Alternative Fuel Sources

[thejabber27]

this thread is about which fuel source will replace crude oil.

i believe that it will be hydrogen fuel cells that will be the gas of the future because
a) hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe
b) it seems safer than using a gasoline car
c) it is very cheap

[Darkreaper70]

Solar/Wind power.

[funniecow]

TBH I hope the price of fuel skyrocket more, or at least stay the same so the alternative fuel issue wont' fade away again.:penguhttp://www.gifking.de/gif/pin/9.gif
:penguin:in::penguin::penguin::penguin:

To be honest what ever happened to good old fashioned bikes? Sure it'll be a longer commute but then again what isn't a long commute? Solar should be the next fuel source, it'll be the most efficient and it would save room and leave wilderness untouched.

[negitoro]

Within the next few decades, I really can't see a significant alternative fuel source shift. The closest is probably ethanol since it's already in use in many countries and partially in the United States.

Hydrogen is great on paper but the technology and infrastructure is decades away. The technology is currently just too expensive and inefficient. Hydrogen maybe the most abundant element, but it requires energy (which currently would rely on fossil fuel consumption anyway) to produce it in the first place. Even after the technology is made to be feasible and viable, it will take many, many years before we can replace the oil infrastructure for transportation.

Solar and wind is great and all but you're joking if you believe it's a solution that "leaves wilderness untouched". The amount of solar panels/wind turbines it currently needs to generate enough power to us to replace oil would mean you'd have to clear massive amounts of land to make the necessary solar/wind farms.

If everyone biked to work, we would have already solved this problem. The issue is people are still choosing to move out to suburbs and then claim they're 'forced' to drive to work.

[Äinstäin]

Why not like in the matrix? Where the power source is humans?

[funniecow]

Within the next few decades, I really can't see a significant alternative fuel source shift. The closest is probably ethanol since it's already in use in many countries and partially in the United States.

Hydrogen is great on paper but the technology and infrastructure is decades away. The technology is currently just too expensive and inefficient. Hydrogen maybe the most abundant element, but it requires energy (which currently would rely on fossil fuel consumption anyway) to produce it in the first place. Even after the technology is made to be feasible and viable, it will take many, many years before we can replace the oil infrastructure for transportation.

Solar and wind is great and all but you're joking if you believe it's a solution that "leaves wilderness untouched". The amount of solar panels/wind turbines it currently needs to generate enough power to us to replace oil would mean you'd have to clear massive amounts of land to make the necessary solar/wind farms.

If everyone biked to work, we would have already solved this problem. The issue is people are still choosing to move out to suburbs and then claim they're 'forced' to drive to work.

Solar is capible of supporting our consumption, there are houses that are totaly off the grid thanks to solar, and all they did was put a panels on the roofs and installed one wind turbine. Btw we're only using aobut 7% of the sun's capible energy, the trick is to find a film that would allow us to use at least 80%.

I know that they're developing a solar coat, it goes on like wall paper and it can be applied metro areas.

[dimond_hart]

I really see ethanol being used predominantly before solar or hydrogen. It seems much more likely, theres too many flaws to do with solar and hydrogen and its much more expensive to make and buy. Perhaps in the far future some new way of developing those two will be discovered but for now ethanol is much more easier and likelier. And some countries have already started using it, like Brazil.

[Devi]

But, if we were to use ethnol fuels, we would have to use some sort of plants, like corn or sugar. The cost of those food sources will go up, because people will be paying more for it to create fuel, which they can sell at a higher cost (or at least that's what I understand from my limited knowledge of economics...). Wouldn't that mean that poor people, people who live at or below their nations' poverty line, not be able to afford food, so that you could drive to work every day? It also doesn't take into account that, I think, so don't quote me, that we won't have enough land to support that type of fuel production and feed people, and that we are going to have to use gas/petrol to fuel that. I'm not staying that we don't need a suitable fuel source, just that maybe ethanol is not the way to go.
And if anyone has any better knowledge of this, say something and post the link from where you got it. I would like to know :)

[Devi]

Solar/Wind power.

And, darkreaper, no offense meant, but solar and wind are not alternative fuel sources to crude oil, not unless you want a car that goes a mile an hour and looks like a reject from the Pirates of the Caribean...

[EightySix]

Solar and wind is great and all but you're joking if you believe it's a solution that "leaves wilderness untouched". The amount of solar panels/wind turbines it currently needs to generate enough power to us to replace oil would mean you'd have to clear massive amounts of land to make the necessary solar/wind farms.

