Switch to Hydrogen Fuel, Wind and Solar energy
Why This Deafening Silence about Our Most Viable Solution to the Energy Crisis?
The ongoing debate, and the framing of it, between the Senate and the heads of the major oil companies, is a completely irrelevant and devastating approach to solving our energy crisis. The question is not whether the oil companies should or could solve the gasoline crisis. Rather, the question is how the government can immediately begin to stimulate alternative sources of energy and, furthermore, which of the contemplated alternatives they should stimulate or subsidize.
As alternatives, coal, nuclear, and ethanol pale when set beside the benefits of hydrogen as the potential for solving the domestic and world energy crisis as well as the crisis in global warming and pollution of the air, water, and earth. Hydrogen could be mobilized, quickly and universally, to solve our problem. It is far more ready to swing into action than the media and legislators are leading us to believe. When hydrogen is backed up and shored up with wind and solar, the latter especially for rural areas, the energy crisis would not only be solved quickly, cleanly, and efficiently, but this three-pronged approached would be exponentially more cost effective.
However, the transition to hydrogen, wind, and solar, to the almost total exclusion of oil, nuclear, and coal, would mean a massive displacement and reallocation of our nation's work force. Of course, with our current corporate globalization and its policy of labor outsourcing, there has already been a massive displacement of the work force. Ironically, this transitional initiative would usher in a vast new range of employment opportunities and bring us out of this chaos.
Of course, this transition would also have global effects that would mean a massive disruption of both domestic and international financial and employment systems. On the other hand, if properly forewarned and educated through the current global media outlets, the US and other nations could meet that challenge successfully.
Countries, such as in the Middle East, whose economies are solely dependent upon the oil industry, would be faced with the greatest near-term hardships. Nevertheless, in the long-term, a beneficial by-product of such massive realignments around the globe would be a dramatic reduction in conflicts between nations that is caused by the current and growing fierce competition for oil, exploitation of workers, formidable imbalances in finance and trade, and global warming and pollution of the earth.
If the US and the rest of the world are made aware of these impending worldwide changes quickly, we all have the financial resources and organizational knowhow to reorient our populations to a new set of industries on a new economic basis. In addition, we have the UN that could assist the international community in finding ways to mediate and work toward these goals cooperatively.
Please pass this on to fellow legislators, media outlets and spokespersons, and other national and international leaders.
We must not remain silent about our most viable solution to so many of our worldwide crises which is the energy triumvirate of hydrogen, wind, and solar.
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- Send to friend


You had better build the nuclear plants first...
so that you have the available power to develop hydrogen power.
Coal, 'clean' or dirty, is dirty. In the end, we may have to resort to coal heating when all else is gone...just to stay warm and alive in our colder climes.
Nuclear is clean. And the rest: wind, solar, and so on are not sufficient, by themselves, to power our population.
A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.
Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623
The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.
At the present,
At the present, hydrogen-fuel technology is a minus sum game: it takes more energy to produce hydrogen than is extracted in the process. The same is true for oil shale. Until such time as the mass production of hydrogen energy for the masses can be made truly cost-effective, it will remain a "just-out-of-reach" solution. As Grinch stated, using cheap nuclear power to produce hydrogen may be one avenue which deserves further research.
See this link for more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_fuel
Wind and solar energy take massive amounts of "gathering" space and equipment to produce a fraction of the energy required for current private and industrial usage. When used on a smaller scale (single-family home), however, wind and solar can make a difference in individual energy consumed. Until both of these technologies can be made more efficient in their use of space required, they will remain as supplemental to the overall energy needs of the public, and not a true replacement of petroleum.
For a relatively "immediate" solution, nuclear power remains as the most cost-effective, readily available, and clean replacement of mass-produced energy. Nuclear power will not solve transportation needs directly, but it would reduce the world's overall dependency on petroleum. Switching to nuclear power would also have the added benefit of reducing the amount of harmful emmissions introduced into our atmosphere. The drawback of nuclear power production is the problem of what to do with the "waste" materials produced in the process.
Our scientists certainly have their work cut out for them. Jim...?
Solar
Submarine USS Wahoo ss238
Maui Bill,
I was thinking, why dont they use solar in the Middle East and Africa, they could clean up, literally.
We all know what the temperatures are in the desert, its a win win situation.
Hi Wahoo. Yup, and the
Hi Wahoo. Yup, and the desert isn't good for much else...
P.S. Did you hear that Aloha Airlines closed down?