Posted on 04/22/2006 9:32:49 AM PDT by SmithL
ST. HELENA, Calif. -- Unable to drive down high oil prices, President Bush is spending Earth Day promoting futuristic hydrogen fuel technology as a way to wean Americans from gas-guzzling vehicles.
After a bike ride near his Napa Valley resort Saturday morning, Bush planned to visit the California Fuel Cell Partnership in West Sacramento for a tour and speech on his energy plan.
The plan does not include any measures that would reduce gas prices in the short term, the White House acknowledges. But with Republicans worried that the increasing cost to drive could hurt them in the voting booth this year, Bush said he understands Americans are hurting.
"I know the folks here are suffering at the gas pump," Bush told an audience Friday in San Jose. "Rising gasoline prices is like taking a — is like a tax, particularly on the working people and the small business people."
But to address the immediate problem, Bush offered only a pledge that "if we find any price gouging it will be dealt with firmly."
The White House hopes the high gas prices will pressure Congress to act on the energy proposals the president outlined in his State of the Union address, such as increased federal research into alternative fuels and batteries for hybrid and electric cars.
Democrats, meanwhile, contend that the Bush administration places too much emphasis on drilling reserves and not enough on alternative fuels.
The promise of hydrogen fuel cell technology in vehicles is a favorite of automakers, environmentalists and politicians because it accomplishes two important goals — automobiles that run on fuel cells would not require gasoline and emit only water.
The problem with the technology is that it's many years away from widespread use.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hydrogen, electric cars for the commute that don't use any gasoline at all, and not a penny cheaper to run but at least they aren't dependent on foreign oil.
So out of touch...
"Unable to report the news in an unbiased manner, AP today assigned Nedra Pickler to . . ."
"Prez......promoting futuristic hydrogen fuel technology"
read my lips....its not in the thermodynamics, stupid!
"automobiles that run on fuel cells would not require gasoline and emit only water."
_________________________________
No its dihydrogen oxide they will emit, a substance that kills countless people every year. This is terrible!
And in the evening barbequeing a whole cow for the Border Patrol and Minutemen....
Or ignoring Lennin's birthday altogether and telling folks why.
Bush promotes fuel cells, rides his bike on Earth Day
--
Notice he didn't take the Gub up on an offer of a ride in his motorcycle sidecar.
Yeah, like the President controls the oil prices. But to Leftists, the gubermint is supposed to control everything, from the price of oil, to its availability (those with special "need" like celebrities and Party officials will always have top priority), to the amount of time you can pass gas in a day.
The City Council where my SIL lives actually tried to ban DHMO.
So much for drilling under this GOP controlled government. Independence from foreign oil was one of the major issues for which I voted all GOP since 2000.
Promoting fuel cells is nice, but without legislation fast-tracking nuclear energy, it's not very helpful. If you have to burn imported fuel to produce hydrogen, then you are set further back because the process is less efficient than gasoline engines, due to the multiple conversions.
Actually, it is more expensive:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1284737/posts?page=1
Stupid thieving government.
Now there are a bunch of crooks, IMO. Firoz Rasul, chairman of Ballard Power Systems Ltd., took over chairmanship of the California Fuel Cell Partnership in 2004. He has a pretty sleazy history.
We have been over and over this on FR for a long time. The idea is to get free of imported oil, not to find a cheaper source of fuel. Reason being, there is nothing cheaper on this planet than oil.
The object of this exercise is to eliminate foreign oil. Cost is of interest but is secondary.
well, I don't think government should have any interest in how US citizens go about attaining their fuel or what fuel it is they attain. It certainly shouldn't be stealing money from the populace to prop up a strategy that is more expensive than the current one. Including, incidentally, one that pollutes more.
Let me repeat that, environmentalists pushing for hydrogen are pushing for a fuel that pollutes more, not less.
The goal of 'energy independence' is as shallow and as ridiculous as that of 'automobile independence', and has become little more than political jargon of the meddling elites.
Then Bush is out there talking about price gouging, of which, by definition, there is no such thing.
It is so topsy turvey, it is, frankly, somewhat mindboggling.
The Dept of Energy has sucked down $5 billion a year for 30 years, and if there isn't a gov't solution in hand by now there won't be. The latest example of gov't coming to the rescue was Katrina, and that is probably the best that can be expected. Being $9 trillion in debt can't be of any help, and the private sector is likewise $9 trillion in debt. There isn't much more where that came from. Answer? Horses? Bicycles?
We're better off getting away from the oil dependence (a lessen we should've learned 30 yrs ago during the oil embargo) than worrying about short term costs of adopting new technologies. Gas-electric hybrids and hydrogen fuel cells are two parts of a strategy. Don't be a luddite.
It's not necessarily more polluting to produce the hydrogen than to use oil. The libertarian Reason Institute's think tank's assumption was based on using natural gas plants. That's definitely not the only answer.
When did Bush buy a resort in Napa Valley? Is that to go with his timber company from the 2004 debates?
You aren't alone in your perturbed feeling in that regard.
We have a winner!
Nuclear power should offset the thermodynamic inefficiency of hydrogen production, correct?
How would this be done? Electralysis?
If any of you are interested I just blogged about this article, and this entire issue of high gas prices, which seems to be in the news a lot lately:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/gasoline_and_government.htm
The template is: if something good happens, the Democrats did it. If something bad happens, blame the Republicans.
"Gas prices are high, in spite of President Clinton's best efforts to rein in the Republican Congress."
"Gas prices are high because of Bush and the Republican Congress."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.