 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| High on Hydrogen
By Antonio C. Abaya Written Jan. 23, 2007 For the Standard Today, January 25 issue Regular readers of this column know that I have been the number one advocate of hydrogen power in this country ever since I was invited to a briefing on hydrogen fuel cells at the Hyatt Jamboree Hotel in southern California in 1995. My host was the CEO of the Onsi Corp., which supplies hydrogen fuel cells for the space ships of NASA. I have since written about a dozen articles on fuel cells, the most recent ones being Doomsday Scenarios (Nov. 07, 2006), Learn from Iceland (Aug. 14, 2005), and Hydrogen Economy (Dec. 26, 2004), all archived in my website www.tapatt.org. For those who may have tuned in late, fuel cells generate electricity by combining oxygen (from the air) and hydrogen (ideally from water) in an acidic solution, causing a stream of electrons to flow (electricity), and the byproduct of that reaction is nothing more obnoxious than water vapor. This is not science-fiction fantasy. There are already hundreds of motor vehicles � cars, vans, buses, lorries � operating as experimental models in North America, Japan, Western Europe and, perhaps, even in China and Russia. There are also stand-alone fuel cell generators operating as prototype models in those same regions, some of them having run continuously for several years now. Last I heard, fuel cell gen sets had a rated capacity of 250 kw, stackable in modules of one mw. They must have reached higher capacities by now I said that hydrogen ideally should come from water because most fuel cells at present get their hydrogen from hydrogen-rich methane (CH4) or natural gas, which are readily available from chemical suppliers. I have always believed and written that the hydrogen should ideally come from water through electrolysis, a process which separates the hydrogen from the oxygen. Not only because water is free, or almost free. But also because the exclusion of methane or natural gas makes the process completely carbon-free, and thus totally pollution-free. Water can be electrolyzed with electricity generated either by solar photovoltaic panels or by wind turbines.. The cycle of breaking up water into hydrogen and oxygen atoms through electrolysis, and then recombining the same hydrogen and oxygen atoms in a fuel cell to generate electricity, releasing water as the byproduct, has a simple, minimalist symmetry, a virtuous cycle that borders on the elegant, like a haiku poem or a piano composition by Erik Satie. Those who read the reactions of readers to my columns, also archived in www.tapatt.org may recall the usual naysayers who poured cold water on my enthusiasm for hydrogen fuel cells. One wrote that hydrogen can never be a primary source of energy because Wikipedia said it isn�t. Or words to that effect. Another, with an Australian address, wrote that what I had in mind was contrary to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Well, the naysayers may have to eat their words. According to a recent Reuters news story from New Jersey , someone named Michael Strizki has done exactly what I wrote should be done. He �heats his house in the winter and cools it in the summer, and runs a full range of appliances, including such power guzzlers as a hot tub and a wide-screen TV set, without paying a penny in utility bills. �His conventional-looking family house in the pinewoods of western New Jersey is the first in the US to show that a combination of solar and hydrogen power can generate all the electricity needed for a home�.. �Strizki runs the 3,000-sq-ft house with electricity generated by a 1,000-sq-ft roof full of photovoltaic cells on a nearby building, an electrolyzer that uses the solar power to generate hydrogen from water, and a number of hydrogen tanks that store the gas until it is needed by the fuel cell. �In the summer, the solar panels generate 60% more electricity than the super-insulated house needs. The excess is stored in the form of hydrogen which is used in the winter � when the solar panels can�t meet all the domestic demand � to make electricity in the fuel cell. �Strizki also uses the hydrogen to power his fuel-cell driven car, which, like the domestic power plant, is pollution-free.� Strizki�s may be the first house powered by a solar-hydrogen energy source in the US , the worst polluter on the planet. But in Iceland , there may be hundreds, even thousands, of such houses, aided admittedly by the abundance of geothermal energy. This is so because Iceland is the first � and, so far, the only � country in the world that has adopted a government policy of moving away from a carbon economy to a pollution-free hydrogen economy. Iceland is targeting to convert all its motor vehicles and fishing fleet from gasoline and diesel engines to fuel- cells. Sweden has also declared that it wants to break the country�s dependency on oil by the year 2020. By April this year, all gas stations in Sweden are obliged by law to offer ethanol and/or biogas. Sweden has also rethought an earlier policy to dismantle the country�s nuclear power plants and, instead, build new ones. Because of the size of its economy � much bigger than Iceland �s � Sweden is expected to be the first major country to become independent of oil. But, it has to be added, shifting from gasoline and diesel fuel to ethanol and biogas may free the world from addiction to oil, but it does not save the planet from global warming. Ethanol is an alcohol and is therefore a carbon compound. Biogas, derived from the accelerated decomposition of plants and trees, must start