Nasa Glenn Research

There is much information on how hydrogen R & D funding requirements, hydrogen and soon may make hydrogen.

Read a little please.

http://hydrogencommerce.com/index2a.htm

"On the moon, you would start with a tank of water. You should use solar panels to produce hydrogen and oxygen during the day, then use the hydrogen and oxygen to produce the electricity during the night when there is no sun. Ideally, if nothing broke and nothing wore out, it could not function without being refueled. "
David Bents, Glenn Research Center NASA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_pr ...

http://www.wired.com/cars/energy/news/20 ...

http://www.enn.com/sci-tech/article/3197 ...

I am not a believer yet. I like the concept and for many years. I was aware of its potential long ago. But the reality is it takes energy to produce energy and hydrogen technology is no exception to this equation. I think a combination of technologies is the best solution, as always improving battery technology (one Chevy Volt!), Solar, wind, hydrogen, biofuels, and even conventional fossil fuels. We need vehicles and infrastructure that allow this flexibility. Chevy Volt (which I think makes hydrogen) seems to come closest to this notion. It's just my point of view alone.

Currently there because you do not buy the company to produce the technology, lower cost, supply points set in locations all States. without the big oil Wil still work to crush the people with their outdated undesirably. Very disheartening to see because they could be a utility / fuel instead of just one oil company

These guys all tend to oversimplify things a bit too much and they all tend to leave the relevant factors in the equation. For example, in this case, the solar panel is considered a link in the chain without matching a given expenditure of energy and materials and energy needed to produce the documents, which are used in manufacturing the solar panel . Once you figure in the cost of this table, suddenly the economic feasibility of this process into the dumpster. If this really work, and if the process was economically viable, while all households in America would be used the system to generate electricity at night. Clearly, this is simply not the case. The only reason it works on the moon, there is no other method available, and foreign and secondary costs are not a factor. So if the moon it costs $ 100 to run a 100 watt bulb for one hour once you figure in all costs, this is possible because only one line in one of several hundred of millions of dollars. In a typical house would not have this option.

For much of the same reason ethanol is not a source of viable alternative fuel. Similarly, the total cost factor is one reason why there were no new applications for nuclear power plants in the United States in more than 25 years. Recently there has been one, but it remains to be seen whether it will last. The cost of building a nuclear power plant exceeds the total value of electricity during its life.

The idea of a perpetual motion has been around for years .. If you could get rid of friction that is causing the wear and things to break this would be a great idea!

im not

I am not a proponent of hydrogen, it is, at best, a very specific solution to very specific situations.

If you just look at the math, you can see. Taking.