AutoblogGreen

Since hydrogen is no answer at all to climate change due to its horrific inefficiency, this isn't the story that needs to be reported here.

This is:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23552526/

Reply

@1: Don't hold your breath... Or then again, based on your link, maybe you should?

Reply

Stories like that make me laugh(the one in the comment). There is a snow flakes chance in hell that the world will stop emitting CO2 today. If you're a shareholder in GM and/or Toyota I understand the complaining about a technology you don't believe will come to fruition.

But what good do stories like this do anyway? Raise awareness more than it is? I'm pretty sure most people are treating GW seriously. To me that study is just saying "Ok, stop making babies there's no point. In fact just go out and buy a 9mm so the Sun + Mother Earth doesn't have to bother killing you". Not very productive.

Reply

Steve, since hydrogen isn't efficient RIGHT NOW, that means it's not a solution? I'm not holding my breath for a hydrogen economy, but it certainly has a number of very attractive features, especially when compared to petrolium... Dismissing it outright is just short sighted.

Reply

"Steve, since hydrogen isn't efficient RIGHT NOW, that means it's not a solution? I'm not holding my breath for a hydrogen economy, but it certainly has a number of very attractive features, especially when compared to petrolium... Dismissing it outright is just short sighted."

It's simply not going to be efficient or cheap, ever. Certainly not compared to electrics. You're losing lots of energy on both production and use of it, and you can only reduce those losses so far. Find me one scientist in the field who thinks someone is going to come up with a practical H2 fuel cell with >70% efficiency, for example. And as for cost, that's just the physical properties of hydrogen; not only is it not found on Earth in nature in relevant quantities, unlike oil, but it's a complete PITA to store and transport -- very bulky, ridiculously leaky, explodes in concentrations from 4-75% and can detonate with incredible force, highly corrosive, enters other pipes and follows them to their destinations, collects under overhangs (NASA has lost a lot of building roofs this way; they recommend carefully monitored buildings whose roofs designed to be blown away cleanly). And on, and on, and on. Oh, and to top it all off, it destroys ozone. Brilliant!

On the other hand, li-ion batteries and supercapacitors are over 99% efficient, now, present-day. And the latest gen on the market is safe and long life. And in the lab right now, working toward commercialization, are dozens of other li-ion variants or similar chemistries, with 2, 3, even more times the current energy density. And it'll cost you a penny or so per mile to run your EV. And hardly takes any new infrastructure.

So, really, why hydrogen *at all*? There's just no reason.

Reply