with cellulose, which is also a carbon compound. When ethanol or biogas is burned in a car engine or an industrial plant, the exhaust would still be carbon dioxide and would still contribute to global warming. Only a total rejection of carbon-based fuels, whether fossil or renewable, and a shift to non-carbon fuels will reverse the spiral into a potentially catastrophic scenario of inexplicable climate changes. In the past three months alone, the world has seen enormous glaciers breaking off from the Antarctic ice mass and floating and melting away into the southern oceans, thus raising sea levels; unusually strong weather disturbances smashing into the Caribbean and the Philippines; a paucity of snow in the ski resorts of the world, as Alpine and Himalayan mountain ranges experienced warm weather in January; ice skaters in T-shirts gliding on the slushy ice in Rockefeller Center; as snow fell for the first time in living memory in southern California, and icicles formed on the branches of orange trees and ruined this year�s citrus crops; and the entire rail network of Germany shut down for nine hours because of unusually strong winds. I saw video clips of Chamonix-Mont Blanc in the French Alps, where I had once skied on its beginners� slopes in the summer, now of a toasted brown color even in winter. What in the world is going on? There is at least a growing consciousness, even among politicians, that something is indeed going on, and it is probably that global warming that those alarmist environmentalists have been warming us about for the past four decades. Even President George W. Bush, who had cavalierly declined to sign the Kyoto Protocol some five or six years ago, has finally jumped on the Global Warming bandwagon and now wants a 20% decrease in the US consumption of gasoline by the year 2017.. He has lately been under pressure to do so. First from the Christian Evangelicals, who are now his sole remaining mass base of political support. And now even from the business community: ten prominent American CEOs signed a joint letter asking him to do something about climate change. Oilman George W, together with Oilman VP Dick Cheney, may finally be realizing that their favorite liquid � to corner which in Iraq they have spent more than $300 billion and more than 3,000 American lives, and are preparing to spend even more - is actually doing the planet in. So the world�s hard choices may ultimately boil down to nuclear, geothermal, wind, solar, hydroelectric, and hydrogen fuel cells. Not every country has geothermal resources, and not every country has sufficient river assets that can be dammed, and not every country can afford total dependence on nuclear. Which is why I am high on hydrogen fuel cells, in tandem with solar or wind.. ***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles since 2001 in www.tapatt.org OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �High on Hydrogen� Hi, Tony. Very interesting article! Shall forward the same to my sister in law who used to work for NPC but now works for the state power company in California . The problem though with oil-free solutions, is that it is sure to face strong opposition and lobbying from the oil companies, who surely want to preserve their interests. Cheers! Bobby Tordesillas, [email protected], Jan. 26, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww It�s high time to explore this. As a poor country, we should look into this as an alternative for the future. Initially, a small number may have this due to the high price of this innovation. However, if there will be mass production of this and due to economies of scale, there will be a lowering in the selling price of this gadget. It would be wonderful for every household to have solar power on mostly used appliances and mga d masyado ginagamit, dun nalang sa Meralco. Laking tipid nun, and people will have more purchasing power to buy more products, either a WANT or a NEED. Economists should also take this view din at umangat naman ang economy ng bansa, more so with the working people. Never mind the politicians, asar naman tao sa mga yan eh. Yun lang, ayaw ng MERALCO nyan, I�m sure. Thanks again. Mike Delgado, [email protected], Jan. 27, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Thanks Tony, I see you are well informed and know the best and most economical method to use Do you recall the Japanese occupation, when there were charcoal-fed vehicles? I sent your article to my cousin Ernest Loewinsohn who now lives in Astorga , Spain . You will be pleased with his feedback. Best wishes, Jaime Calero, [email protected], Sydney , Australia , Jan. 27, 2007 This is most interesting. I read something about this some years ago, I can�t remember when, but if this gets more developed, it would be the way to go, and they better hurry or we will all find ourselves in high water when it would be too late. I don�t believe I�ll live to see it through. Ernest Loewinsohn, Astorga , Spain wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya; A quote from subject article: "One wrote that hydrogen can never be a primary source of energy because Wikipedia said it isn�t. Or words to that effect" ------------------------ You could be referring to what I wrote a long time ago which run something like this: "Hydrogen is not a primary energy source on earth; it is a secondary source and a storage medium". You missed the point of what I said. Even in your preferred scenario of hydrogen from windmills and solar cells, the primary energy sources would be the wind and the sun. Hydrogen would still be a secondary source and a storage medium. Is this a