Text 11764, 70 rader
Skriven 2007-02-07 23:05:02 av Josh Hill (15204.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Cath0licism and Creati=nism
=======================================
On 7 Feb 2007 05:20:01 -0800, "ravend03x" <rkimd3@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Feb 2, 7:09 pm, Josh Hill <userepl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The best bet in the short term, I think: E85 made with cellulosic
>> ethanol (price $1.30 per gallon). Adds virtually nothing to the cost
>> of a vehicle, in fact, several million vehicles can already use it.
>> Followign close on, plug-in hybrids (suitable batteries should be
>> available in five years or so). Vehicle cost a few thousand more than
>> a standard vehicle at current prices, but that may change -- certainly
>> companies like Toyota are working to drive the price differential
>> down. A few years later, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, which will
>> likely make the internal combustion engine obsolete. Look for it all
>> to happen once Bush is out and replaced by someone competent.
>
>I come a bit late to this conversation, so please forgive me if this
>reiterates later replies.
>
>I used to be a staunch supporter of hydrogen fueled cars until a
>friend of mine pointed something out.
>
>The plan to mass produce hydrogen from fossil fuels and the
>environmental impact of that process, let alone the fact that we would
>still be held captive by oil companies, foreign or otherwise, has
>dampened my enthusiasm for the hydrogen fueled car.  Don't get me
>wrong, I still like the idea of running a car on fuel extracted from
>water and having zero greenhouse emissions, but I don't think much
>money will be spent researching and developing these technologies when
>the option of using fossil fuels as a hydrogen source exists.
>
>As a final blow to my shining image of a hydrogen fueled car, I
>understand that the current administration fully supports hydrogen
>fuel as an alternative to gas.
>
>Kinda makes you go, "Hmmmm..."

Hydrogen would, as you point out, probably be made from natural gas
and then coal at first. Fortunately, it appears to be possible to
produce hydrogen from fossil fuels /with sequestration/ at the plant
so the CO2 wouldn't be released into the atmosphere. This is something
you can't do with an internal combustion engine.

As time and technology progressed, we could move on to hydrogen from
fission using high-temperature electrolysis, hydrogen from wind (which
can be done now but would be expensive), and then hydrogen from
fusion. It can also be made from biofuels. That would also be somewhat
more pricey than gasoline, but it has a beautiful consequence that
I've never seen mentioned -- if you sequestered the carbon from the
biofuels, you'd actually be /removing/ carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere with every mile you drove!

So I'd say that from a technological perspective the hydrogen picture
is rather rosy. Vis a vis Bush: interestingly, he's been right on in
the technological assessments in his speeches, which seem to come
straight from the DOE. The problem is his failure to act -- he
actually believes that industry will limit carbon emissions on its
own. But this administration will be gone in a couple of years, and
I'm optimist enough to assume that the next administration will be
wiser -- even Republican candidates like McCain say they're in favor
of some sort of carbon limit (as did Bush six years ago, before going
back on his word).

-- 
Josh

[Truly] I say to you, [...] angel [...] power will be able to see that [...]
these to whom [...] holy generations [...]. After Jesus said this, he departed.

- The Gospel of Judas
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)