Another Breakthru in Hydrogen Energy Challenges Fossil Fuel Dominance...

[TM7]

.
Alright, sounds like good news and on the right track. Brits have discover method to 'liquefy' H2 for safety and normal dispensing methods.....Good......fyi...TM7
.
.
> Another Breakthrough in Hydrogen Energy Challenges Fossil Fuel Dominance
.
Another Breakthrough in Hydrogen Energy Challenges Fossil Fuel Dominance
.
 April 4, 2013 |   By admin   | 16 Replies  More  Alex Pietrowski, Staff Writer
Waking Times
Researchers at Virginia Tech have developed a new process that extracts large quantities of hydrogen gas from plants in a renewable and eco-friendly way, offering us another potential alternative to ending our dependence on fossil fuels.
After 7 years of research, Y.H. Percival Zhang, an associate professor at the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the College of Engineering at Virginia Tech, and his team have developed a new method of using customized enzymes to produce high quantities of hydrogen out of xylose, a simple sugar present in plants.>Zhang and his team have succeeded in using xylose, the most abundant simple plant sugar, to produce a large quantity of hydrogen that previously was attainable only in theory. Zhang’s method can be performed using any source of biomass.
This new environmentally friendly method of producing hydrogen utilizes renewable natural resources, releases almost no zero greenhouse gasses, and does not require costly or heavy metals. Previous methods to produce hydrogen are expensive and create greenhouse gases. [Science Daily]Hydrogen fuel has the potential to dramatically revolutionize the automobile market and reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Vehicle manufacturers are already developing cars that run on hydrogen fuel cells, which do not produce as many pollutants as regular gasoline cars. Currently in the US, the transportation sector produces 82% of total CO2 emissions in the country.>EIA estimates that U.S. gasoline and diesel fuel consumption for transportation in 2011 resulted in the emission of about 1,089 and 430 million metric tons of CO2 respectively, for a total of 1,519 million metric tons of CO2. This total was equivalent to 82% of total CO2 emissions by the U.S. transportation sector and 28% of total U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions. Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, March 28, 2012
Zhang’s method of hydrogen production will need to find its way into commercial markets, which could happen in about 3 years, before any significant impact on the alternative energy market is possible. Even though Zhang’s process addresses the previous obstacles to hydrogen gas production, including high process costs, greenhouse gas emissions, and low quality of the end product, large investment in technology development and infrastructure would still be necessary to transition to hydrogen fuel cars.>“The potential for profit and environmental benefits are why so many automobile, oil, and energy companies are working on hydrogen fuel cell vehicles as the transportation of the future,” Zhang said. “Many people believe we will enter the hydrogen economy soon, with a market capacity of at least $1 trillion in the United States alone.”
“It really doesn’t make sense to use non-renewable natural resources to produce hydrogen,” Zhang said. “We think this discovery is a game-changer in the world of alternative energy.” [Science Daily]A future where renewable energy replaces energy production using fossil fuels is inevitable. Some have gone as far as to illustrate that we have the potential to make this shift in less than 20 years, for example, Mark Z. Jacobson of Stanford University and Mark A. Delucchi of the University of California, published a study that shows it is possible to power New York State using only renewable sources by 2030.
Nevertheless, governments’ support of traditional energy production via fossil fuel subsidies, which amount to $1.9 trillion per year, as reported by the International Monetary Fund, is one of the main obstacles to the growth of alternative energy sources. The IMF estimates that $480 billion of the total is comprised of direct subsidies, which have the goal of making petroleum products more affordable.>A fossil fuel subsidy is any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers or lowers the price paid by energy consumers. There are a lot of activities under this simple definition—tax breaks and giveaways, but also loans at favorable rates, price controls, purchase requirements and a whole lot of other things. [Oil Change International]The remaining $1.4 trillion are comprised of “externalities”: “the effects of energy consumption on global warming; on public health through the adverse effects on local pollution; on traffic congestion and accidents; and on road damage.” (IMF) Current energy policies are established in such a way that fossil fuel companies do not pay for any of these “externalities”, and thus leaving these industry costs to be indirectly subsidized by governments.
Here are some more statistics about the energy subsidies in the US:>“…between 1994 and 2009 the U.S. oil and gas industries received a cumulative $446.96 billion in subsidies, compared to just $5.93 billion given to renewables in those years. (The nuclear industry, by the way.  received $185 billion in federal subsidies between 1947 and 1999.)”
Source: ForbesWith such policies in place, heavily influenced by large multi-billion dollar companies with strong government ties, is a rapid change towards renewable energy even possible? Are we ready to challenge our policies to shift financial support from harmful and damaging energy production to renewable technologies, and change our own behaviors to create a cohesive movement towards a cleaner and safer planet?
If breakthroughs in technology can offer salient alternatives to the economic stranglehood fossil fuels has on our economy, then we may realize a future of clean energy. One thing is certain, however, without practical alternatives there is no chance of changing the momentum behind extraction based energy toward clean energy.About the AuthorAlex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and an avid student of Yoga and life.
Sources:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130403104104.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_vehicle
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=23&t=10
http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/
http://grist.org/climate-energy/can-we-shift-to-renewable-energy-yes-as-to-how/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2013/02/14/government-subsidies-silent-killer-of-renewable-energy/
http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2013/032713.htm
This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