harmless distinction? Am afraid not. The case of Iceland is self-evident. The country has plenty of geothermal steam and a small population and small motor fuel requirement. You have not demonstrated that a similar policy would be desirable or even feasible for the Philippines . What you have proposed so far is a desirable objective. I regret that I can't explain much further. It would take too long and we do not have the required data. Tony Anciano, [email protected], Jan. 27, 2007 MY REPLY. But there is enough space here to point out that wind and solar energy � as well as hydroelectric and petroleum resources � were/are made possible by the thermo-nuclear reactions in the Sun (and other stars) by which hydrogen atoms fuse into helium atoms to generate the heat and the light that warms and illuminates our planet.. In other words, without hydrogen, there would be no wind, no solar, no rivers, no plant and animal life, no petroleum. What could be more primary than that? wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I don't disagree with your points (I rarely do, you have a great analytical mind), but what's the efficiency of producing hydrogen from water. From my vague memories of school, I think it takes quite a lot of energy to break H2O into H and O.. Cheers, Peter Wallace, [email protected], Jan. 29, 2007 MY REPLY. You�re right, Peter, and so was another Australian who raised exactly that point, that one would generate less energy than one started out with, in accordance with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. But I replied to him (and now to you) that the generation of hydrogen from the electrolysis of water is and should be a separate system, both physically and conceptually, from the use of that hydrogen in a fuel cell to generate electricity. Of course, that would make the entire process more expensive. But if one were to input the deleterious worldwide effects of carbon fuels - melting polar ice caps and glaciers, rising sea levels, droughts and floods, vicious storms, endangered agriculture and fisheries, desertification, pollution and cancer, new diseases or new strains of old diseases - the cost of energy from oil and coal would not be so cheap, either. I am now in touch with the organization that is managing that experimental home in New Jersey and hope to come up with a joint project with them. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Great article, Mr. Abaya! That's too much to handle if you're talking about Philippine economic strength in which the budget is more or less compared to one complete NBA All-Star team's salaries. Plus, the porky barrels which are completely waste of money spending.. Let's not think or recommend more than what we can really afford. Save that idea for future pinoy hi-tech generation of thinkers and future wise guys in the Malacanang Palace (if we get lucky to have one real good government:). Well, if oilman Bush fails, they still have a lot of money and power but if Philippines fail, it's done since we have no money. As simple as that. Please check out Brazil 's brains and national interest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil I watched a program on a science channel a few months ago about Brazil 's fight for oil independence. It works for them. The chairman of Brazil 's energy department said in confidence that they can function with less or no dependence on gasoline. One factory itself can provide fuel for 11,000 cars a day and since it's recyclable fuel, the "sugarcane waste" serves as fuel to run the factory. Awesome! The implication is valid (per attached link/page) but look at Japan wherein you can't just buy a house and lot there. We should take advantage of our tropical climate, may it be for ethanol or solar power. Hope science and engineering schools of the Philippines should recommend great projects than building stupid radios (leave them to Japan/USA/Europe) or other wasteful ideas. Projects should help solve Philippine problems like this fuel issues and pollution control. We are in a survival mode not mentioning that the population is in exponential fashion. I heard about a team of young and the brightest pinoys based in UP who invent or design chips or something. It's about time to make our Flagship product/s than a bunch of simple lanterns and infantries of domestic helpers!!! If Agapito Flores will come back to life, he will probably whip the butts (pardon my French) of the Science and Engineering departments and graduating students with his archaic sticks. I think Jathropa and ethanol are fair enough. And once we're successful, then Hydrogen fuel it is. For now, we can't compete with Sweden and Iceland . In dreams probably and in payabangan contest:) They are too advanced to set examples for the dying Philippines . These Jathropa or sugarcane ideas give a lot of jobs in plantation and processing areas. You're correct about manufacturing/processing ideas. Cebu-Mactan has the fastest local economy in the entire Philippines , mostly because of the manufacturing and processing zones. If the Trade and Industry Secretary and other wise guys can't see or figure it out, then, they are very slow or unfit for the jobs. Another thing. tourism is picking up. and one thing that annoys foreigners (including myself) is the lack of cleanliness and sanitary stuffs in our "national attractions' " restrooms. They're uncomfortable entering the "comfort" rooms. It's a great concern. We should have an advantage than other 3rd world countries since Pres. GMA heads a lot of international organizations. Thus, promoting Philippines and inviting more investors. The root