PART FIVE: THE GEOPHYSIOLOGICAL DAMAGE CAUSED BY HYDROGEN.

This chapter completes the exploration of the geophysiological damage caused by alternative energy. It looks at the geophysiological damage that could be caused by hydrogen which many greens regard as the environmentally friendly fuel of the future. Given the huge potentialities of this fuel it was decided to treat it separately from other forms of alternative energy. The development of hydrogen depends on a number of other developments outlined above e.g. a plentiful supply of cheap, alternative electricity to generate hydrogen, a gas pipeline system, etc. The geophysiological damage caused by these factors is not repeated in this chapter. As a consequence, the geophysiological analysis presented in this chapter is really only the tip of the hydrogen iceberg.

ONE: THE SOURCES OF HYDROGEN.

5.1.1: Background.

5.1.1.1: The Transition from Fossil Fuels to Natural Gas to Hydrogen.

It has been predicted that natural gas will eventually succeed oil as the world's primary fuel .. "use of natural gas can be expected to double or even triple during the next few decades. Since world oil production is likely to grow only modestly from the current level, and then decline, natural gas could become the most important fossil fuel by 2010 ..." [1] ; "Gas is set to displace oil, coal, and nuclear as the energy source of the 20thC." [2]

It is believed the increasing popularity of natural gas will pave the way for the creation of a hydrogen fuelled society. [3] .. "natural gas could become the most important fossil fuel by 2010 - building a long term bridge to an energy economy that is fueled by hydrogen gas generated from solar energy." [4] ; "First, and most imperative, is the necessary change from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. Natural gas can be substituted for petroleum, and it releases far less damaging exhaust. Although its use would not finally solve our energy problems, the first step in the right direction would seem to be to turn to it as a substitute for other fuels. Transition from natural gas to hydrogen would then be possible by methods already projected by engineers, and hydrogen burns without any detrimental atmospheric emissions." [5] ; "The mandate for survival .. means a universal moratorium on the use of oil and coal and the substitution of natural gas as a transition fuel (until hydrogen is developed); it means a worldwide adoption of alternative forms of energy, from solar to thermal, and so on." [6]

Natural gas could play three vital roles in the transition from conventional fossil fuelled societies to hydrogen powered societies. Firstly, the exploitation of the vast abundance of natural gas will lead to the creation of a natural gas infrastructure which could eventually be taken over by hydrogen at little extra cost or effort. In the same way, it is likely that fossil fuelled cars will be replaced by natural gas fuelled cars which, in turn, could be replaced by hydrogen fuelled cars. [7] The surprise about the transition from oil to natural gas and then hydrogen is not that it could happen but that bloody-minded, all destructive, oomans seem to have gone out of their way to ensure that it didn't happen decades ago, "One of the greatest wastes of energy in the 20thC has occurred through the loss of natural gas during the pumping of crude oil. For decades natural gas was wasted; it was used as a means of driving the oil to the surface and it was then flared off. In the late 1920s and early 1930s .. 1.25 billion cubic feet of natural gas were wasted every day in the United States - equivalent, over 10 years, to 250 million tons of coal (about a quarter of the world's annual consumption). In the 1950s about half of the natural gas produced in the world's oilfields was wasted by burning it at the wellhead and it is still a common practice." [8]

Secondly, despite the obvious differences between oil and gas and the fact that they need to be treated differently, they are united firstly, by the fact that gas is invariably found with deposits of crude oil and, secondly, because both are exploited by multi-national corporations which, although separate, have common interests, "The newly-perceived advantage of natural gas as a low Carbon fuel can only encourage an already growing appetite for it. Although the ways of distributing and using liquid and gassy fuels differ greatly, the oil and natural gas industries are thoroughly intertwined, with the same companies engaged in finding and recovering both." [9] Even now some multi-national corporations handle both crude oil and natural gas, "Over half of some oil companies' reserves are gas." [10] A bp spokesperson has pointed out that, "The bias of the oil companies of the future will grow toward gas." [11] It is, therefore, in the economic interests of multi-national oil corporations to promote natural gas. [12] If multinational oil/gas corporations succeed in restructuring society to ensure the dominance of natural gas, the greater will be the likelihood that hydrogen will eventualy emerge as the dominant form of energy. It is possible that multi-national oil companies will end up being the main suppliers of hydrogen gas.