[Larry L]

Good grief! I don't know where to start on this article of pure BS. This must have been written by a politician  as it's no where close to being factual or true. Hydrogen in liquid form does not solve the problem with the fact that it is a LOW BTU fuel and you can't put enough of it in a vehicle (except maybe a 2 ton truck) to get across town. Their numbers on the carbon foot print is stated to make you believe that 80+% of the carbon generated comes from transportation- it does not and that's not even a close number. You also have to consider that hydrogen has a BTU rating of 783 as compared to propane, another gas, at 2460 per cubic foot. It still comes back to the issue that hydrogen will always have- you can't carry enough of it to do any good. Yeah, it's a clean fuel but there are zero emission engines out there already, but you can't have one. This is just political BS at its finest.

[blind ear]

Nothing will change unless it is to the advantage of the corporations that control the lobbyist. What is good for the planet and common man are tertiary or lower in today's socioeconomic environment. ear

[Shu]

I'm hopeful for new energy technologies. Unfortunately the energy density of petroleum products is higher than anything else so far. I would just like to get away from a dependecy on the middle east for oil.

[FPH]

NASA used hydrogen cells in their space vehicles, didn't they? I think if you look at carbon footprint from transportation,,,you have to include shipping than your numbers skyrocket.  But yes, plane H2 gas might not be energy dense,,next step is polymerizing for more E bonds.
.
.
..TM7

Sure, you just combine it with liquid oxygen and keep it at -400 or so.

[Larry L]

I would just like to get away from a dependecy on the middle east for oil.

WE could be there in less than 10 years but DC isn't going to let that happen. The BP rig that blew up in the Gulf of Mexico was an exploratory rig. They have been mapping the largest reservoir known to man that exists under almost the entire Gulf of Mexico and extends out into the Atlantic to Brazil. It's just off of the coast of Florida and runs across to the coast of Texas. The oil Hugo Chavez has been selling us comes off of it. The crude oil is of the light kind which means it has few impurities and is easily refined. Unlike the sulfur laden crap we get from the Arab countries. There's enough known crude to last the earths consumption for the next 3000 years and that's considering other countries becoming industrialized. There is a HUGE amount of natural gas there and it's under 8000PSI pressure. After the BP rig blew, they started hydrocarbon testing most of the Gulf and they found that this pool of oil is releasing gas at an alarming rate in the Gulf. The Gulf sea bed in places is cracked open and gas is escaping into the water. We can harvest it or watch it destroy the Gulf of Mexico. The Chinese are building rigs right off of our shores and selling us this crude. It's there, all we have to do is go get it. But DC says no. It's all about the money folks, there is no energy shortage.


FWIW, NASA has technology that they are USING that involves solar collectors in space. The energy is transmitted to earth via microwave energy and it is converted into electricity. Solar collectors placed around the world would produce enough electricity for several cities. So why can't you have it? Ask your politician.

[blind ear]

As has been stated before. Congress will guard their tax dollars/power first therefore they will continue to protect the major corporations that help in generating those tax dollars. Government will grow it's self to increase it's power over the citizens. The citizen's rights/power shrink with each increase in budget/taxes. ear

[dakotashooter2]

NASA used hydrogen cells in their space vehicles, didn't they? I think if you look at carbon footprint from transportation,,,you have to include shipping than your numbers skyrocket.  But yes, plane H2 gas might not be energy dense,,next step is polymerizing for more E bonds.
.
.
..TM7

Sure, you just combine it with liquid oxygen and keep it at -400 or so.

Which is a lot easier in space than on earth.............