Well, we now have a great focus on global warming. It ties in with our precarious temporary reliance on fossil fuels to deliver the energy required to maintain our desirable mobility and comforts, unsurpassed by the experience of the average person of past generations. I don’t think the average North American wants to give that up.
Recently we had the experience of $100 per barrel of oil. I recall that back in 1979, I paid 20 cents for a liter of gas. Recently, I paid over $1.00 per liter. Sure, the price has dropped more recently, but with the relentless improvement of the economies of Asia, particularly China. (1.2 billion people) and their sophisticated programs for ensuring fossil fuel supply for the future, us North American are soon going to be sucking air.
Yes we’ve looked at and developed alternative energy resources like wind power and solar and they really haven’t made a dent. We have had a proven source of energy lately, though, nuclear energy, but it appears to have bogged down in politics.
Now we can argue about the pros and cons of nuclear energy. On the down side, is the high cost of developing the plant. All the more reason IMHO to get on with further development when the price of oil is where it is now. Another problem with nuclear energy is waste disposal. My understanding is that at present there are 109 nuclear reactors in the states, each producing about 2 tons of waste per year that no one wants to dispose of in an abandoned mine of which there are more than enough especially in the Canadian shield. we need to measure our apprenshion for stored radiactive waste against climactic upheavel. We can’t come up with a perfect solution for our descendants, but we can provide the best outcome.
On the upside, particularly with Canada, we have an ubundant supply of uranium. Given that I’ve never heard of a decommissioned reactor due to economics by both the public and private sector, I can only surmise that nulear energy is cost competitive with fossil fuels.
Which brings me to hydrogen. According to this site, hydrogen is competitive with gasoline. Fair enough, but I understand that hydrogen production at present requires another fossil fuel, namely methane. however according to this site hydrogen can be produced by electrolysis from water through electricity. It seems simple enough. What I don’t know is the cost of this process. I’m sure that my whole dream depends on it. That is my major worry.
Here’s what I see. Human resources and our relatively cheaper (wrt to future fossil fuel costs) fuels devoted to a nuclear energy infrastucture for the production of hydrogen. Distribution similar or better than presently used for propane. There are a considerable number of vehicles today that use propane. Why not replace with a completely benign gas
(emmission wise) like hydrogen? Never mind that the only emmissions from the combustion of hydrogen is water.
In short, we can extract energy from the nuclear realm to produce electricity and produce a completely environmental fuel that won’t affect the global environment and that won’t affect foreign policy imperatives.