Thirdly, in the long term it would be fairly easy to replace natural gas with either biogas or hydrogen. In the beginning hydrogen could be mixed with natural gas but, when it becomes economically feasible, it could take over from natural gas completely, "In the early stages of the transition to hydrogen, the new energy gas can be added to natural gas pipelines in concentrations up to 15% - a clean burning mixture known as hythane. In the long run, engineers believe that it will not be too difficult to modify today's natural gas pipelines so that they will be able to transport hydrogen." [13] Hydrogen is not a radically new source of energy requiring the creation of an entirely new energy infrastructure.

One commentator believes a hydrogen based economy is not far off, "Soon after the turn of the century, an even more spectacular technology should be commonplace. We could be on the brink of running a hydrogen - rather than a mostly oil and coal - economy." [14]

5.1.1.2: The Transition from Biogas to Hydrogen.

The implication of the above scenario is that those greens who promote the development of biogas are also helping to bring about a hydrogen powered society.

5.1.1.3: The Sources of Hydrogen.

Hydrogen can be derived from water or methane. In turn, methane can either be obtained from fossil fuels or from Phytomass/biomass. It is easier to derive hydrogen from water than methane.

5.1.1.4: The Generation of Hydrogen.

There are various ways of generating hydrogen.

5.1.1.4.1: Phytomass/Biomass.

Crops and organic waste could be converted into methane and then hydrogen.

5.1.1.4.2: Photolytic (Bacteriological) Production.

Hydrogen can be produced through bacteriological Photosynthesis, "Photolytic production of hydrogen can be carried out by the use of organic Photosynthesizers. Bacteria or plant chloroplasts can achieve this, and in principle it could be a major source of hydrogen for transport: sunlight is free, water is common, and bacteria breed quickly." [15] Photosynthesizing bacteria could be grown in huge vats/containers in factories to produce hydrogen.

5.1.1.4.3: Water Electrolysis.

Hydrogen can also be obtained by using an electric current to split water molecules. This technology was discovered a mere two decades ago, "Japanese scientists a. fujishima and k. honda demonstrated in 1972 that solar energy could be used to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. The process involves converting solar energy into electricity and then passing it through water." [16] Water electrolysis is the most direct route for the production of hydrogen.

5.1.1.4.4: The Refining of Oil/Coal.

Natural gas can be used to provide hydrogen, "The cheapest source of hydrogen at present is natural gas ..." [17] Coal could also be used to generate hydrogen, "Pilot plants in which coal can be converted to hydrogen and carbon dioxide already exist. In these plants, the hydrogen would be the fuel of gas turbine power stations and the CO2 would be collected and disposed of underground or in the ocean." [18]

5.1.1.5: The Current Scale of Hydrogen Generation.

"World production of hydrogen is around 350 billion cubic metres a year, about 30 million tonnes." [19]

5.1.2: The Geophysiological Damage to the Supply Side of the Carbon Spiral Caused by the Sources of Hydrogen.

5.1.2.1: Mining, Processing, and Manufacturing.

The mining of the raw materials needed for the manufacture of hydrogen generating equipment; the construction of hydrogen generation plants (whether hydrogen is produced using Phytomass/biomass/Bacteria/water electrolysis) would release greenhouse gases.

5.1.2.2: Site Clearance.

If the clearance of the site on which a hydrogen generation plant is going to be built involves deforestation, this releases greenhouse gases.

5.1.2.3: Construction.

The construction of hydrogen generation plants releases greenhouse gases.

5.1.2.4: Transportation.

The transportation needed to move raw materials from mines to processors and then manufactures; the transportation of equipment from manufacturers to hydrogen generation plants; the transportation of Phytomass/biomass to the hydrogen production plant, etc releases greenhouse gases.

5.1.2.5: Agriculture.

The growing of crops to provide the raw materials needed for the generation of hydrogen would release greenhouse gases (if applicable).

5.1.2.6: Water Supply.

The supply of water for hydrogen plants would also release greenhouse gases (if applicable).

5.1.2.7: Electricity Supply.

