> Electrolysis powered by wind, solar, geothermal (Iceland already
> plans to be a big exporter of hydrogen).
[snip]
> reforming of methane or methanol at the service station or in the
> car
this sounds like daydreaming to me. Not that i am against daydreaming per se ;-)
its not that these specific __mechanisms__ for energy transformation don't exist or couldn't be designed in the lab, but making them work in the short to medium term for the good of the 6 billion people that make up our community is not so easy.
when evaluating various crystal ball approaches to the energy problem, i like to use the following rough guideline to best think about the technical challenges:
Crystal Ball Evaluation Guidelines
----------------------------------
(Version 1.0.0.beta123)
Energy
------
1.) harvesting raw fuels
2.) transporting raw fuels -- oil tankers, alaska pipeline, railroads, Hindenburg style balloons.
3.) fuel transformation -- gas from crude, "reformation of methane or methanol", electricity from hydrogen
4.) delivery infrastructure -- trucks, powerlines, gas pipes, rails
5.) power plant design -- you have to HAVE engines which run on the stuff produced in 1-4.
note too, that any discussion of pollution needs to take into account each of the steps above. so, for example, it does no good to say that electric cars do not pollute if the production plants which produce the electricity do. really one has to look at whether, for example, production of electricity in large plants, with __good__ stack scrubbers, beats all the emissions from gas-powered cars. And THEN, there may be other problems, like 5.) (where ARE the electric cars Detroit promised us???), 4.) (how do we get all that electricity to auto and truck drivers, can the existing electric grid sustain the new demand), etc etc...
so:
Collateral Damage Assessment
----------------------------
( numbers relate to Energy items above)
1.) local ecology (Alaskan permafrost, Iceland ???) 2.) oil spills, gas explosions 3.) processing plant emissions 4.) transport system emissions 5.) power plant emissions
so, when i read about future energy scenarios, one way to separate the wheat from the chaff is to see if the author is cognizant at least in some rough way of 1-5, if not, its likely just a passing fantasy.
but frankly, I've never really seen ANY decent crystal-ball for energy use. i believe its simply beyond capital's capability. yes, there are some good studies out of various pieces of 1-5 for a given fuel, but nothing all encompassing.
les schaffer
p.s. when i was a kid in the mid-60's, my dad brought home for me to read a NASA report on fuel cells, and he told me this would be the future. have YOU seen fuel cells yet???