A month or so ago, just before the State of the Union address, I decided to put my activist’s cap on and write my local U. S. Senator in California, Diane Feinstein about the need for a future filled with hydrogen cars and other green vehicles and green technology. Yesterday, I received a response back. While the response does not address hydrogen cars or green technology directly, it does address reducing emissions from the transportation sector, which is the ultimate goal. Below is what I said and how Senator Feinstein responded.
Hydro Kevin: “I run a hydrogen car website at https://www.hydrogencarsnow.com and would like to call upon your political influence to see to it that more money and resources are appropriated for research and development on hydrogen cars and plug-in hybrid vehicles.”
In the email, I went on to talk about how Ford and GM were lobbying the government for money in order to conduct additional research on lithium-ion battery technology for plug-in hybrids and how this, along with hydrogen car technology, would be beneficial in cutting down on greenhouse gases and global warming.
Senator Feinstein: “Thank you for writing to me to express your support for increasing automobile fuel efficiency standards. I agree that it is time to increase the fuel efficiency of our Nation’s vehicles … By increasing Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, we can significantly reduce our dependence on oil, in addition to decreasing our greenhouse gas emissions.
“I am pleased to share with you that Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and I have introduced the ‘Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act of 2007’ (S. 357).”
Senator Feinstein goes on to talk about how, if the bill passes, fuel economy standards will be raised to 35 mpg over the next 10 years for cars and light trucks and how this will reduce emissions by 18-percent.
More needs to be done, but it’s good to know that our representatives are working in a bipartisan way to address the reduction of greenhouse gases in the transportation sector. Whether by carrot or stick, this is an issue that needs to be addressed now so that we all can breathe a little easier later on.
Kevin. Hydrogen is dead. When will you non-techies understand this?
The action is now in nano-lithium (LiFePO4). This is much more significant than hydrogen, and a lot more beneficial than hydrogen to society. Nano-lithium is 100 times bigger than hydrogen.
Thanks for the tip. I don’t see the two technologies as mutually exclusive, however. My hope is that all technologies that reduce greenhouse gases, global warming and lead to a greener environment be embraced.
“I dont see these technologies as mutually exclusive”
So if some technology can co-exist with another, then it becomes viable?
What sort of logic is this? Nobody is saying hydrogen is unviable because nano-lithium is viable.
What I am saying is that hydrogen is not viable to begin with absolutely – while nano-lithium is viable. This is not a relativistic argument. The two are unrelated. Its a matter of economics.
Nano-lithium has passed the technological and engineering hurdles and now is just a matter of time before it takes over.
It sounds like your argument 10 years ago would have been that nano lithium is not viable right now so everyone should stop working on it because it will never be viable.
With your argument there would be no men in space, no cell phones, no Internet, etc. Just because something is not viable in the present doesn’t mean it doesn’t have a bright future.