The generation of electricity to create hydrogen would release greenhouse gases. The scale of the pollution would depend on the source of electricity, "Liquid hydrogen produced from coal increases the CO₂ equivalent emissions by 143%; whereas hydrogen from non-fossil fuels would reduce CO₂ by 100%." [20] ; "As with electric vehicles, the level of CO₂ emissions from hydrogen powered vehicles depends critically on the source of fuel." [21] Any of the sources of green electricity mentioned above could be used to generate hydrogen. Fred pearce supports the construction of small-scale hydro-electric dams to generate hydrogen, "Hydroelectric power from the remote north could become the key to the development of a new global energy source .. The key to its development is its large-scale manufacture, which requires passing electricity through water. What better job for a hydro-electric dam, where the water and the power are on tap? In addition .. if the water in the river were converted on site into hydrogen, then there would be no need to store water for conversion into power when it is needed. The storage function would be performed by the hydrogen rather than the reservoir." [22]

For the scale of the pollution caused by the various sources of alternative electricity see earlier chapters since this would have to be included in the geophysiological damage caused by hydrogen.

5.1.3: The Geophysiological Damage to the Demand Side of the Carbon Spiral Caused by the Sources of Hydrogen.

5.1.3.1: Mining, Processing, and Manufacturing.

The mining of the raw materials needed for the manufacture of hydrogen generating equipment; the construction of hydrogen generation plants; etc, causes geophysiological damage.

5.1.3.2: Suffocation.

The construction of hydrogen generation plants suffocates the land's Photosynthetic capabilities. It is not known whether producing hydrogen from Phytosynthesizing bacteria would take up more or less land than using Phytomass or water electrolysis.

5.1.3.3: Agriculture.

Huge areas of land could be used to grow the crops needed to produce hydrogen. For the various types of geophysiological damage caused by the growing of Phytomass see earlier section.

5.1.3.4: Transportation.

The transportation needed to move Phytomass from the land to the production plant would also cause geophysiological damage.

5.1.3.5: Water Supply.

The supply of water for hydrogen plants causes geophysiological damage.

5.1.3.6: Electricity Supply.

For the geophysiological damage caused by the various sources of green electricity see relevant chapters.

5.1.4: Conclusions.

The least environmentally damaging source of hydrogen is from Phytomass and biomass. Electrolysis is a slightly more environmentally damaging source especially if the electricity does not come from a green source. The most ecologically destructive source of hydrogen is coal.

TWO: THE CONVERSION OF HYDROGEN.

5.2.1: Background.

5.2.2: Refining.

Once hydrogen has been produced it might need to be refined to remove impurities.

5.2.3: Liquefication.

The second conversion process is reducing the size hydrogen, a bulky gas, to make it easier to transport .. "the problem is storing it - a tonne of hydrogen occupies 11 million litres, which is about the size of a village church. Moreover, hydrogen is less dense than methane and it requires three times the volume of gas to produce the same amount of heat. But condense hydrogen to a liquid at -353C and a tonne of the gas becomes a manageable 14,000 litres. World production of hydrogen is around 350 billion cubic metres a year, about 30 million tonnes. It is cheaper to produce electricity than to make hydrogen. But the surplus electricity produced by nuclear power stations at night could provide a cheap way of electrolysing water to make hydrogen." [23] The problem of doing this, however, is that it entails a huge energy cost, "One form of transportation would be as liquid hydrogen. Liquefaction for transport in tankers would use energy equal to 30% of the energy in the gas, so that the overall energy efficiency of a liquid hydrogen system would be around 3.5%." [24]

THREE: THE TRANSMISSION OF HYDROGEN.

5.3.1: Background.

The transmission of hydrogen takes place in exactly the same way as natural gas/biogas i.e. either in containers transported by vehicles or ships, or through gas pipelines. Natural gas pipelines could be modified to transport hydrogen.

5.3.2: The Geophysiological Damage to the Supply Side of the Carbon Spiral Caused by the Transmission of Hydrogen.

For the basic structure of an analysis of the geophysiological damage caused by the transmission of hydrogen see chapter three. The following sections are the additional pollution/geophysiological damage caused by hydrogen.

5.3.2.1: Pressurization.

The main additional form of pollution released by hydrogen in comparison to biogas/natural gas is that hydrogen needs to be stored at much higher pressures than biogas. It thus needs high pressure hydrogen cylinders/containers.

5.3.2.2: Ship Building.

Klaus lanz mentions a proposal to transport hydrogen by a supertanker. When the james bay III hydro-electric scheme in canada is completed it will generate so much electricity that proposals are desperately being sought for ways of using this electricity, "The lastest scheme seems almost to smack of desperation: using electricity to extract hydrogen from water and then exporting it by ship to europe as an allegedly environmentally friendly petrol substitute." [25]

5.3.3: The Geophysiological Damage to the Demand Side of the Carbon Spiral Caused by the Transmission of Hydrogen.

