Alternate Energy Sources for Our Future

The transition from a fossil fuel based economy to a non-fossil fuel based economy has quite a few options. Selecting the right option in a pretty critical decision. Two of the more popular are hydrogen fuel internal combustion engines and hybrid electric vehicles using internal combustion engines to extend range. These I would consider transition solutions. They are not the real solutions and might better be not considered.

The reason for my thought is efficiency. Internal combustion is about as inefficient as it gets. The loss of heat due to the combustion process kills the efficiency of these motors. If we are to move to a more environmentally friendly economy, perhaps we should consider more realistic choices.

Fuel cell electric hybrids are much more efficient. At roughly 52% efficient, the fuel cell electric hybrid is much more efficient. Okay, how did I come up with 52 percent? The electrolysis of water to hydrogen is 80 something percent efficient. The conversion of hydrogen to electric is 80 something percent efficient. And an electric motor is roughly 80 something percent efficient. Multiply that all out, neglecting the something's and you get about 52 percent.

Now I know there are a few out there thinking that the efficiency of the creation of the electrical energy to produce the hydrogen needed to be considered and that there are mechanical losses in the vehicle that I neglected. Get a grip! I am comparing an engine to an engine. The internal combustion engine has the same mechanical losses and the fuel conversion is a moot point.

Getting from the gasoline based economy we are in to the economy we want to be in required logical steps. There are millions of internal combustion vehicles in operation. To transition too quickly would wreck the economy. Interim fuel sources need to consider the economic impacts. Bio-fuels are considered a solution. That solution is based on keeping our internal combustion dinosaurs running. Those dinosaurs run just fine on propane, Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and hydrogen.

With Hydrogen or a derivative of hydrogen-based fuel probably winning the portable fuel race (vehicles), developing a supply infrastructure based on gaseous fuel might be a good idea. I have predicted a 20 to 30 year period will be required for reducing our dependence on fossil fuels to 10 percent. Developing the right fuel supply infrastructure is a critical component in meeting that goal in a cost effective manner.

Now by de-emphasizing the bio-fuel's role in energy independence I will be getting nasty emails from Willy Nelson. So let me explain a bit. Bio-fuels are a great idea! Brazil has done a wonderful job! We in the U. S. of A aren't Brazilians! We have the highest consumption of gasoline in the world. If we tried to convert to an alcohol only economy, we would drive food prices so high that most of the third world would starve. In just the last year increased US production of alcohol has already created financial hardship in Mexico.

Get your calculator out and follow me. Bio-fuel production in the US is currently about 5% of our gasoline/diesel usage. To increase bio-fuel production to 90% of our needs without impacting food and feed prices we out need to increase the efficiency of alcohol production and/or productive acreage by 90/5, which equals 18. Now let us make that a percentage. Multiply the 18 by 100. That equals 1800 percent! That would be a lot. I don't want you bio-fuel advocates to get down. You will have a role in our energy future. Only that role will be limited to approximately 15 to 20 percent of our energy needs.

Just like I told the math geeks, I don't want you bio-fuel proponents to get carried away. I know that there will be new hybrids, biomass utilization and improved farming methods that can impact those numbers. I wish you the best of luck. I do anticipate that a hydrogen powered economy will much more obtainable. Hydrogen produced by using, wind power, tidal power and the waste heat from nuclear and other power plants.