• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

National energy policy

What do you think the US government's national energy policy should be?


  • Total voters
    30
1) No, there is no confusion, fossil fuels is where current hydrogen is obtained from, not electrolysis. I'm telling you how it is not how it could be.


2) hydrogen is not a natural storage medium, it requires storing and that's the biggest problem facing hydrogen, it's too unstable to handle for normal conditions. .

Basically it comes down to two problems. One you don't get that the future is electrolysis and converting excess energy to hydrogen is now being done for green houses. Two, you don't get it's not a problem to store hydrogen. Somehow you are confused. How about an example of a green house where they take the excess solar energy during the winter and convert it via electrolysis to hydrogen. The medium that they use to store the energy away for the winter when there isn't much light for their solar panels? Would that help you understand? Now imagine wind turbines instead of solar panels supplying the electricity and the excess going into hydrogen if it can't be used by others on the grid or if it is a house off the grid.

I'll get you multiple links for wind can supply the worlds energy like 200x over and turbines within our own country can supply all our current and future demands too. later though.
 
The last I heard, whether by electrolysis or via extraction from methane, it takes more energy to get hydrogen than you get from burning it.

Of course, getting the sun to extract the hydrogen for you is a pretty good strategy, but the issue is scalability. We need to be able to convert a substantial portion of our infrastructure by 2015, and it seems like we probably won't be able to do that.
 
Basically it comes down to two problems. One you don't get that the future is electrolysis and converting excess energy to hydrogen is now being done for green houses. Two, you don't get it's not a problem to store hydrogen. Somehow you are confused. How about an example of a green house where they take the excess solar energy during the winter and convert it via electrolysis to hydrogen. The medium that they use to store the energy away for the winter when there isn't much light for their solar panels? Would that help you understand? Now imagine wind turbines instead of solar panels supplying the electricity and the excess going into hydrogen if it can't be used by others on the grid or if it is a house off the grid.
Unbelievable, right back to square one, the very issue concerning hydrogen is storage and safety as has been illustrated by the links I provided earlier and explanation on how low it's activation energy is - recall the Hindenburg video and posts there after?
The future will not be hydrogen - that's just a gimic by the politicians and industry.
 
Unbelievable, right back to square one, the very issue concerning hydrogen is storage and safety as has been illustrated by the links I provided earlier and explanation on how low it's activation energy is - recall the Hindenburg video and posts there after?
The future will not be hydrogen - that's just a gimic by the politicians and industry.

Don't let reality hit you on the way out.
 
The last I heard, whether by electrolysis or via extraction from methane, it takes more energy to get hydrogen than you get from burning it.

Of course, getting the sun to extract the hydrogen for you is a pretty good strategy, but the issue is scalability. We need to be able to convert a substantial portion of our infrastructure by 2015, and it seems like we probably won't be able to do that.

Yes, it certainly takes more energy to make it than we get back out of it. However there's no other way to store it sometimes. Say for instance you have a green house not connected to the power grid. How do you store the wind energy for those non windy days. Or how do you store the suns energy for those winter months. The best way is to convert it to hydrogen.
 
If that's the case, then hydrogen clearly is not going to help us much...
 
Yes, it certainly takes more energy to make it than we get back out of it. However there's no other way to store it sometimes. Say for instance you have a green house not connected to the power grid. How do you store the wind energy for those non windy days. Or how do you store the suns energy for those winter months. The best way is to convert it to hydrogen.

my bold-

We need a significant breakthrough in storage batteries, for one thing.

There was a fairly recent significant improvement in the efficiency of photovoltaic batteries, improving the cost per Kwhr produced to $.08 to $.10. They are becoming competitive. Connecting solar arrays to the grid in the sunbelt will be helpful in powering the entire country in the not too distant future.
 
my bold-

We need a significant breakthrough in storage batteries, for one thing.
From the standpoint of elements, batteries as they are today are probably as good as it gets. Battery technology today has not changed since Volta invented the first dry cell nearly 2 centuries ago.
So what's the next step? Capacitors, superior to batteries in every single way except storage. Capacitors just don't store that much energy as a function of their size in contrast to a dry cell. How to get around that? Nano-tubes seem to hold a promising answer.
All of which are far safer than hydrogen.

tryreading said:
There was a fairly recent significant improvement in the efficiency of photovoltaic batteries, improving the cost per Kwhr produced to $.08 to $.10. They are becoming competitive. Connecting solar arrays to the grid in the sunbelt will be helpful in powering the entire country in the not too distant future.
AS a means of energy production perhaps, Organic photovoltics are very promising but the efficiencies still need to be worked out. Quantum dots are another good direction.
 
Hi Folks... I haven't been on the site much lately because I've been focusing on my steam plant... the thing is nickle and diming me to death but it's a week or ten days from finished to produce the electricity for my home so I take advantage of the cooler weather to finish it...

I saw this link that I thought was significant to this thread and thought I'd share it with you guys... Bioenergy pact between Europe and Africa with the big bucks will come energy at a reasonable rate for the cost of production... I hope!
 
Back
Top Bottom