5.3.3.1: The Proposed Scale of Hydrogen Pipelines.

Given the enormous distances between the centres of alternative energy production and the centres of energy consumption the hydrogen gas pipeline system is likely to be similarly enormous. For example, it has been suggested that, "Forty years from now, solar thermal plants may stretch across the deserts of the US, North Africa and central Asia. Hydrogen fuel ... can be manufactured in desert solar plants and shipped by pipeline to run automobiles in distant cities." [26] Richard north proposes to transport hydrogen from the tropics to brutland. [27]

5.3.3.2: The Transportation of Hydrogen or Electricity?

In the future, alternative energy suppliers may be faced with the problem of transporting energy to distant consumers. They have three choices:-

* generate electricity and transmit it via the electricity grid;

* use electricity to produce hydrogen and transport it using lorries/pipelines; or,

* transmit electricity to an urban hydrogen production facility to create hydrogen.

The economics and geophysiology of these options has not yet been determined. It has been suggested that, "It is cheaper to produce electricity than to make hydrogen." [28] This is because alternative energy could produce electricity which would otherwise be wasted thereby making it virtually free.

As far as transportation is concerned, it has been suggested that it would be cheaper to transport hydrogen rather than electricity, "It can be transported by pipeline, possibly less expensively than electricity can be transported by wire." [29] Richard north agrees quoting evidence from the world resources institute, "So, luckily for sunless British interests, transporting hydrogen long distances is quite cheap." [30]

Ted trainer has highlighted the absurdities of setting up solar power stations in tropical regions and transporting hydrogen thousands of miles to the over-industrialized nations. He believes the transportation of electricity is more likely than hydrogen, "An integrated global solar electrical supply system might consist of many plants north and south of the equator to take account of the seasons. However, significant transportation costs could arise. It is 8,000 km from 15 degrees south of the equator to britain. One form of transportation would be as liquid hydrogen. Liquefaction for transport in tankers would use energy equal to 30% of the energy in the gas, so that the overall energy efficiency of a liquid hydrogen system would be around 3.5%. Therefore to provide 24 million kwh of electrical energy per day in europe would require collection of 685 million kwh in the form of solar energy. In a region averaging 6 kwh/m²/day this would require 114 millon square meters of solar collectors. More promising might be the generation of electricity at low latitudes and its transmission via very long high voltage cables, requiring only storage to supply night time demand." [31]

FOUR: THE CONSUMPTION OF HYDROGEN.

The way in which hydrogen is consumed helps to determine its impact on the Earth's Photosynthetic capacity. Unfortunately, there is not enough information to show how different forms of consumption produce different geophysiological damage.

5.4.1: Background.

5.4.1.1: General Usage.

Hydrogen could be burnt to provide heat, hot water or steam for electricity generation. It could be used as a transport fuel. It could be used to store energy e.g. in fuel cells. It .. "can be either burned in an internal combustion engine or combined with oxygen in a fuel cell." [32]

5.4.1.2: Hydrogen Fuelled Cars.

One of the main uses of hydrogen is likely to be as a fuel for alternative cars. This is one of the most geophysiologically damaging uses of hydrogen.

In greenpeace's fossil free future, hydrogen powered vehicles are predicted to play an increasingly major role, "Solar electric and solar hydrogen systems were assumed to .. meet 30% of fuel use in 2030 and 80% in 2100." [33] .A few companies are already working on the production of hydrogen. Its development is a long term prospect, "Sir John Cadogan, director of research at BP, said he was certain the technology to produce hydrogen fuel from water at a price that could compete with fossil fuels will ultimately be achieved." [34]

A number of car manufacturers are working on prototype hydrogen cars. "In two or three years' time the first hydrogen powered cars will be road-tested. In two or three decades says the managing director of Mazda his company will be making hundreds of thousands of pollution free cars each year. Hydrogen is the fuel of the future he says." [35] Mazda have produced .. "their first hydrogen powered prototype car, aimed mainly at commuters, the 988cc car has a range of 200 kilometres. However, frequent recharging of the batteries is only one of the major headaches for those working on the research." [36]

5.4.1.3: Fuel Cells.

