We have alternate fuel, so why don't we embrace it?

Question

We have hydrogen, air, and nuclear energy. So why doesn't the world fully start to convert to it?...Cars are a great example, we have the technology but only a few models are avaliable that actually use fuel saving technology...so why?

Answer 1

It costs people more money, if you don't count indirect things like global warming or needing to be in the unstable Middle East.

The fossil fuel industry has great political power.

Now that global warming has been proven to be real and (mostly) man made, you'll be seeing a lot more activity.

Answer 2

Whoa, correction. Vegetable oil fuels get EXACTLY THE SAME fuel economy as regular diesel. Oil is oil. It is true that ethanol gives lower fuel economy than gasoline, but they both suck.

Why don't we convert? WE ARE... but you must realize the auto industry moves at the speed of a glacier. It takes 10 years from drawing board to showroom. The industry is heavily committed to hybrid and biodiesel-friendly, but the stuff is in the pipeline. And frankly what GM has coming is better than what Toyota has coming.

Hydrogen is not ready for prime time. We can make it, we can burn it (inefficiently or expensively) but we can't STORE IT, and nobody has any good ideas on that.

Anyway, hydrogen is just a way to transfer electricity from powerplant to car, and we already have better ways to do that, i.e. electric cars.

Electric cars work, not a problem. Except the auto industry rebelled against California's attempt to force them to do electrics, and crushed them just to teach California not to mess with the auto industry. Now, GM is going "D'ohhh" as they reinvent the electric car they already had, in the new Chevy Volt.

What about the battery problem? No problem, add an inexpensive gas/diesel/SVO engine that can power the car when the batteries get low. Now you only need 40 miles battery range, which is easy... that's more than most people drive in a day, so that gas engine will never run except when they take long trips. They could go 3 months without buying gas.

However in the short term, if you want this technology, build it yourself. Any diesel runs biodiesel. SVO conversions are not that hard. Thousands of people have converted a gas car to electric, and once you have an electric, just add a small generator and you have a strong plug-in hybrid. Passing a smog test can be an issue on a hybrid conversion, but not if you start with a <2006 diesel car/truck, because those are exempt.

Answer 3

The truth is that we don't quite have it right yet.

Hydrogen costs more energy to extract from every source than the energy that it releases. Air is roughly twice as expensive as conventional power, and is intermittent on top of that. Nuclear energy is dangerous because the waste needs to be protected for a longer period than any known civilization has ever lasted.

We're working through these issues and as oil prices rise some of these problems of price resolve themselves naturally. Solar prices are going to cut in half in the very near future, wind is close, we just need a better way to set up infrastructure, and we will get a boost from nuclear in my opinion as well.

Cars are a perfect example. The only known electric cars that run like current models and not the slow or narrow futuristic kind are the Tesla at $99,000 and the Phoenix at $45,000. While 45 might sound good, the truth is that it only reaches that because it's selling to fleets and can easily get $30,000 back for offsetting. That will run out soon.

Cars are coming too, just 5 years out we'll see EV's on the road. There are 3 batteries now that fill the need, and I think will see the inside of EV's soon. Altair, A123 and Firefly.

Answer 4

The world uses a lot of oil and is probably not going to be concerned about looking to harness another mass energy plan until the oil runs out. This is due to huge profits that go to the oil companies for more exploration and drilling sites and technology to drill these sites. It's a procrastination thing: "Why fix what already works?"

As a personal opinion, I would think that the urban areas in our world should try to use 10-20% of its total power from sources that produce the minimum environmental impact possible. Ex: houses partly powered by solar cells; small wind generator towers; smaller gas powered vehicles (1000 lb dry weight passenger vehicles with a 2.7 liter engine versus 5000 lb+ suv's with 5.7 liter engines); etc.

Some of these technologies are in use right now. There must be companies willing to research and refine these technologies to make them more usefull and practical though.

Answer 5

Because of all the oil companies. If we start using other types of energy, or alternate fuel they will lose money, or even run out of buisness. I agree with Bob, the fossil fuel industry does have a lot of political power. Plus it would be expensive to use some other energy source. But I would like to see a change in the use of fossil fuels. Because in my oppinion we are using way to much than the earth has stored for us. So, to sum it all up the main answ., like so many of us has pointed it out is= money.

