Would you favor one candidate over another if that candidate had a solid plan for switching the economy away from gasoline to a hydrogen based economy?
Given the research and development breakthroughs in recent years, its entirely possible for the switch to happen over a 10 year period.
So would you favor one candidate over another if it ment getting away from big oil companies?
2007-10-10 05:52:39 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Joe S.- There are many ways to extract hydrogen from water without great cost to the consumer. You could use wind power to generate the electricity needed to break the bonds and release hydrogen from water. Solar power could be used in the same way and aside from the initial investment for both of those there is no recuring cost. In addition the new nuke power plants (some 30 of them) are going to be high heat gas cooled designs. The waste heat from those plants alone could be used to generate more than enough hydrogen to cover US demands.
Its funny that most of the people that are against hydrogen powered cars are the ones that are either tied to big oil or farms that produce bio fuels.
2007-10-10 11:27:58 · update #1
Steelegrave - Hydrogen is actually safer as a fuel than gasoline. Why? Because during an accident gasoline spreads in a pool around the vehicle. Hydrogen would rise into the air thus actually giving the people within the vehicle a greater chance of survival.
Oh and incase you didnt' know. It was proved that it wasnt the hydrogen that causes the disaster. It was instead the coating that was applied to the fabric the zepplin was made of.
2007-10-10 11:35:38 · update #2
Not on that issue alone but it certainly would be something I would look very closely at. I do favor hydrogen power. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. It is renewable and sustainable. With the proper incentives I believe research and development and the manufacture of devices to separate the hydrogen from other substances and to use it are something Americans can lead the way in doing. The 10 year period is doable.
2007-10-10 06:11:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one president could sit through a 10 year period to get hydrogen to the mainstream. I wouldn't believe they could deliver on the promise. I look to the auto industry to introduce this; Honda has been working at it for some time with good results. They'll be ready to deliver hydrogen powered vehicles in 10-20 years. Policy will play no role in automobile engine innovation, once the technology exists they will be instrumental in changing policy to accommodate, but we're putting the cart before the horse if we expect politicians to do this now.
2007-10-10 12:59:20 · answer #2 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Oil is not only a detriment to the environment, it is what gives many terrorist sponsoring nations power. It shapes our international policy and defines who we are as a nation to a greater degree than most realize or want to admit. Additionally, relying on ethanol has increased food prices and provides only minimal reduction from our dependence on oil.
This is one issue that would sway me to one candidate provided there were no other issues on which I strongly disagreed. By the way, BMW has a hydrogen hybrid car available. It is possible.
2007-10-10 12:59:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have yet to see a feasible plan where the production of hydrogen is net positive in terms of energy.
Hydrogen as a fuel is a red herring.
2007-10-10 12:56:16 · answer #4 · answered by joe s 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
it would take more than one issue to cause me to favor a candidate over another... but this would be a large step towards earning my vote.
2007-10-10 12:56:11 · answer #5 · answered by pip 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yeah I really want to be around 20,000 mini Hindenburgs when I'm leaving the game.
2007-10-10 12:59:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
That would be just one of many platforms.
2007-10-10 12:57:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