OCT 21

I think that there are ways around this issue. Is the guy thinking that distilled water needs to be coming from the tap? In a recirculating system, where the water is not exhausted (it stays within the system to be turned back into its 2 parts) , there would be very little issue it seems, think about how much water people use in their homes that is only used once? Also, maybe our wastewater treatment facilities could use our effluent to create power that would then be used to create hydrogen? A recirculating system creates other issues, like how does one make the two components again, how to transfer to the vehicle easily and the water out of the vehicle (it would be quite pure at this point), etc. What do I know?

so even in the hydrogen utopia, we will have to conserve, huh?

I'm no fan of the hydrogen economy, but this is just an argument against using water cooling for power generation. If you note, the actual water used to create the hydrogen is insignificant compared to the cooling water... if we produce the hydrogen with cheap wind (intermittency does not matter because hydrogen storage is cheap if done on a large scale) then there is no water lost as steam in hydroelectric cooling. Simple answer: no coal and no nukes. Biomass can produce hydrogen more efficiency by pyrolysis to syngas (H2 CO.)

If we are ever going to heach the hydrogen economy (which I seriously doubt... I expect we'll have the electricity economy instead) the wind of the Great plains will make that area the Saudi Arabia of hydrogen.

Doesn't the hydrogen react with oxygen to create water? Won't the water return to the system as vapor? Shouldn't the "waste" rain down and start the cycle again?

Did I misread, or is the article suggesting this report is centred on electrolysis as the sole way to create hydrogen? What about all the biological methods being researched to generate hydrogen from bacteria? And other means? I thought the electrolysis method was generally thought of as being too energy inefficient unless you have cheap electricity available (eg you live in NZ or Iceland with geothermal everywhere).

Another thing - is it realistic to suggest that the entire economy should be powered by Hydrogen? I would have thought that hydrogen would be a part of a suite of alternative energy methods. Use the wind in windy places, tidal for coastal, etc

My gut feeling from this article (not having read the study mind you) is that if you take one idea and blow it out of proportion, you subsequently get out of proportion answers like 'we'll have no rivers left'. I hope I'm wrong about the study...

whole this is supposed to power. If it's just for cars, I can see it being a problem since automakers won't want to store the wastewater onboard. Though having a discount for drivers who have their wastewater saved and pumped back into the service stations for local conversion back to hydrogen would be a great system.

I don't believe that this claim is possible, that our rivers would die when our society would be running with hydrogen... Besides, if it was true that our rivers were drying, wouldn't it be just good when water-levels otherwise would be rising because of the greenhouse gas emissions?

This study raises some important questions, yet the analysis is not entirely accurate. Electrolysis does not require significant amounts of water. The hydrogen extracted from a gallon of water using a hydrogen generator could drive a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle as far as gasoline vehicles travel today on a gallon of gasoline.

What is excluded from this report is the amount of water currently used to produce gasoline. The U.S. uses about 300 billion gallons of water/year for the production of gasoline, about three times the amount needed for hydrogen. Domestic personal water use in the United States is about 4800 billion gallons/year.

While this study focuses on the impact of using thermoelectric power to generate hydrogen, this is only one of the many methods to produce hydrogen and is far more water-intensive than its alternatives. The most common method for the production of hydrogen today is through steam methane reformation, which does not necessitate such a large amount of water. Additionally, nuclear energy* can produce high quality hydrogen in large quantities at a relatively low cost without any air emissions using conventional electrolysis, and hydrogen can be produced using anaerobic bacteria from waste water – a process that actually cleans the water while creating hydrogen for energy uses.

Whats more, this study only looks at electrolysis cooled with water; many electrolyzers are “dry cooled” just like a car radiator, using only 2.4 gallons of water for every kg of hydrogen – less than 1/10th the 27 gallons/kg number given in this study. At the National Hydrogen Association (which I represent), we see everyday the tangible steps that are being taken to move toward a hydrogen-based economy, which will have a positive impact on the environment by cutting carbon emissions, reduce foreign energy imports and improve our national security.

While each form of alternative technologies is explored, each has its own benefits and drawbacks. However, hydrogen holds the most promise because using certain hydrogen technologies will either cut or virtually eliminate emissions. It should also not be forgotten that many of the alternative energy solutions being explored can also be used to generate hydrogen as a fuel, such as using wind or solar energy.

To learn more about how hydrogen is generated, electrolysis and hydrogen technologies in use, please visit the National Hydrogen Association websitehttp://www.hydrogenassocaition.org/, the premier source for information about hydrogen and hydrogen technologies.

It looks like the petro industry has a propaganda hand in some of Webbers calculations.

Many industries are publishing propaganda on the web. They are using some of the same propaganda strategies of the tobacco indusry - whose propaganda was successful for 40 years.

Daniel Dingel has invented a car that runs on salt water. All he asks for is an economic break for the people of the Philipines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVhXrvCCILw

:- dis website is mad boring and dumb :(

I'm glad this website comes up on a Google search and that it's articles are open for comments. Clearly the report cited is one sided and like many government experts, this one is probably not accurate on his facts and research. Or perhaps another government employee (who works for us, the taxpayers) who's view or position is skewed somehow.

Hydrogen is clearly the way of the future. We can make hydrogen from waste products and capture the waste water from making hydrogen. We may not have all the answers, but we certainly didn't have the answers when we decided on using fossil fuel either.

Thank-you for the facts you have presented about the production and use of hydrogen as a viable and clean fuel source for the future. This further convinces me that Hydrogen cell cars and the Hydrogen economy are the right way to go. I will go and buy a 5 KW solar panel system when Nanosolar offers their cheap solar panels to the public, and get an electrolyzer and hydrogen storage tanks to produce and store the hydrogen I will need for my hydrogen cell car. Finally something that will benefit us all and be good for the environment.

Hello to Rex and anyone wishing to promote hydrogen as a viable energy source. I invite you to come to chat on Edmunds.com/Inside line/forums and do a search for hydrogen cell cars under 'new cars couples are considering'. The petro industry has a lot of friends there and I have been fighting the good fight. Rex, I hope you do not mind, I quoted you in one of my posts.
Please come and write some good responses. I am presently making an argument that hydrogen is cheaper to produce than gasoline, and that hydrogen cell cars are the future. BTW, Toyota just announced it will produce a long range hydrogen cell car, 500 miles on one tank of hydrogen,saw that on your hydrogenassociation.org website. Thanks and please come and talk at edmunds.com.