cause of why we have less investors is the lack of PEACE AND ORDER. Strong military (not Martial Law, of course:) yields to investor confidence. By the way, where are the generals who helped, planned and advised to create a new government by force? Are they in Boracay? What a country or system! They should be locked up too to set examples!!! Okay back to fuel issues. yes, we will ask the wise guys in the statistics departments nationwide to compare (and make recommendations) about the price, pros, cons and implications (etc etc) of Hydrogen fuel buying/production, Jathropa and Ethanol production. Again, they should be based on our limited economic power ore resources. Thank you, Sir!!! LF, [email protected], Feb. 01, 2007 MY REPLY. Ethanol from corn or sugar, bio-fuels from Jathropa trees, coconut oil, etc all help wean us from petroleum and other fossil fuels. But they are still carbon compounds and, when burned, will still generate carbon dioxide and contribute to global warming and climate change. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Reaction to �Vietnam Surges Ahead� ( Nov. 22, 2006 ) Sir, I read with interest your comparison between the Philippines and Vietnam . Coincidentally, I came across a closed manufacturing company in Cavite yesterday. Not one but numerous others in other provinces in our country. It made me sad, knowing that it is only in the industrialization and manufacturing sector that our people can really feel the economic 'progress' the President is talking about, yet the administration is only keen on the tourism, call center and IT sectors. It didn't even bother to look into the industrialization sector. If I may add, I don't think the administration is serious on agrarian reform. Why is there still boiling resentment from our farmers across the countryside? I don't think they are content with what they have, but they demand real reform from the sector, since our agrarian sector is being gobbled up by cheap fruits, vegetables and the like from other countries. I agree with your suggestion to have a protectionist attitude from our trade department, so that our people will be protected from the sudden surge of cheap items that are detrimental to our farmers. Edward Felix Donato, [email protected], Jan. 26, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Reaction to �The Ermita Doctrine� ( Jan. 14, 2007 ) Dear Tony,, I really admire you having the guts to criticize government and its officials and I feel you will not stop doing so. I can sense that if you had the power to clean government by yourself, without second thought you will do it, right now from where you stand. Our country needs men like you. If you will run for any national position, I WILL VOTE FOR YOU! HONEST! (Thank you, but I am not a candidate for any office. ACA) Then with you we and the rest of the guys like us can start cleaning government. Starting from the Aguinaldos and their cohorts, and from each of the Presidents who ran our government like HELL, those who where mentioned in the book of Ric Manapat SOME ARE SMARTER THAN OTHERS, and this Administration as you viewed it. WHEN OUR HISTORY IS CORRECTED, then we can start fresh! Rodolfo Cada, [email protected], Feb. 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Reactions to �Gauleiter Puno�s Overkill� ( Jan 21, 2007 ) Dear Tony, I need to sit back and be as objective as possible and just simplify it. You seem to really really hate Gloria, Tony (I tell you, it has to be her mole. She needs to have it lasered to oblivion) (Laser will not help. Its swelling is caused by a rare disease called Garcicorruptus abgloria, and, like Pinnochio�s nose, can be cured only by admitting the truth. ACA) You wrote - "GMA is just more manipulative, more scheming, more power-mad, more duplicitous than anyone else since Ferdinand Marcos. She is also guilty of making the patently false claim that she can make the Philippines a First World country by the year 2020". Was Erap any better? (You obviously think I�m an Erap fan. Please know that as chairman of Tapatt I was one of the 23 NGO signatories in the House resolution calling for his impeachment. ACA) Let's try to look back and hope to find a past president who never got involved in any scandal or scandals. Marcos - Martial Law, political killings, Dictador Ramos - Bataan Nuclear, IPP contracts.. Cory - Hacienda Luisita Erap - Jueteng, plunder Gloria - Cheating, Mike Arroyo, Jocjoc Bolante..and probably many more to come. I would like to remember their positive accomplishments though if any. I believe they started with good intentions for the country. Sadly, you can't expect to play inside a pigsty (which is our political system) and not get mud all over for how can you "arf" when everyone else is "oinking" (So? Does that mean we should be content to live forever in a pigsty? By the way, I was one of the few columnists who wrote that Gloria won the 2004 elections, but by a slim margin {of about 200.000 to 300,000 votes}. The cheating was in enlarging that slim margin to 1.2 million votes. By a weird coincidence, the 900,000 padding was almost exactly the same as �my one M� that a voice that sounded like Gloria�s asked Garci about, to which Garci replied �Pipilitin ko po.� My column of May 13, three days after the elections, was titled �GMA by a Hair.