the proper versus current approach to "alternative fuels"

Oh gee once again to debate with a science genius who knows it all Oh well! First of all, if not hydrogen - YOU name a fuel that can replace gasoline in its entirety forever ___________________________ Now to debunk your silly arguments (1) Hydrogen, as we currently use and create is not a fuel at all, it's a glorified battery Wrong. Hydrogen is a fuel, and powers the space shuttle for example. it has NOTHING to do with batteries, which are solid electrochemical storage devices. (2) Hydrogen is exactly as green as the power grid, and less efficient. This is a nonsceintific argument- "green" is irrelevant, although hydrogen is by far the most "green" according to wacko leftists who think we are all doomed due to CO2 (3) The way we produce hydrogen is by electrolysis of water. We tear water apart and get the H2 out of the H2O. WRONG again. Primarily right now hydrogen is produced through reformation of methane (natural gas) Eventually, electrolysis will be the primary methodology of creating H2 from water, through medium temperature catalysed steam electrolysis Now you just spew some nonsense , which I will not address. Until this statement (4) hydrogen is messy. It is the tiniest molecule (it's diatomic ergo molecule) there is, and thus leaks out of pretty much everything like a sieve. Hydrogen is the CLEANEST of all possible fuels. If I have an airplane FILLED with liquid hydrogen, and I rupture the tank, 100% of the hydrogen will evaporate into space at 7 miles per second. Not a drop will be left on the ground. When hydrogen burns, it makes only water. The fact that it can embrittle certain metals is well known and preventable. the fact that it will escape through holes is a non factor. Now to your stupid diabtribe (5) We have no infrastructure for the creation of hydrogen. yes we do- the natural gas infrastruture. We can mix hyodrogen with natural gas to make hythane as an intermediate We have no infrastructure for the transportation of hydrogen. Yes we do - tankers and the natural gas infrastructure We have no infrastructure for the distribution of hydrogen. Ditto We have no infrastructure for the use of hydrogen. Oh gee, so we cant build it? Germany has an entire infrastructure built already and Mercedes Benz DE is putting out lines of hydrogen powered cars starting in 07 We have no infrastructure for dealing with accidents resulting in hydrogen leaks. Wrong. and hydrogen is MUCH SAFER than gasoline and JP4. you DONT NEED and infrastructure like a hazmat team We have no infrastructures for dealing with accidents involving hydrogen cars. Again, more nonsense We don't even have the flipping cars! Now you resort to hysteria. you typify the typical NON-scientific liberal reaction to hydrogen, Congrats. (6) Hydrogen isn't carbon free, hydrogen is simply using power from the power grid to split water and use the hydrogen as a fuel WRONG. What if I take PV, Wind power, hydroelectric, or geothermal. Nice try or even NUCLEAR power (liberals start foaming at the mouth and running for the hills at even the mention) (7) However, you put more energy into that equation than you're ever going to get out again (2nd law of thermodynamics) Ok genius, well how about Ethanol ? it takes about 2 gallons of diesel to get one gallon of ethanol to the pump- boy thats efficient You can electrolyze water at about 70% efficiency easily. And please, you dont even know what the 1st -3rd laws even say, never mind enthalpy and entropy, so dont try to appear like you do Now YOUR solution - electric cars Now you might ask, if not this then what? What will the future look like? Later this year, with all of the needed infrastructure intact, we are going to get the first line of manufacturer-created (there were earlier mods) plug-in hybrids. Using a gas-electric system with a large battery bank it allows people to plug their cars in at home or work to power them with enough range to travel around 50 miles before switching to the gas system. That's well more than the vast majority of people's driving. Many people could easily go months without needing another tank of gas. Electricity from the grid (directly) costs about a dollar a gallon (in comparative terms) Batteries alone will NOT work. They take 8 hours to recharge, they are heavy, the range is short and without a generator on board the batteries get run down quickly. General motors put out the EV1 more than 10 years ago and it failed. And you "dollar a gallon" argument does not hold water. A small car 9ie a prius) uses about 100 kW . that is 100 kWh per hr. a kWh costs about 15 cents here in CA. that is about $ 15 per hour or about 60 miles. that is $ 0.25 per mile Gasoline costs 3$ per gallon. One gallon gets you about 40 miles with a car like a prius. that is $ 3.00 / 40 miles = 7.5 cents per mile and YOU said that " Currently, most of that energy comes from coal!" you cant have it both ways the bottom line is that technology IS advancing and batteries continue to improve, but are not going to have quick recharge ever. Ethanol from any source , as well as biofuels or ANYTHING that starts with photosynthesis (1% efficient) , which aslo displaces FOOD from people, is the WRONG PATH. Also you did NOT address AIRPLANES and TRUCKS and SHIPS, did you? NONE of these will run on batteries, and will need a fuel HYDROGEN , with the highest energy density, can power all of them HYDROGEN is LIMITLESS HYDROGEN is ULTIMATELY CLEAN HYDROGEN IS THE ANSWER Someday that will get it