Cars powered by hydrogen fuel cells, once hailed by President George W. Bush as a pollution-free solution for reducing the nation's dependence on foreign oil, will not be practical over the next 10 to 20 years, the energy secretary said Thursday, and the government will cut off funds for the vehicles' development.
Developing those cells and coming up with a way to transport the hydrogen is a big challenge, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in releasing energy-related details of the administration's budget for the year beginning Oct. 1. Dr. Chu said the government preferred to focus on projects that would bear fruit more quickly.
The retreat from cars powered by fuel cells counters Mr. Bush's prediction in 2003 that "the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by hydrogen, and pollution-free." The Energy Department will continue to pay for research into stationary fuel cells, which Dr. Chu said could be used like batteries on the power grid and do not require compact storage of hydrogen... See the full article
Comment by: auntiegrav (auntiegrav) (Jun-3-2009)
Anything that cuts down on government-funded automobile research is a good thing. We have to stop accepting the endorsement of our car religion by government just as we don't let the government endorse other religions. The car has one purpose and that is to get you to leave your place and contaminate someone else's place.
Comment by: PT (David Alexander) (May-30-2009) Web site
The statement by Robert Alvarez is not completely clear -- he mentions "nuclear nonproliferation activity" and "safe storage" of nuclear materials, both of which seem to be important non-military actions, but then refers to weapons as the biggest allocation. As a result, his statement is "muddy" and I wonder what the real budget focus is in the Obama plan. It seems that Obama makes compromises as a strategy to keep the critics quiet and accomplish more short-term -- but something in me says that he is gradually shifting the national focus from war and force, to diplomacy and the solving of financial, energy and environmental challenges. Let's hope so. To do all that will require gradual steps as well as much raising of awareness in the public so as to gain political support that makes it all possible.
"While Dr. Chu emphasized the allocations for research, a former Energy Department official, Robert Alvarez, pointed out that the budget still includes $6.4 billion for nuclear weapons and $4.4 billion for naval reactors, nuclear nonproliferation activity and safe storage of surplus plutonium. 'Weapons still make up the largest single expenditure,' he said."
Does that mean that nuclear weapons are low-hanging, delicious fruit and they deserve such tremendous support? And in what context? For me these figures put in question all good intentions for solving the climate crisis and all on-coming talks and the stimulus for development of renewable energy sources and for finding of alternatives for petrol and depleting resources.
The volunteers of PlanetThoughts.org are happy to give you their best selection of news, opinion, reviews, stories, quotes, tips, and more. We hope you enjoy the reading... and thinking. Thanks!
Fossil Fuel
TheTeam
Cars powered by hydrogen fuel cells, once hailed by President 
PT (David Alexander)
speeva (Sevdalina Peeva)
