flynn23 wrote:
] ] This morning, a California company, PolyFuel, plans to
] ] announce that it has achieved a breakthrough in fuel-cell
] ] membranes by using an alternative material: a hydrocarbon
] ] that it says costs only about half as much per square
] ] meter.

This article fails to address the pivotal question it seeks to answer; namely, what effect would such a membrane actually have on oil imports? If we all switch to fuel cells in the next 25 years (after the $4 billion re-fueling infrastructure is created, that is), would such widespread use of a hydrocarbon membrane be supported by our existing domestic oil production?* Also, what amount of energy is required to produce the membranes? If the same amount of oil is just going to sidestep the transportation sector on its way to the electric utilities, the decrease in efficiency between the internal combustion engine (60%) and turbine electricity production (35%) cycles would actually amount to more oil consumption and pollution.* The same applies whether you use coal or natural gas; though the supply of coal is arguably longer lasting than that of natural gas or oil, both are still polluting and still the source of political chess games.

Thus, the problem with the fabled hydrogen economy - the feasibility analysis starts to fork faster than you can keep up with it.

- - -

*Source: C.E. Thomas, Brian D. James, et. al. “Societal Impacts of Fuel Options for Fuel Cell Vehicles.” Hydrogen and Its Future as a Transportation Fuel. Copyright 1998 the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. page 346, Table 8.

RE: Membrane Breakthrough for Fuel Cells