The hydrogen in fuel cells also provides energy, "One means of using hydrogen efficiently is the fuel cell, which can produce electricity directly from the fuel at an efficiency as high as 65%. Indeed, the fuel cell may one day be thought of as the silicon chip of the hydrogen economy. Many homes could have reversible fuel cells - capable of producing hydrogen from electricity and vice versa." [37]

5.4.2: The Geophysiological Damage to the Supply Side of the Carbon Spiral Caused by the Uses of Hydrogen.

5.4.2.1: Mining, Processing, and Manufacturing.

The mining/processing of the raw materials needed for the manufacture of hydrogen cars/fuel cells would release greenhouse gases.

5.4.2.2: Construction.

The construction of factories manufacturing hydrogen cars/fuel cells releases greenhouse gases.

5.4.2.3: Transportation.

The transportation needed to move raw materials from mines to processing industries and then manufacturers; the transportation of manufactured items such as hydrogen cars/fuel cells to retailers, etc releases greenhouse gases - unless they were powered by hydrogen.

5.4.2.4: The Burning of Hydrogen.

The use of hydrogen, whether in cars/fuel cells, does not release greenhouse gases, "To burn hydrogen is simply to recombine it back with oxygen to produce water." [38] ; "When it burns, it produces mainly water vapour - no carbon dioxide." [39] ; "Hydrogen would be a fuel used without any carbon emission - so no global warming would result from it." [40] ; "Hydrogen is a clean fuel (it produces water and heat when it is burned) and produces no sulphur oxides, no carbon monoxide, no hydrocarbon particulates, and no CO₂ emissions. It does produce some nitrogen oxides, but the amount of these pollutants are fairly easy to control." [41] ; .. "hydrogen burns without any detrimental atmospheric emissions." [42] ; .. "solar hydrogen is virtually .. pollution free." [43]

5.4.2.5: The Disposal of Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

It is not known how much greenhouse gas pollution would be released by the disposal of fuel cells.

5.4.3: The Geophysiological Damage to the Demand Side of the Carbon Spiral Caused by the Uses of Hydrogen.

5.4.3.1: Mining and Processing.

The mining/processing of the raw materials needed for the manufacture of hydrogen cars/fuel cells would cause geophysiological destruction. There are no further facts about this issue.

5.4.3.2: Manufacturing.

The construction of factories manufacturing hydrogen cars/fuel cells would suffocate the Earth's life support system.

5.4.3.3: Transportation.

The transportation needed to move raw materials to processors and then hydrogen cars/fuel cell manufacturers; the transportation of hydrogen cars/fuel cells to retailers, etc causes geophysiological destruction.

5.4.3.4: The Disposal of Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

If fuel cells were dumped in landfill sites they would have to take some responsibility for the geophysiological destruction.

5.4.3.5: The Developments Stimulated by Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

By far the greatest geophysiological damage that is likely to be caused by the use of fuels cells is, in the over-industrialized world, the invasion of the countryside, and, in the industrializing world, enabling rural people to survive in semi-poverty in rural villages. The developments provoked by hydrogen could be almost as colossal as those provoked by solar cells. Fuel cells are seen as .. "portable power packs in the developing world, reliable local supplies for distant communities .. " [44]

FIVE: CONCLUSIONS.

5.5.1: The Abundance of Hydrogen.

The reason so many commentators believe that hydrogen will eventually become the fuel of the future is its sheer abundance. Whilst there are limits to the supplies of fossil fuels, and most alternative energies (with the exception of solar energy), the supply of hydrogen is virtually unlimited, "In fact, all current u.s. energy needs could be met with just 1% of today's u.s. water supply." [45] ; "solar hydrogen is virtually inexhaustible and pollution free." [46] Theoretically, hydrogen is virtually as abundant as solar energy.

Since its inception, green politics has been about the conservation of scarce resources. However, hydrogen is far from being scarce. The potential development of hydrogen has had a huge impact on changes in green ideas. The sheer abundance of hydrogen has encouraged some greens to desert the politics of scarcity in favour of green cornucopianism. They support the ascendancy of hydrogen not despite its abundance but because of its abundance.

5.5.2: The Flexibility of Hydrogen.

There is little doubt that hydrogen has enormous technological appeal. It is one of the most versatile forms of energy, "Hydrogen could be the fuel of the future - a cheap, clean greenhouse-friendly substitute for oil and gas that can burn in cars and home heating systems as well as in power stations." [47] It can be burnt directly to provide heat, hot water, steam for the generation of electricity, or it could be converted into a bioliquid, "It is also a means of converting electrical energy into gaseous or liquid fuel, which is important because only about 25% of our (the US) current energy needs are supplied in the form of electricity." [48]

5.5.3: The Political Flexibility of Hydrogen.