� You can access it in my website www.tapatt.org. ACA) . What you can do Tony is to help us find a leader who is potentially scandal-free ALL THROUGH OUT HIS/HER TERM. Anyone in mind..? How about Joker Arroyo, Bayani Fernando, Rodrigo Duterte..anyone? I bet despite their good potential they already have a negative label attached to them. WE seem to always thrive in things scandalous. (Our group sat down late last year with nine bishops, including Bishop Lagdameo, president of the CBCP, to discuss a process for allowing new potential leaders to emerge, but the bishops did not accept our proposal, even though they had no clue as to what to do. I have one non-politician in mind, but he does not want to go into politics. Not yet, anyway. Abangan ang susunod na kabanata. ACA) P.S. Try not to sound antagonistic to your readers reacting to your articles when they do not agree with you You wrote - "You seem to think of Filipinos as �noble savages� who must be protected by the Big White Father from evil outside influences. That kind of thinking should have disappeared with the calesa..". (If you will bother to re-read the writer�s original letter, she wrote: �Why do you recommend movies? It seems that movies are responsible for much unrest in developing nations because they often show oppulence (sic) not available and ideas which lead people away from their native morality.� Would you really have let that pass without a reply? At any rate, the American letter-writer has apologized. ACA. See below.) (You also wrote:) "As a rule, I also would not trust a critic of a critic who knows nothing about the subject. ACA)" (Again, if you will re-read the writer�s original letter, he wrote: �As a rule, I do not trust a critic who comments on occupations of which he knows nothing about�� My reply was just my tit for his tat. ACA) I recall William Esposo who brands readers "pathetic" when they express their views contrary to his line of thinking. Very unprofessional and rude..tsk, tsk. Lighten up Tony, least you become bitter to the point of no return. Have coffee or tea, spend a day without a newspaper and TV. Try gardening..singing? Wish you the best always. (I do not get to read William Esposo, so I cannot comment if he is �very unprofessional� or not. But if you will go through the hundreds of reaction letters in my website, www.tapatt.org, you will see that I do not reply to most of those who disagree with me. But when the letter-writer is arrogant, insolent or rude, then I reply, and I am also arrogant, insolent or rude. I don�t believe in playing doormat for anyone. (By the way, you started your first post by asking, rhetorically, �Is Gloria the only one who can turn the economy around,� obviously expecting a �Yes� answer. I replied that President Aquino and President Ramos �turned the economy around� during their watch, without any help from 8 million OCWs sending $14 billion to their families here, and I gave the appropriate GDP stats. (Instead of acknowledging that your rhetorical question was flawed, you went off on a tangent about all presidents being involved in scandals and about how I should not antagonize readers who disagree with me. (As for your suggestions, I do work in my garden, and I listen to classical music from my 1,000-CD music library, and I watch movies from my 2,000-DVD film library, and I also read books. I spend about six hours a day on my computer and the Internet, versus the less than two hours that I spend reading the two Manila newspapers that I buy. So, contrary to your belief, I am not totally immersed in the depressing world of Philippine politics. However, I do not sing. ACA) Joyce Rigoroso, [email protected], Jan. 29, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I am sorry I sounded so patronizing. I did not mean it the way it sounded. I meant that some of the movies are not inspiring and do not contribute to the uplift of culture or spirituality. Many have contributed to the relativity of morals we experience today, To improve a culture, like the Philippines , you should strengthen Christianity with which many have lived for generations. In addition, capitalize on the culture which surrounds them Sheilah Hockman, [email protected], Jan. 29, 2007 MY REPLY. Explanation duly noted. It is true that films, as the dominant influence in our era, are both a mirror to, as well as a major generator of, the moral values in our society. But it is probably futile trying to stop this progression. Everything, including morals and the parameters of religious experience, evolve over time and space, for better or for worse. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Unedited) I am making a coorection to your correction if you don't mind> (Sic) (Correction, please. Methanol and ethanol are alcohols and are therefore organic compounds. But they are not petrol-based. ACA) sic. Yes, Methanol "MUST" and "SUPPOSINGLY" a wood [fermented] alcohol. So much so that ethanol comes from cellusic feed stock and it "MUST" be [fermented].ERGO, fermented alcohols are considered organic. Methanol and Ethanol used in bio-fuels are distislled alcohols (petro-gas, coal or shale oils), therefore, they or inorganic. In MASS prodution organic alcohols could not give the requirment. That's the reason why in a similar example, ICE CREAM manufacturers will resort in the use of so-called ARTIFICIAL FRUIT FLAVORS, due to the lack of supply for real fruits. Jahnie Marzan, [email protected], Feb. 04, 2007 MY REPLY. Correction on your correction. Methanol and ethanol do not change their molecular structures just because they are distilled from petro-gas, coal or shale oil. They remain carbon-based compounds, meaning they remain organic compounds. Petro-gas, coal and shale oil ARE themselves carbon-based or organic compounds, being the residue of plants that lived hundreds of millions of years ago. Ask any professor of Chemistry. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |