Low Tech vs Interstellar societies...

[spank]

During WW 2, Belgium was virtually cut off from using gasoline and other petroleum products by Germany. So, the Brussels public bus system switched to ammonia.

That's TL 4 running vehicles on ammonia successfully.

https://www.icfa-conference.org/doc/03-03-02_AMANO.pdf

Also quite prolific were wood gasifiers,

Germany had over 500,000 Holzgas vehicles and the werhmact had over 200,000. for example this Driving School tank.

FEMA actual wrote a guide on wood gas conversion in 1989!
"Construction of a Simplified Wood GasGenerator for Fueling Internal CombustionEngines in a Petroleum Emergency"
https://www.driveonwood.com/static/media/uploads/pdf/fema_plans.pdf

 

[Spinward Flow]

So, worry no more and accept the REALITY that both HYDROGEN and ELECTRICITY currently begin life as hydrocarbon fuels

I will not, because that's not the reality.
Hydrocarbon fuels are merely ONE WAY to generate hydrogen and electricity ... rather than being the exclusive / ONLY WAY to generate hydrogen and electricity.

For example ... nuclear power can generate hydrogen and electricity.
The reason why the Fukushima nuclear power plant "blew up" after the tsunami hit it was because of a process that produced hydrogen gas in the reactor core as the water levels dropped in the core. The Fukushima nuclear power plant was designed, construction and operation for the generation of electricity.

And solar power is intrinsically, at its core ... a nuclear power sourced way of generating electricity.
The nuclear reactor that powers solar power plants? THE LOCAL STAR ... powered by fusion.

Wind power is also, ironically, nuclear powered (albeit indirectly) by the "fusion reactor" of the LOCAL STAR inducing "weather" conditions at the planetary surface when there's an atmosphere.

Hydropower is produced by water "flowing downhill" in ways that can produce useful work (either mechanical and/or electrical).

And then there's this kind of Inconvenient Truth about the whole thing ...

Your turn.

 

[Spinward Flow]

In case there are any (remaining) doubters about the potential/profitability of the "hydrogen economy" pre-fusion technology ... here's a really good primer on why hydrogen is a "lousy fuel" for chemical energy processes compared to almost everything else ...

 

[atpollard]

Your turn.

Ok.

Hydrocarbon fuels are merely ONE WAY to generate hydrogen and electricity ... rather than being the exclusive / ONLY WAY to generate hydrogen and electricity.

Strawman.
I never claimed “ONLY WAY”.
[go back and reread what I actually said]

 

[Grav_Moped]

“The hydrogen is typically derived from natural gas via Steam Methane Reforming (SMR), which, while emitting CO2 is currently more cost-effective.” [I assume the most “cost-effective” method will continue to be employed.]

So, worry no more and accept the REALITY that both HYDROGEN and ELECTRICITY currently begin life as hydrocarbon fuels (even if your Electric Car chooses to ignore the efficiency loss of generating electricity while including the loss efficiency of generating Hydrogen for the Hydrogen Car).

The advantage of battery-electric over hydrogen (either ICE or fuel-cell) is that electricity can be* sourced from solar/hydro/geothermal/whatever. Hydrogen isn't**.


----------
* Not that US infrastructure is configured that way now of course, but it's at least possible.

** Electrolyzing 2H₂O into 2H₂ + O₂ is fairly costly at present. With magical fusion power, it would be almost free ("too cheap to meter"?). Until then, you get H₂ by cracking methane.