Every hydrogen fuel cell currently in production or concept uses some form of fossil fuel to generate the hydrogen gas. Are we really saving anything here or are we just covering one problem up with another?
We might conserve a wee bit if they can really get the ball rolling and they fully develop the system. BUT~ How long is it going to take and how expensive will they be upon initial mass production. I think the price will be high and the benefits low at the onset. BMW is working on it and my chances of getting one is slim to nothing. I have too many kids so that one went out the window. If they ever get it down to a virtual science and 3-4 years of mass production would be enough for Ford or whoever to come along with something efficient and less bucks. Another caveat: I hope the things are well made. If not, the death toll will rise and they will yank it off the market due to individual and class action lawsuits.
We need to develop alternative energy sources to generate the hydrogen, such as solar, wind, etc. You are right, much of the energy now used to generate hydrogen is fossil fuel. We need to get higher mpg for vehicles and get people to use mass transit as well.
They already have developed fuel cell technology. At present, it's production releases about the same amount of GHG's. But then, the microwave oven was originally about the size of a refrigerator in the 50's. Yep, they were big and inefficient. I hope it doesn't take that long to develop a better production method.
Hydrogen production units that would provide just fine for a single gas station have been built that run off of the power grid and convert water to hydrogen that work just fine. They don't require fossil fuel. There are many ways to generate electricity. It is an area that needs work. Strangely enough water is still the best source for hydrogen. Reforming it from oil results in trace amounts of carbon monoxide being left in the hydrogen gas. That results in quicker distruction of the fuel cell's fagile membrane that generates electricity. This is the main issue stopping hydrogen fuel cells right now. It is purer, but more expensive to get it from water.
No, hydrogen it's not an alternative to petroleum for producing energy. The reason is that petroleum is a primary energy source (you don't have to produce it), while hydrogen is an energy vector (to produce it you have to use other primary sources such as petroleum or nuclear). Of course this doesn't mean that the hydrogen technology is useless. As an energy vector, hydrogen is a good solution to transport energy from one place to another with stricter environmental constraints. For example, you may produce hydrogen in a big plant far from urban areas, where the pollution can be more efficiently limited, then you use the hydrogen as clean fuel for city cars.
