I think it would be a great idea if--- there were a lot of hydrogen
available in the environment. However, since hydrogen is quite
reactive, it is tied up in compounds. It takes at least as much energy
to release it from those compounds (like water) as what is obtained from
burning hydrogen.
If we get hydrogen from electrolyzing water, we have to run those
powerplants overtime to generate the hydrogen. A step backwards in my mind.
If hydrogen is to be a future energy source, we need development of
green ways to produce it, and money and effort should be going there,
instead of gimmicks like hydrogen-burning automobiles. Heck, it isn't
that hard to convert any engine to burn hydrogen- a lot like converting
it to burn natural gas or LP. Isn't worth doing until we have a good
source of hydrogen.
Hydrogen, as you point out, isn't an energy source. It's an energy
storage and transport medium. It's a pretty good one, in spite of
having the ability to leak out of nearly anything. But the problem
is that people confuse it with a miracle energy source, which it isn't.
I wouldn't discount hydrogen power entirely, because it does allow us
to make electricity on a large scale basis so it's efficient, then store
and transport that potential energy in the form of hydrogen so it's
easily made portable.
But I would discount a lot of the things some of the hydrogen advocates
have been claiming.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."