You don't have to build them on land. There are already wind turbines at sea. You could also start placing solar panels at sea..I think hydropower would also be another alternative fuel source....

The predicted year when we will run out of petrol is soon. Yet the number of cars coming onto the roads each year increases...Very sad thing when people dont care about the future generation. Alternative fuel sources only work when the government do something about it...but with petrol companies adamant against other fuels competing with them , these other alternatives wont work.



P.S save power, dont leave anything on standby...the red dot is like a vampire it still sucks power on standby

P.P.S electric cars..hybrid cars...the cost needs to come down for people to be able to afford them..

[dimond_hart]

Devi~
I actually agree with that, if ethanol did replace crude oil worldwide it would cause poverty to rise, making it a bad fuel source, but with fossil fuels quickly depleting it may be needed in the future. Plus the environmental advantages=the human disadvantages. They equal out and obviously if there weren't any disadvantages more countries would be using it. But wealthy countries like the USA don't have much reason not to try using it, or at least adding a small percentage of ethanol to their fuel to make it less harmful to the environment.
I know that its more complicated than this, but if some countries used ethanol it would make a difference until a better fuel alternative is produced. (By the way, my knowledge comes from the chemistry side of this topic :P )

[negitoro]

Solar is capible of supporting our consumption, there are houses that are totaly off the grid thanks to solar, and all they did was put a panels on the roofs and installed one wind turbine. Btw we're only using aobut 7% of the sun's capible energy, the trick is to find a film that would allow us to use at least 80%.

I know that they're developing a solar coat, it goes on like wall paper and it can be applied metro areas.I don't disagree that solar can provide a good supplementary energy source. And I agree that solar panel technology is something that needs to be much, much more efficient.

But it's a huge difference between individual houses that can go off the grid vs. generating enough electricity to sustain our way of life (let's face it, society won't tolerate moving backwards). The energy we consume far, far exceeds what we use to power our homes.

Like think of downtown in a major urban area... those office buildings where the rooftops (area for solar panels) vs. the energy consumption needed. Also, consider that most people don't live in areas where we're blessed with consistent sunny weather.

[negitoro]

You don't have to build them on land. There are already wind turbines at sea. You could also start placing solar panels at sea..I think hydropower would also be another alternative fuel source....While this is true, it doesn't change that you'd need a ridiculous amount of them to replace our fossil fuel consumption. A single windmill, even if it's enough to power 1,000 homes, you'd need like thousands before you could just power all the homes (not even counting industrial and commercial consumption). The same goes for solar panels... heck, wind is more viable than solar at sea.

This is, of course, all very impractical for the millions of people who live inland, too far away for this kind of power to be sent to.

P.P.S electric cars..hybrid cars...the cost needs to come down for people to be able to afford them..They are already affordable! A hybrid model costs just slightly more than a regular car. Yet people continue to pay even more for an SUV or pickup trucks or luxury vehicles.

It's not really of cost, it's a matter of CARING. People won't care until it hits them directly in a hard, practical way ... like when gas hits $5 a gallon.

But, if we were to use ethnol fuels, we would have to use some sort of plants, like corn or sugar. The cost of those food sources will go up, because people will be paying more for it to create fuel, which they can sell at a higher cost (or at least that's what I understand from my limited knowledge of economics...). Wouldn't that mean that poor people, people who live at or below their nations' poverty line, not be able to afford food, so that you could drive to work every day? It also doesn't take into account that, I think, so don't quote me, that we won't have enough land to support that type of fuel production and feed people, and that we are going to have to use gas/petrol to fuel that. I'm not staying that we don't need a suitable fuel source, just that maybe ethanol is not the way to go.
And if anyone has any better knowledge of this, say something and post the link from where you got it. I would like to know :)
Ethanol is not perfect. But none of the energy sources really are. The only reason I think ethanol is the next choice isn't because it's the best but because it's the most likely and realistic of all the options.

Oil companies, car companies and governments (and the lobbyists and politicians influenced by the oil and car companies) can more easily make the shift. Basically, ethanol is better than oil and coal so it's probably a start.

Quite honestly social problems will exist regardless. You can't say oil drilling and coal mining in 3rd world countries improve the lives of the people much. Heck, people suffer for the coffee we drink and the basketball shoes we wear, let alone for driving our cars.