Answer 6

Thats a very good question and the best answer I can give you right now from what I know is that the oil companies and people who are making billion of dollars every year off of us and the world don't want to give up their profits or loss their great business. Its all about money and the control of it. If the world, mainly the peole in power (big oil companies) cared about things like the environment and peoples quality of live and cheaper feul or even free energy (which is possible but they would never want you to know that), they would have switched to better cleaner more efficianct (or at least the potencial to be) feul and energy decades ago. There is much more that can be said about this but that is what I know for now. I hope you understood.

Answer 7

In spite of what the voices in their heads tell people, it comes down to this:

Energy Density, Cost, and By-products

1. Nuclear energy is the most dense form of energy known to man. A 50lb fuel bundle can power an average house for over a decade. But no one is willing to build "one fuel bundle reactors" for each home; it's too expensive. The issues with nuclear are to do with its history of development, the inability of our nervous systems to recognise the hazard (we "feel" heat and "see" light, but not other types of radiation ... like UV) and waste disposal.

2. Oil is the second highest density fuel known to man. It has obvious drawbacks, too.

3. Vegetable and animal oils are the third densest energy-wise, and are the original source of crude oil. Just not crushed and cooked under tons of rock. They do not have as high a BTU or calorie value as petroleum (8,700 cal/kg vs 10,000 cal/kg ... all oils are not created equal) so you do not get as much mileage, it is net zero improvement. Though slightly cleaner than petroleum oil, what is the use of burning food in cars?

4. Alcohol ... same answer as #3, other than the forming petroleum part.

5. Chemical batteries are an energy storage medium, not a source of energy. They have to be charged to work.

6. Air? Do you mean compressed air? There are companies in Europe that build compressed air powered city cars now. The range is limited, but they are environmentally benign and the technology is simple. Yet again, this is only a method of storing energy as pressure, it is not a source.

7. H2 is another storage medium ... energy is put in as electrolysis, energy is released as combustion. Cars don't burn water. Water doesn't burn. The problem with H2 is the "gas tank"; it takes an incredible amount of energy to compress H2 gas to the point that you wouldn't have to pull a trailer behind you for a gas tank. The US DOE is sponsoring studies into carbon fiber fuel tanks, but they aren't cheap. There is not enough carbon fiber manufacturing capability to keep up with current demand let alone more demand. And an oil sponsored government is not in a hurry to prove it works. They want proof of concept by 2015, that is not even commercialization of it, just prove it is as cheap as oil.

I hope that helps you understand that:

1. Nuclear (solar is fusion) is the only SOURCE of energy in the solar system. All other energy is a product of that, whether chemical, potential, kinetic, electrical, whatever.

2. Every form of energy, no matter how environmentally benign has its +s and -s

3. Hairless apes haven't figured out how to use fire, yet. Alternative energy might take a while.

Answer 8

Good question. I've thought the same thing. I suppose it's politics and oil money. If you'll note, you do see the major car/oil companies working on development. Once they can turn as high or a higher profit on the new technologies and they can shift the focus from their huge companies off of oil, we may see something happen. Until then, it's "the man" keeping us down. Actually, after that, "the man" will still be keeping us down, but the world may be cleaner.

Answer 9

Like everything else in the world, the answer is - follow the money. All alternatives to gasoline are still much more expensive than gasoline. That may change in five or ten years, when the price of gasoline increases about 50% and the price of, say, advanced battery technology, drops about 50%.

Answer 10

And technology/energy sources in addition to the ones you've mentioned.

"Four Invisible Forces. There are four forces that have worked together to create this situation."
-- The wealthiest families and their central banking institutions
-- National governments
-- Deluded inventors and con men
-- All of the rest of us

The article focuses on alternative energy technology that has not made into the open consumer markets, and cites the above as the reasons. Rather than butcher it up further, I hope y'all will give it a look:
http://www.wanttoknow.info/freeenergy#4