Hydrogen is also flexible in the sense that it could be derived either from huge, centralized, capital-intensive, power plants or more decentralized sources, "Both in production and use, hydrogen lends itself to a decentralized system ..." [49] ; .. "the equipment to produce it is almost as economical on a small scale as on a large one. Both in production and use, hydrogen lends itself to a decentralized system in which waste is minimized." [50] Decentralization is aided by fuel cells, "Many homes could have reversible fuel cells - capable of producing hydrogen from electricity and vice versa." [51] ; .. "portable power packs in the developing world, reliable local supplies for distant communities .. " [52] However, fred pearce, not surprisingly, believes that mass manufacture would be better, "The key to its development is its large-scale manufacture, which requires passing electricity through water. What better job for a hydro-electric dam, where the water and the power are on tap?" [53]

5.5.4: Hydrogen solves the Energy Storage Problem.

Hydrogen has yet another enormous advantage over rival alternative energies because it is capable of storing energy. Many alternative forms of energy produce electricity that has to be used immediately but hydrogen, like biofuels, is capable of storing energy for use at the time convenient to consumers.

5.5.5: Hydrogen is the Perfect Cogenerator.

Many forms of alternative energy are inconsistent producers of electricity. They cannot produce electricity when consumers want it and they are often able to generate huge amounts of electricity when it is not needed, "As large wind pharms and solar ranches appear in windy and sunny reaches of the world, they can generate electricity that is fed into the grid when power demand is high, and produce hydrogen when it is not." [54] In this sense alternative energies are extremely wasteful. They could generate massive amounts of electricity but there is no point in doing so because consumers don't want it. Hydrogen is therefore the perfect partner to all forms of alternative energy because it enables them to generate, and in effect save electricity, that would otherwise not be generated. Hydrogen overcomes the main obstacle to the development of alternative energies, "Hydrogen both stores and transports solar power and thereby makes solar power available when and where it is needed." [55] As far as solar cells are concerned, the use of hydrogen to store energy is doubly advantageous given that hydrogen is needed to convert solar electricity into a form of electricity that could be used domestically and industrially, "It is a means of converting solar electricity (PV is in the form of direct current whereas most machines and appliances run on high voltage alternating current) into alternating current, a more useable form of electricity." [56]

5.5.6: Hydrogen Boosts the Efficiency of Alternative Energies.

Where hydrogen is used as a cogenerator with other alternative forms of energy it is able to dramatically boost the efficiency of these forms of energy. Instead of operating for a fraction of the time when they can meet consumer demand, they can now operate whenever circumstances allow. The huge quantities of electricity that would otherwise not be generated can now be used to produce hydrogen. The best case scenario for hydrogen-alternative energy cogeneration is that the cost of alternative energy could drop dramatically and enable it to challenge the supremacy of oil even at its cheapest.

5.5.7: The Subsidiarity of Hydrogen.

Hydrogen will never become the dominant form of energy because it needs electricity to split water molecules. It will always have to be used in conjunction with other sources of energy - primarily solar cell energy. But it could play a vital role as the cogenerator in conjunction with a plethora of alternative energies.

5.5.8: A Global Hydrogen or Electricity Grid?

One of the biggest issue concerning alternative energies is whether they are going to lead to the creation of a global hydrogen pipeline network or a global electricity grid or perhaps even both. Because most alternative forms of energy produce electricity it would seem the most likely development is an extension of the electricity grid. However, given that they could operate at maximum efficiency only with the aid of hydrogen the choice arises: firstly, solar/wind/wave energies could be used to meet electricity demands at peak times but then produce hydrogen when demand drops so that hydrogen could be converted back into electricity in order to meet demand. This would mean that only an electricity grid is required. Secondly, all alternative electricity could be converted to hydrogen so that there is a need only for a gas pipeline network? The third possibility is that alternative energies produce electricity which is converted to hydrogen and then piped to centres of energy consumption where it could either be converted back into electricity either at a power station or at home using a fuel cell. The problem with relying heavily on the use of electricity is that it is not as flexible a form of energy as hydrogen. Even if electricity is used to transport energy, industries and homes would require hydrogen so this would mean hydrogen is going to have to be transported to these places anyway. What is the point of setting up alternative energies which convert hydrogen to electricity, transport the electricity to urban areas and then convert it back into hydrogen when hydrogen could just be piped to where it is needed? What this seems to suggest is that whilst alternative energies could do without a global electricity grid, they can't do without a global gas pipeline network.

5.5.9: The Perfect Marriage between Hydrogen and Solar Energy

Solar energy is a form of energy available in astronomic quantities. If this was the only form of alternative energy available its impact would be to create an all-electric economy. Electric economies are not entirely satisfactory - even with batteries they are not flexible enough to meet all energy needs. However, in conjunction with hydrogen, solar energy can be converted into any form of energy that might be needed. Solar energy by itself offers astronomic energy but this will only be of limited benefit to society. However, in conjunction with hydrogen, it offers astronomic benefits. Hydrogen is able to convert the astronomic potentiality of solar energy into an astronomic actuality on Earth.

5.5.10: The Tortuousness of Hydrogen.

It is commonly held that whilst alternative energy can easily generate electricity it is far more difficult to find a cheap and plentiful supply of alternative liquid/gaseous fuels. Hydrogen answers this problem. But, hydrogen is so flexible a form of energy it also threatens to be the most tortuous of alternative energies. It is possible that crops could be grown to produce fuel which is burnt in a power station to produce electricity which is used to generate hydrogen which is finally used as a source of heat in homes. The end use of this energy could be many steps beyond the point at which the original fuel could have been used for the same purpose. Such long routes may not be uncommon, "It may seem wasteful to use electricity generated from solar energy to make hydrogen, which can then be used to generate more electricity. However, electricity that is generated by existing photovoltaic cells cannot be stored long term; it must be used immediately." [57] The longer the route between the generation of energy and its eventual use the more geophysiological damage is likely to occur. The use of hydrogen creates the opportunity for an energy merry-go round before its eventual consumption. The easy conversion of hydrogen from a fuel into electricity and then back again provides one of its main advantages but it could also seriously detract from its green potential.

5.5.11: The Advantages of Hydrogen over other Alternative Energies.

Hydrogen has a number of significant advantages over other forms of alternative energy.

5.5.11.1: Scarcity and Abundance.

Fossil fuels are a finite source of energy whilst alternative energies are perpetual (given a stable climate). Fossil fuels are also a limited form of energy but then so too are most alternative energies. There are limits to the amount of energy which could be derived from Phytomass, biomass, wind, wave, tidal, power. Even if exploited to their fullest extent (which is likely to make them unsustainable) they could never provide more than a limited amount of energy. In comparison, solar/hydrogen energies are perpetual and abundant. Solar/hydrogen energies are as different from alternative energies as alternative energies are from fossil fuels.

5.5.11.2: No Problem with Leakages.

The scale of leakages from natural gas pipelines is so severe that some commentators believe it could scupper the environmental rationale for replacing oil with natural gas, "A study by Dean Abrahamson of the University of Minnesota found that, compared with oil heating, the methane leaking from natural gas distribution systems has such a powerful greenhouse effect that it offsets any CO₂ reduction benefits of switching to gas heating." [58] ; "It is conceivable that cars running on natural gas would produce more 'CO2 equivalent' than conventional petroleum driven vehicles, because of methane leakages occurring during the production and distribution of fuel." [59] There are no such problems with hydrogen. Hydrogen pipelines could suffer severe leaks but such leakages would not disturb the climate.

5.5.12: The Pinnacle of Alternative Energy - Solar, Nuclear, and Hydrogen Power.

5.5.12.1: Hydrogen is the perfect cogenerator for Nuclear Power.

Hydrogen is the perfect cogenerator for alternative forms of energy. However, rather surprisingly, hydrogen is also a perfect companion to nuclear power. The efficiency of nuclear power plants could be increased significantly by working in conjunction with hydrogen power plants since, at the present time, the former function far below capacity because the demand for electricity is too low, "But the surplus electricity produced by nuclear power stations at night could provide a cheap way of electrolysing water to make hydrogen." [60] .

5.5.12.2: The Advocates of Solar, Nuclear, and Hydrogen Power.

There are a number of green commentators who support the development of both solar and nuclear power. E.g. nisbet has abandoned the usual distinction between conventional, and alternative, energy and seeks to unite nuclear, and solar, power through the creation of a hydrogen run economy. His long term objective is to boost nuclear/solar power, "With intelligent use of conservation (of energy) and of nuclear, solar and hydroelectric power, and with a switch to electric public transport and to hydrogen as a currency of energy, it is quite possible to imagine a global economy in 2020 that has no net production of CO₂ or CH₄." [61] ; "A successful global economy of the period 2000-2050 - may be a nuclear-electric-hydrogen economy. In such an economy the electricity generated in nuclear power stations would be used to power industry and to produce hydrogen to power independent transport." [62]

Nisbet's views are significant in so far as he demonstrates the inherent compatibility between nuclear and solar power - beyond the proposition, which lovelock likes to emphasize, that nuclear energy is a natural form of energy on Earth. Given the common green view that whilst solar power is an environmentally benign form of power nuclear power is not, it is vital to point out the compatibilities between these forms of energy. Solar power could fit in quite easily with a nuclear powered society (france is already moving in this direction), and, conversely, a solar powered society could open up the way to the introduction, or expansion, of nuclear power. Whereas some greens believe the creation of a solar powered society would dispel the nightmare of nuclear power, nisbet shows clearly that, on the contrary, it is a companion of nuclear power.

5.5.12.3: The Dangers Posed by the Compatibility between Solar, Hydrogen, and Nuclear, Power.

If hydrogen becomes the fuel of the future it will provide renewed justification for nuclear energy. Hydrogen creates a high degree of compatibility between nuclear, and solar, power. [63] Both forms of energy could be used to mass produce hydrogen. Given that solar energy is not evenly spread around the world, the temptation to use nuclear power in temperate regions of the world as a back up to solar power would be considerable. [64]

Given the likelihood of hydrogen powered societies opening up opportunities for nuclear power then greenpeace, friends of the Earth and the green party are all naive in believing they can promote solar/hydrogen economies whilst, at the same time, opposing nuclear power. Solar energy is nuclear friendly and will almost certainly guarantee the perpetuation of nuclear power. The problem is even more stark in that the greater the development of a biogas infrastructure, the more likely is it that this will bring about a hydrogen powered society which will then open the way for a nuclear powered society.

To the extent that the car industry is one of the best guides to future trends in energy developments it should be pointed out that it is already initiating the move from oil to natural gas - it has developed prototype hydrogen cars. It is likely to be in the forefront of the development of hydrogen powered societies. In doing so it would also be responsible for rejuvenating the nuclear power industry. It may well be true that, "The real saviour of the north american car culture may be something that's a long way off; hydrogen fuel." [65] but by the same token the car industry could also be the saviour of the nuclear power industry. [66]

5.5.12.4: The French Connection.

The hypothesis of a transition from oil, to natural gas, and then solar/nuclear/hydrogen powered societies, may seem tendentious. But this scenario is logically feasible. There are already links between the car industry and the nuclear power industry but, paradoxically, they have not developed in the logical way just outlined.

France relies on nuclear power more than any other nation on Earth. It is so heavily committed to this form of energy it produces more electricity than it needs for its own domestic consumption. It is looking increasingly to export nuclear powered electricity to neighbouring countries and to develop new markets for electricity. The huge electricity generating capacity provides a powerful incentive to increase the consumption of electricity especially given that the closer that nuclear power stations work at full capacity the cheaper electricity becomes. [67] As a consequence the french government is promoting the development of electric vehicles. Over the next five years it is hoping to boost the number of electric cars to 100,000, "Under a scheme announced in the last days of prime minister edourd balladur's government, each sale of an electric car between now and the end of next year will be subsidized by the state to the tune of 15,000 francs (£2,000), so that its price matches its petrol or diesel-criven equivalent. While the scheme extends to importers of electric cars, it is not proof of pure environmental benevolence on the part of the french government: French car manufacturers are at the forefront of electric car production, with renault being the first to construct battery driven vehicles on the same production lines as its other models. Ordinary french consumers will, from the autumn, have a choice of 11 models of electric cars - ranging from the citreon ax .. to the fiat panda electra .. Running costs in france - where electricity is, on average, cheaper than brutland - are said to range from £1.20 to £2.00 per 70 miles. The 106 and the citreon ax have been on trial in the atlantic city of la rochelle since 1993. For the experiment la rochelle has been equipped with a network of "electricity stations" - kerb-side boxes which look like petrol pumps, into which the cars can be plugged for recharging." [68]

Doubtlessly even at this very moment there are over-wealthy, over-privileged supergreens designing stickers for their cars proclaiming - 'This car runs on clean green energy - nuclear power'.