[funniecow]

Ethanol only works in Brazil because they get it from Sugercane, to use corn based ethanol is to actually lose money. In the long run it takes the same amount of energy to produce corn based ethanol as it provides. The only real option is cellulose based ethanol, which is being developed almost all on Richard Branson's dime.:eek:

The only reason ethanol received such a big push is because a high percentage of the ethanol industry is owned by the crude oil industry. Not to mention every 4 years there is a "corn ethanol" rally because of the elections.(Iowa=corn country). To put simply the ethanol yield from corn is inefficient we need higher sugar plants to make it practical, like sugar cane.

Are you kidding me people have you ever tried solar power? Sure it probably won't be integrated with cars yet but every home equal barrels of oil. California alone struggles every year trying to balance it's power grid by buying power from Nevada.

BTW just to let you there are specialty/new age wind turbines that don't' take up that much space are are able to catch wind from every direction, most metro buildings would be able to support itself if it were to put 10-20 of these on their roofs. Jay Leno has it for his gigantic car garage and it's contributing to his energy bill.

I'm not a hippie or anything but I'd rather use wind/solar/smart ethanol then get called over to the middle east every 10-15 years.

[scarecrow]

i think that our future power come from wind/solar and tidal plants.
but in my eyes the most promising technology will be the one of an
thermonuclear reactor which uses nuclear fusion like the one in the sun
to produce the energy we need
read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

[cornpopsicle]

Hydrogen fuel cells is basically a method of storing energy, not an energy source. This is a common misconception. In order to use hydrogen as a source of energy, energy generated from other sources, such as solar, nuclear, and lately, tidal has to be used to create the hydrogen fuel.

[Peach Twilight]

P.P.S electric cars..hybrid cars...the cost needs to come down for people to be able to afford them..


They do need to lower the price, because hybrid will impact the environment greatly. Would go into way more detail, but there is something about solar and hydro energy that I want to address.

I built a car for school, one using solar and one using a hydrogen fuel cell. When they were raced at competition. The solar powered vehicle went faster and further.

I decided to test the voltage of both cells, Solar cells put out more volts than the hydrogen fuel cell. I think that solar fuel could become the leading energy supplier, with a little work and some research.

When it comes to power, and technology that will help the environment, America seems to be at a stand still.

[Tekkaman Saber]

The sad thing is though Part of the reason why solar powered vehicles will be very difficult to purchase is because most governments will not want them to be because to be frank they are greedy they make a huge amount of money from companies and normal people from taxes to do with the fuels, and if those fuels are no longer needed then they will be losing a large source of income, it's the same reason why cigarettes are still legal in many places.

[proy3]

This talk about hydrogen cells, ethanol, and solar power is great, but there are two other fuels that could easily replace gasoline. One is the most abundant resouce on earth that covers about 75% of Earths surface. http://waterpoweredcar.com/

The other is one we breathe on a daily basis. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6138972/

Those two technologies are the way of the future, Water is a humongous energy resource and Air will never run out because the compressed air car doesnt release any pollution. if The oil companies ever release their strangle hold on the energy market, dont be surprised if you find air and water powering your home and propelling your car.

[funniecow]

The sad thing is though Part of the reason why solar powered vehicles will be very difficult to purchase is because most governments will not want them to be because to be frank they are greedy they make a huge amount of money from companies and normal people from taxes to do with the fuels, and if those fuels are no longer needed then they will be losing a large source of income, it's the same reason why cigarettes are still legal in many places.

Exactly, the reason solar doesn't get the attention it deserves is because once it becomes well established the only to be made from it would be the manufacturing and up keep. Think about it, we won't need to buy a tank of gas, diesel, or pounds of coal if we were ever wanted to do something.

Ethanol gets spearheaded because it supports the farming industry, the gas industry, and provides retarded subsidies.

[Tekkaman Saber]

What we really need is an uncurropt leader (Better luck finding a needle in a haystack in a barn that is in a tornado) for a country to have the guts and seriously support this otherwise change is unlikely.

[statcat]

This talk about hydrogen cells, ethanol, and solar power is great, but there are two other fuels that could easily replace gasoline. One is the most abundant resouce on earth that covers about 75% of Earths surface. http://waterpoweredcar.com/

The other is one we breathe on a daily basis. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6138972/

Those two technologies are the way of the future, Water is a humongous energy resource and Air will never run out because the compressed air car doesnt release any pollution. if The oil companies ever release their strangle hold on the energy market, dont be surprised if you find air and water powering your home and propelling your car.

those are the smart alternatives to gasoline. But they need to discover a way to run a car on garbage seeing as how this planet is filled with it which would be the greatest fuel source for the enviornment.

[funniecow]

What we really need is an uncurropt leader (Better luck finding a needle in a haystack in a barn that is in a tornado) for a country to have the guts and seriously support this otherwise change is unlikely.

To be honest with you if you look at track records and ear marks, people who aren't corrupt in politics can't get jack done.

[Manhunter098]

Hydrogen is cheap? Think again. Its also very energy ineffecient because to actually get the hydrogen, takes a lot of energy. There are a couple effective ways of producing it, but they are currently only just getting out of the theoretical stuff there and neither method currently actually exists in a working form.

I wrote a 7 page report on why hydrogen fails for my environmental science class, so if you want some more stuff just ask.


By the way I think that batteries are the way of the future. Seriously pure electricity is the MOST ENERGY EFFECIENT thing we have. And its MUCH easier to get the most out of your energy source when you have a gigantic power plant. Plus we already have the infrastructure in place (minus "pay for" outlets in parking lots) to go with electricity, all we really need is a better battery, and with a recent development, that should hit the markets in a couple years scientists found a way to get pretty much 10x the energy stored in a lithium ion battery.



By the way when you say alternative "fuel" sources, do you mean fuel that would be used to produce energy, or fuel that would be used to store it. Hydrogen would be a fuel that is MADE in order to store and transport enery. Stuff like coal and gasoline is for making the energy itself.

[Lightz]

Look up this video online its called.. "Who Killed the Electric Car" The greedy oil tyrants of the world don't want cheaper or more efficient fuels at the moment because they won't be making a lot of money off of it. Hydrogen fuel will cost same or more than oil. We had good clean electric cars on the road in California in our life time and most people have already forgot. The cars were all scraped thanks to big oil pushing there big money into politics. >.<

[cornpopsicle]

That was rather an intriguing video, but like all documentaries, you might have to question the point of view that it came from.

[Peach Twilight]

There is one thing that I find wrong with ethonal. It pollutes the environment just as much as gasoline. Personally I believe that saving the polluted environment should be the first priority.

[funniecow]

Uh ethanol from corn pollutes, and we don't have fully ethanol cars yet. Go look at the earlier posts.

[Peach Twilight]

I know, but when tested by environmentalist it turned out that when it was burned it released the same amount of pollutants into the environment.

If you think about it logically it makes sense. When any thing burns it releases some carbon monoxide. Why is corn any different? This will still cause a lot of health problems since Carbon monoxide is a terrible pollutant.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9647424

That will explain every thing...

[funniecow]

Oh, you meant environmetnally safe, nope, the only reason we want to get ethanol off the ground is because it makes us rely less on gas. TBH most of the talk of alternative fuel only takes place when gas prices go up, once prices die down all of the talk is swept away.

[Peach Twilight]

Yes, that is true, if we can come up with other ways to make up for pollutants then perhaps we could use it as an alternative fuel. Most people are under a misconception that ethanol is better for the environment.

But yes that is completely correct. If we do run out of gasoline then Ethanol will be a great alternative fuel. We will just use it until some other technologies become available.

[Manhunter098]

There is one thing that I find wrong with ethonal. It pollutes the environment just as much as gasoline. Personally I believe that saving the polluted environment should be the first priority.


Ethanol produced from crops that we grow is carbon neutral. So it doesnt really pollute at all since by growing more corn to make it from, we remove the same amount of pollution was added. In other words if we want to keep the world EXACTLY how it is now, than ethanol is the way to go.


But really as far as I see it...electricity tops EVERYTHING. Just about every option is beat out by electricity in just about every single way.

[cornpopsicle]

There's still the problem of how your generate that electricity, however.

[tonton]

this thread is about which fuel source will replace crude oil.

i believe that it will be hydrogen fuel cells that will be the gas of the future because
a) hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe
b) it seems safer than using a gasoline car
c) it is very cheap


Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe - but not so abundant on earth. It's expensive to generate hydrogen from water and it is not a safe gas to handle - think Hindenberg......

Solar, wind, tidal, geothermal (depending on which country you live in) are the way to go.

[Dantrag]

Let's see now. There was an episode in the Mythbusters where they tested if a car can run on used cooking oil (The type they use in McDonalds etc). They filtered the cooking oil to remove all pieces of potatoes etc, then they used the filtered oil to fuel a diesel-engine and it ran without a glitch. Infact the fuel consumption/kilometer/mile was better than with normal diesel.

So in a sense, that could be one alternative fuel.

[negitoro]

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe - but not so abundant on earth. It's expensive to generate hydrogen from water and it is not a safe gas to handle - think Hindenberg......Safety is not a huge issue. After all, gasoline is explosive too, right?

[cornpopsicle]

Gasoline is much more combustible than hydrogen. By itself, hydrogen is rather safe. Hindenberg is a poor example of hydrogen's properties since recent studies have shown that the paint on the airship was combustible. It also tends to agree with the witness testimonies that it was the surface burning rather than the characteristic flame that hydrogen exhibits under burning conditions.

Basically, the Hindenberg was grossly overexaggerated by the ignorant media and scientists have been unable to convince the masses for decades because of it.

[Jammerjoint]

I absolutely agree with you, corn.

From the start, geothermal is absolutely super-efficient and virtually emission-free. Simply using the heat of the earth, there are virtually no downsides other than the fact that it is hard to obtain such a depth. Therefore, use geothermal for ground-based buildings and a base power source that cannot be compromised unless we affect the planet to its core, which is much harder than the atmosphere (which we easily affect since it is so thin).

Solar power is a good option as well, but is limited to daylight hours, and I think it was said that it's annoying to store. It's good for a support energy source.

Wind energy is certainly a good choice, but not exactly that efficient or reliable. Again, a good support.

Waste to energy is great. I've recently been to such a plant, and I saw how it works. It is NOT AS EFFICIENT as some other energy sources, however here is the truth you cannot ignore: for every ton of trash that is burned, 1 ton LESS of carbon dioxide, a highly responsible greenhouse gas, is released. Also, leaving the trash out will release some carbon dioxide, but more importantly METHANE, which is a greenhouse gas that is 20 TIMES more potent. Problem is, waste to energy is expensive in terms of the facility itself, and is therefore hard to employ in undeveloped areas.

Hydrogen is certainly a great option to consider. Clean, fairly efficient, what's not to like, right? It makes a good main source of energy for the world.

I lack knowledge when it comes to nuclear energy. I do think it might be good, but I'd be highly concerned of even the slightest traces of nuclear waste produced. I'm highly opposed to any such waste production, unless it is the only option left, which I'm sure it will not be.

[Manhunter098]

Safety of hydrogen is actually pretty good. Did you know that the only people that died on the Hindenburg were the ones that jumped off? Everyone that stayed on board survived. Hydrogen is so light that it disperses almost instantly, so even though it may produce a flame, its not going to last long, and there wont really be a lot of force behind the explosion (hence why hydrogen to power a car is used for a fuel cell and NOT combustion).


Hydrogen still sucks though, the energy per unit of volume is much lower than most other options.



If we could get past the visual issues, wind energy is one of the best ways to go for electricity production. Think about it, if we attached generators to buildings above the road, wind generated from cars (and that forced to pass through the buildings) would end up turning the turbines. Not to mention we can add wind generators to grazing land and get far more production from it. We can also generate wind at sea, there are so many places that we can just put up a bunch of wind turbines that we can get the power almost anywhere where there is a relatively constant wind and it doesnt take up too much space really.

We also need to put gardens on top of all our roofs so we can retain heat better as well as reflect more heat back into space (roofs absorb more heat than plants). Plus we could grow food on our roofs and stuff, but overall it would save energy and it would look cool too.

But seriously...wind energy for the win...it only costs like 3 cents per kilowatt hour.

[tonton]

Gasoline is much more combustible than hydrogen. By itself, hydrogen is rather safe. Hindenberg is a poor example of hydrogen's properties since recent studies have shown that the paint on the airship was combustible. It also tends to agree with the witness testimonies that it was the surface burning rather than the characteristic flame that hydrogen exhibits under burning conditions.

Basically, the Hindenberg was grossly overexaggerated by the ignorant media and scientists have been unable to convince the masses for decades because of it.

There was a Mythbusters episode on this too! Yes the paint did have a contribution to the fire as an accelerant but there is NO question that H2 had a huge contribution to the fire. It is seriously explosive. (Note taken that it is in the fuel cell not used for combustion - but how safe would it be if your car were involved in a serious crash?)

Another Mythbusters episode showed that diesel fuel was really slow to ignite - tends to be flammable rather than explosive. I think it was gasolene that had similar properties. It was the kerosene that ignited very easily.

