Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Bush Pushing Hydrogen Fuel As Alternative
Topic Started: May 25 2005, 11:25 PM (394 Views)
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Bush Pushing Hydrogen Fuel As Alternative

Quote:
 
WASHINGTON -    President Bush stared inquisitively down into the nozzle of a hydrogen fuel hose on Wednesday, then pumped the fuel into a blue compact car as he renewed his plea for Congress to pass a wide-ranging energy bill.

But with the cost of hydrogen double that of premium gasoline, even the president acknowledged that seeing today's children take their driver's tests in pollution-free cars is a long-term goal.

"This is the beginning of fantastic technology," Bush said at a Shell station in northeast Washington, the first retail hydrogen and gasoline fueling station in North America. "Hydrogen is the wave of the future. We're too dependent on foreign sources of energy."

Bush wants an energy bill, among other things, to support the future use of hydrogen instead of gasoline.

Rick Scott, operations and safety coordinator at the station, helped Bush pump 1.83 kilograms into the four-door parked at the pump. Scott said the hydrogen cost $4.75 a kilogram, which is equal to a gallon of gas, but noted that the 1.83 kilograms would power the car twice as far — about 100 miles.

"Congress has ben talking too long about the energy bill," said Bush, who is pushing for federal funding to back research of hydrogen-powered vehicles. "I think the American people are tired of waiting. I'm getting a little tired of waiting on the energy bill. ... I want to see the bill to my desk."

Cars running on fuel cells that produce energy by mixing hydrogen with oxygen are already on the road and Bush has pushed a $1.7 billion hydrogen research program. Administration officials have said it's possible fuel cell cars will be mass marketed in 15 years.

Testing, Testing...Is this thing on? :rotfl:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Quote:
 
Administration officials have said it's possible fuel cell cars will be mass marketed in 15 years.

Yeah right. At this rate, maybe in 30-35 years.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
Are you in favor of fuel cells or not?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

I'm in favor of them and hopefully this is a sign of greater government involvement in the future.
| Quote | ^
 
who
Have light saber. Will travel.
I think that the most could be done with conservation. I think gas taxes should be increased to encourage conservation with the additional money going into a national energy policy on the level of the NASA race to the moon.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
gvok
May 26 2005, 06:31 AM
I'm in favor of them and hopefully this is a sign of greater government involvement in the future.

Yeah, I was wondering if 24 was for or against. I couldn't tell if 24 was ridiculing the fuel cells or President Bush or both.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
who
May 26 2005, 06:37 AM
I think that the most could be done with conservation. I think gas taxes should be increased to encourage conservation with the additional money going into a national energy policy on the level of the NASA race to the moon.

Increasing gas taxes will increase govt. dependency on gas. It'll be just like cigarettes: they're terrible, a health risk, big evil tobacco companies and all that,... but, but we can ban them we are funding everything with their tax revenue. Who is addicted to cigarettes?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

who
May 26 2005, 07:37 AM
I think that the most could be done with conservation. I think gas taxes should be increased to encourage conservation with the additional money going into a national energy policy on the level of the NASA race to the moon.

Thomas Freidman had a similar idea.
| Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
Quote:
 
But with the cost of hydrogen double that of premium gasoline, even the president acknowledged that seeing today's children take their driver's tests in pollution-free cars is a long-term goal.

Why not put taxes on petrol to increase its cost and by doing so make hydrogen and other alternatives more economically viable and at the same time increase incentives to conserve energy and use more efficient cars?

Over night demand for inefficient cars would be down and demand for already avaliable alternatives such as LPG and hybrids would be up.

Any revenue generated could be ring fenced for renewable energy development with the goal that eventually the renewables will become self funding and the income from taxing petrol will fall to zero.

Alternatively if you worry that an extra tax will harm economic growth then why not 'switch' some of the tax burden onto fuel instead of adding a new tax. Government increases tax on petrol but cuts income tax by a corrisponding amount for example.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
gvok
Unregistered

It's twice as expensive but the car also goes twice as far (according to the article above).
| Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
ds9074
May 26 2005, 06:51 AM
Quote:
 
But with the cost of hydrogen double that of premium gasoline, even the president acknowledged that seeing today's children take their driver's tests in pollution-free cars is a long-term goal.

Why not put taxes on petrol to increase its cost and by doing so make hydrogen and other alternatives more economically viable and at the same time increase incentives to conserve energy and use more efficient cars?

Over night demand for inefficient cars would be down and demand for already avaliable alternatives such as LPG and hybrids would be up.

Any revenue generated could be ring fenced for renewable energy development with the goal that eventually the renewables will become self funding and the income from taxing petrol will fall to zero.

Alternatively if you worry that an extra tax will harm economic growth then why not 'switch' some of the tax burden onto fuel instead of adding a new tax. Government increases tax on petrol but cuts income tax by a corrisponding amount for example.

Wow, it's that simple!?!?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Fesarius
Member Avatar
Admiral
^^^
Be nice, or I will confiscate your LZ albums....
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
Fesarius
May 26 2005, 07:06 AM
^^^
Be nice, or I will confiscate your LZ albums....

You win.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Quote:
 
Are you in favor of fuel cells or not?

Does it matter?

Quote:
 
Yeah, I was wondering if 24 was for or against. I couldn't tell if 24 was ridiculing the fuel cells or President Bush or both.

However, I will answer your question anyway. I was ridiculing the current system that is designed against the promotion of alternative fuels such as hydrogen.

I do not think our government or the private sector will do enough to promote the mass marketing of fuel cell cars run on hydrogen by 15 years from now. Most people are still stuck in the petroleum mindset.

I do think promoting and supporting alternative fuels is a commendable undertaking. In that respect, I appreciate that Bush is making some kind of effort.

However, I was joking a little at Bush with the linked picture. Is that okay with you?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
38957
May 26 2005, 08:01 AM
ds9074
May 26 2005, 06:51 AM
Quote:
 
But with the cost of hydrogen double that of premium gasoline, even the president acknowledged that seeing today's children take their driver's tests in pollution-free cars is a long-term goal.

Why not put taxes on petrol to increase its cost and by doing so make hydrogen and other alternatives more economically viable and at the same time increase incentives to conserve energy and use more efficient cars?

Over night demand for inefficient cars would be down and demand for already avaliable alternatives such as LPG and hybrids would be up.

Any revenue generated could be ring fenced for renewable energy development with the goal that eventually the renewables will become self funding and the income from taxing petrol will fall to zero.

Alternatively if you worry that an extra tax will harm economic growth then why not 'switch' some of the tax burden onto fuel instead of adding a new tax. Government increases tax on petrol but cuts income tax by a corrisponding amount for example.

Wow, it's that simple!?!?

Yes, it is style of doing things typical with a tax and regulate, socialistic mindset.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus