[Cicero]

You need to learn how to paragraph, because this is basically unreadable as it stands.

The problem I see with a "hydrogen economy" is that you need energy to produce the Hydrogen--let's say by electrolyzing water. At the moment, most electrical energy comes from fossile fuels. So you aren't really saving any oil unless you start making electricity in some other way, lets say from nuclear power.

[B.O. Plenty]

It don't take any more "energy" to make make hydrogen than it does to crack crude oil to make gasoline. The problem is the same, except that a "gallon of hydrogen" will take you about twice as far as a gallon of gas. It is the most powerful fuel(other than nuclear) that is presently known. If Texaco high-test was better, NASA would have it in the space shuttle.

[Calvin Locke]

Well, there's also wind, solar, tidal, hydro. I went looking in Walmart the other day and I didn't see any "Mr. Fusion" energy plants...

On the serious side, I was glancing at hydrogen articles a few months ago. Never got around to finding out why hydrogen from electrolysis needs to be perc'd through KOH or something caustic.

But, hydrogen can be stored, transported, and burned at a later time.

Personally, if its cheap, efficient, and usable, it works for me.

(If you want to discuss one of the more esoteric points of hydrogen with a fanatic, you can argue that it's a carrier, not engery, or energy, even if it is a carrier- personally, if its cheap, efficient, and usable, it works for me.)