Enter the fuel cell, exit dependence on Alberta

[QUOTE BY= badsector] How is this, Dr. Caleb? <img align="absmiddle" src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif'>[/QUOTE] Better. Thanks! The purpose of Vive is to bring Canadians together, not divide us. Your last article was pretty 'east vs west'. Incidentally, Alberta's biggest growth industry for natural resources is forestry. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'>

[QUOTE]Incidentally, Alberta's biggest growth industry for natural resources is forestry.[/QUOTE] Being a "lefty" and a hiking fan, I have somewhat moderate enthusiasm for cutting trees down. Yes, I am willing to hug them.

[QUOTE BY= badsector] Being a "lefty" and a hiking fan, I have somewhat moderate enthusiasm for cutting trees down. Yes, I am willing to hug them.[/QUOTE] Being a centrist, and an outdoors type too, I realize that we need wood, concrete, glass and steel if we're going to avoid living in caves. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'> I guess it's a good thing that Alberta has more World Heritage sites than any other province. Something you may find interesting too is: <a href='http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/01/sweden_raises_t.php'>Link</a>

The fuel cell is an important innovation in terms of converting chemical energy directly into electrical energy. However, what is the cheapest, easiest available way to get hydrogen? Hydrocarbons, which often go by the name of oil. Personally, I would like to see an innovation in fuel cells that uses some form of liquified hydrocarbon, rather than elemental hydrogen. Either way you look at it, that hydrogen is not coming from water unless you get the energy from another method. If we were to obtain the hydrogen from water or the liquifaction of air, there would be a need to increase the size of our electric power grids in order to carry the necessary energy. It is much simpler just to retool existing refineries to produce more hydrogen.

[QUOTE BY= Bryan of StA] However, what is the cheapest, easiest available way to get hydrogen? Personally, I would like to see an innovation in fuel cells that uses some form of liquified hydrocarbon, rather than elemental hydrogen. [/QUOTE] How about if you could rip hydrogen directly from alcohol, using a catalyzer? The alcohol could come from corn, and not have to be processed first, as the procedure benefits from the extra water derived from corn alcohol. <a href='http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/tech/InnovationRepublish_1044486.htm'>Linkie</a> Fill up with alcohol from your local fuel station, and drive.

The idea of Saskatchewan as the economic powerhouse of Canada makes me giddy <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/lol.gif' alt='Laughing Out Loud'> . Petrocanada, grade Taber. I know that many southern american countries have had the fueling infrastructure for some time now for ethanol and gasoline (really, same system, different tanks. Like diesel and gasoline at the same station). Still, although a significant proportion of hydrocarbons (about 45%) are used for gasoline, manufacturing and other products (asphalt among others) still consumes most oil. As to natural gas, burning it for heat makes sense, as all it's energy then becomes usefull heat.

Part of the reason why the globalizers are now moving into Brazil is the vast unused land in that country. Coupled with cheap labour, Brazil could very well produce bio fuel for North America. <a href="http://www.economist.com/World/la/displayStory.cfm?story_id=5107849&no_na_tran=1">Brazil</a>

I just ran across this excellent article on the state of Electric vehicles. I'm still convinced that General Motors EV-1 was the biggest success in this field, and it was cancelled because it was so low maintainence that GM wouldn't make any money off it. Enter the Hybrid. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/rolleyes.gif' alt='Rolling Eyes'> http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2006/3/22/111627/349 The biggest problem Electric vehicles face are: Battery charge times and a lightweight but efficient battery. Fuel cells would overcome that.

I hope the plan is not to log in the northern Alberta Boreal forest that regenerates very slowly....

Brazil can't clear much land though, Badsector. It isn't sustainable because so much of the land has poor soil quality. If the rain forest collapses, and clearing too much land will cause that, we're pretty much screwed. We'd be way better off growing fuel crops (and I'd encourage industrial hemp over corn because it's easier on the soil) on the Canadian prairies because it's already one of the most altered ecosystems on the planet, although climate change may end that as well.

[QUOTE]Brazil can't clear much land though, Badsector. It isn't sustainable because so much of the land has poor soil quality. If the rain forest collapses, and clearing too much land will cause that, we're pretty much screwed.[/QUOTE]Reverand Blair, actually I didn't mean they should cut down the rainforests. As it turns out, Brazil has a huge mass of land that is not forested and good enough for agriculture. <a href="http://www.agbrazil.com/">An interesting article</a> "Unlimited Opportunities Brazil's frontier--known as the cerrado--is immense and mostly undeveloped. Larger than all of Western Europe and nearly as big as the United States east of the Mississippi River, the unopened area suitable for crop agriculture is larger than the US area in corn, soybeans, wheat and feed grains combined. Investment and agribusiness opportunities in Brazil's cerrado stagger the imagination. Huge tracts of virgin land suited to large-scale dryland or irrigated farming sell for as little as US$100 per acre. Millions of hectares are newly opened and planted every year. The opening of Brazil's frontier has created a sustained rate of growth of farm output and demand for inputs and services unparalleled in world agricultural history. And, in sharp contrast to the agriculture of developed nations, the investment and agribusiness opportunities in Brazil's frontier agriculture are destined to continue a rapid rate of growth into the foreseeable future."

That is only slightly better than the rain forest though, bad sector. If you look at the problems facing the Canadian prairies, most of it cleared and seeded in the twentieth century, the suitability of the cerrado for agriculture is also questionable. At a time when we are introducing programs to re-sequester carbon in our own farmlands, it seems to me that encouraging Brazil to follow the bad example we started to set 100 years ago is not a particularly good idea. In the last 30 years, I've seen changes to our agricultural methods that have been driven by two forces...the industrialization of agriculture and the need to mitigate the damage that industrialization causes so we can continue farming on an industrial level. It's not sustainable. Now, if Brazil were to seed it to Doc's sweetgrass and make sure to leave enough natural habitat that it was possible to go back if (when) things started going wrong, it would be one thing. We have no history of that sort of careful planning though. Instead we'll rip and tear and plant corn or wheat, irrigate it, use herbicides and pesticides, and suck every dollar possible out. The results are predictable. Erosion, polluted water, habitat loss, species loss, and in the end only a couple of multi-nationals will be making a profit.

Yes, Reverend, that is how things are (quite unfortunately). On the other hand, it might resolve the current crises.

I think using agricultural land that we already have in production would be a better alternative. We've already trashed enough land, after all. The world has a food surplus, but that surplus has pushed world prices down to the point where farmers in the developing world can't afford to plant crops to feed themselves with. Using existing land for eco-fuel production would help to solve that problem by pushing world prices back up.

Personally, I'd rather have them grow their bio fuel in Brazil, not in my backyard.