: drilling holes, building rigs, geoanalyzing, having American bases in the Persian Gulf, having Middle East problems, etc.
For the umpteenth time, FORGET HYDROGEN!! Let's stay focused on the central problem, which is DEVELOPING NON-PETROLEUM ENERGY SOURCES!
Contrary to popular opinion. We do not have an "energy crisis" at all. That would imply energy is disappearing, which is scientifically impossible.
What we do have is an addiction/dependency to a particular type of energy in a particular form. This is the actual problem.
Oil cannot be made from solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, hydro, wave etc. It is very inflexible and even creating it from coal, or plants, is just like giving a heroin addict methadone. My point about hydrogen is this: Imagine the year 2300, 20% of hydrogen is produced from coal. Coal runs out. 80% of hydrogen is produced elsewhere. Increased intensity of other methods as well as improving emerging methods, will fill the gap during the course of coals decline. We don't have to redesign every car/plane/truck-motorbike/etc. to run on the new mysterious energy that Bryan suggests we try and find, from somewhere that has it. :lost:
Oil is restrictive. Energy really is not the issue, if we could create oil from any form of energy now, we'd not have an oil crisis for a very very long time. So...imagine becoming dependent on hydrogen. Not only can it be produced from EVERY form of energy that we have. But basing the infrastructure on one fuel is also efficient. And hydrogen being more abundant than every hydrocarbon combined (by far) means any impending energy crisis will be because of other sources, not the dependency itself. Hydrogen as a form can be made from any source of energy. Oil cannot, and oil also is relatively rare, hence the crisis. Not an energy crisis, a form factor crisis of addiction.
Think of it in biological terms. Human beings run on ATP, nuclear energy generated inside the cells. We don't survive by eating ATP. But we can consume a vast range of matter, in so many forms to create that energy. That flexibility allows us to function in a variety of environments, hence the abundant life on this planet. Imagine our bodies were dependent on polyunsaturated fats alone. Certainly wouldn't be 6 billion of us, maybe a few hundred if we get lucky. Infact, life itself on earth wouldn't exist if it required a single source of external energy.
ATP is the Hydrogen equivalent.
FOOD will combine every method we know to make it.
The problem is, would a combination be enough? Well...what's the worst case scenario? We may end up using less, but at least we'll be dependent on a fuel that yields a minimum at all times. We will always have hydrogen if current renewables and ANYTHING else are dedicated to it's creation. There will always be a minimum supply. The same cannot be said for oil. It is already rare, and we certainly can't make it from anything.
Do you honestly think we'd have an "energy crisis" if solar panels, windmills, nuclear plants, hydropower, could create crude oil from water or anything else as equally abundant?
That's the beauty of hydrogen dependency, it depends not on it's availability, but OUR ABILITY to generate ANY kind of energy at all. That is why the energy crisis is about flawed thinking more than oil scarcity.
A hydrogen economy will fail if the hydrogen economy depends on limited, running out energy. BUT hydrogen by it's nature can depend on anything, and so EVERYTHING is a solution.
Can we find a renewable form of energy that is enough? Bryans suggestion of this doesn't solve the underlying problem, which is looking for another saviour. Even if we did find one, great, we can generate a lot more hydrogen, but even if we didn't we can still make it with what we've got. The life blood of civilization will still be flowing, we might get a cold, we might get disease, but we will never drop dead.
