[ExI] THE END for fossil power

[Kelly Anderson]

2011/4/3 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>>
>> What do you do with surplus? Dump it into synfuel.
>
> Why not dump it into hydrogen?  I understand not converting fossils to
> hydrogen, but water...
> Hell, it's the most abundant element in our Universe, seems to me we should
> get familiar with it.

Some of the main challenges with hydrogen vs. synfuel are:
1) Storage. Hydrogen being such a small molecule, it escapes any
attempt to contain it with relative ease.
2) Energy density. Hydrogen stores less energy per pound of fuel.
3) Expense. Hydrogen fuel cells (the most direct way to turn hydrogen
into electricity) are currently rather expensive.
4) Infrastructure. Converting from current fuel systems to hydrogen is
massively expensive. Current pipelines don't handle hydrogen well (see
point 1).
5) Public acceptance. People still equate hydrogen with the
Hindenburg. In some ways, hydrogen is kind of like nuclear power in
the sense that people don't understand the true risks. Technological
solutions, and public experience will overcome this, I hope.
6) Some places with lots of energy don't have lots of water. Arizona
(solar) Wyoming (wind). This probably isn't a major issue.

The energy density problem is particularly difficult in mobile
applications (cars).

Hydrogen sounds like a great idea. It is a great idea. We just need
more research to make it practical and we need to understand its
limitations, particularly with regard to energy density. Some schemes
for packing the hydrogen into latices have been proposed which would
solve this problem, if they can actually build them.

Of course, synfuels still have the familiar problems including
pollution and CO2 production.

-Kelly