Anyway, I don't know the actual chemistry of it all - will be curious to find out if anyone knows the info - esp. how exothermic all the various combustion reactions are!

[Manhunter098]

Hydrogen has very little danger since it is so light and disperses very quickly through the air. Essentially if you were an an accident and your hydrogen tank were to expolode, there would be a very breif FLAME (since hydrogen doesnt actually have much force behind the explosion, its more like an epanding flame than anything) that rises into the air with the hydrogen and then disappears. I DOUBT it would even be a long enough flame to give a person bad burns IF it were even close enough to hit them, which is unlikely because it rises and dissipates so quickly. Youll probably be more likely to see the flame above the car than around it, furthermore IF the tank is only ruptured and the hydrogen is no immedeately ignited, then it will just dissipate and none will be left in the tank to explode (unlike gasoline). Also we wouldnt store hydrgoen as a liquid or a gas...NEITHER is going to be effective enough to make using it in a car a really viable option.

[conradxu]

y not use Co2 or oxygen or even compost. a fuel source should be some thing that can actually fuels somthign else. we use the fuel air and food to give nutrients. technically there are a few sources of fuel and how we use them is our decision but once used there will be waste, our is ****, cars is co2,
so what we need to do is to find a way of useing waste as a fuel source, do u have any idea how many dumps (garbage) there are?

[cornpopsicle]

Well, first things first. Combustion is a reaction that results in CO2 and H2O. The reason why we would want to use alternative fuel sources is to lower the CO2 output. Secondly, you can't use CO2 as a fuel since it is nonflammable. This is why CO2 tends to be used as the compressed air capsules because it's rather cheap and nonflammable. Burning compost is incredibly inefficient and can also result in other particulates in the air that would be undesirable, since there are many chemicals in waste that we don't want to be breathing in. This is why alternative fuels sources are important, because we don't want to make sure that it can be safely developed and still be relatively efficient.

[Neji2112]

when i was in Europe, they had a massive amount of windmills all over the place, and i could stand to put some along the Florida East Coast, but people complain that it will obstruct the view... not that all the hotels dont already do that...
also if you own any large property where there is a substantial amount of wind blowing, the power companies, will pay you, to put one on your property, and will also pay you for the power it produces. throw in a few solar pannels, and it'll pay for itself in no time, and they'll pay you even more!

Wheat grass produces nearly nine times more ethanol than corn does, and it is easier to grow even in dry climates.

Nuclear power does pretty good at producing "clean" energy, although the unlikely posibility of a meltdown could pose a threat.

Hydro-electric, power is deffinitly cleaner than all other forms, and they're working on submerged watermills that uses the oceans currents, as well as generators that use wave energy.

Geothermal also uses hot water to create energy, and also it used to pipe in hot water to the cities, just look at Iceland.

Hydrogen. i'm a bit iffy about it, because of it's explosiveness, look what happened to a Hindenburg. but it is promising if they can provent it.

and that's all i can think of, off the top of my head.

[Manhunter098]

Nuclear energy really isnt that great, because it takes a LOT of energy to actually enrich and mine, and transport (under heavy security) the Uranium used as fuel. Plus an INSANE amount of the energy produced is completely lost as well.

Hydrogen is not so much an alternative means of producing energy, like everything else you listed, but rather an alternate form of storing energy. Furthermore its explosiveness is not really so risky, just read what I posed at the top of the page. But you can rest assured hydrogen sucks as a storage medium for energy, but for quite different reasons, but mostly due a high net energy loss because of the amount of energy it takes to produce, as well as a low energy density as well.

[Peach Twilight]

Gasoline is much more combustible than hydrogen. By itself, hydrogen is rather safe.


It is very safe if you use it in the form of a hydrogen fuel cell, creating the gas from H2O instead of burning it. If you use a fuel cell , there isn't a need to burn the gas, and the only bi product is water, so it's really great for the environment.

[Soupnazi]

The technology for Alternative Fuel Sources isn't there to the point where we can effectively distribute it. I am confident that they will become a lot more common in the future though.

[Manhunter098]

Alternative fuels as in storage mediums for energy to be used in transportation by vehicle suck in general. The only one thats truly effective is electricity, since its very effecient, and the ONLY thing needed for it to become the next trend in vehicles is a battery that will hold enough charge to get the car about 300 miles or so, and would charge in less than 6 hours.