Chris, I’m surprised you are so dumb on this issue. Hydrogen from petroleum? That just makes my point of phasing out petroleum.

You want to take a net positive and replace it with a net negative that currently costs more. It certainly does not make your point.

Hydrogen from WATER using free & bountiful solar.

Why is a large majority of the hydrogen sold come from the petroleum industry? Becasue it is a hell of a lot cheaper than by other means. I’m not sure where you got this idea that solar is free, but it is wrong. You are also completely discounting the major hurdles hydrogen still must clear: storage issues and catalyst cost.

Solar will get better. Solar will begin providing a lot of our energy needs. Solar will become competitive VERY soon (and in some cases it already is). Hydrogen will clear those hurdles (in the article I linked to above, I provide a short review of the scientific literature on non-precious catalysts).

The mechanism behind this progress is certainly not government.

To ask the GP to endorse a candidate with any libertarian economic views would be a hardsell. Harder when that candidate has no history with the party.

If you’re so set on winning both nominations, why haven’t you tried to win the Green nomination too?

I would bet a lot of money that they don’t envision you as the standard bearer.

Hell, one of them is a candidate themselves. A candidate will small support, but far more support than you.

that what we in the aerospace industry are developing solar cells far more advanced than what is seen on the commercial market (which is in its infancy and is what Chris probably refers to).

I was refering to the commercial market, which in the context of Milnes’ diatribe is all that matters. Currently, photovoltaics are not competitive in the marketplace. I can’t wait for a future where rooftops are blanketed with solar panels (and as you state, it’s not that far off). However, right now oil is cheaper. That will change. And I have plenty of faith in the ingenuity of mankind to do what has to be done. Some of my research intersects with fundamental studies that serve as the foundation of photovoltaic research. I could go on and on about the possibilities in the near future. My point is certainly not to downplay solar.

I have ZERO faith in the government to get anything right. I get crapier gas mileage because Virginia thinks its a good idea to put more expensive corn in my gas tank … and I have to pay more for the corn I eat, as well! The market will get it right so long as the government stays out of its way.

My points are (1) hydrogen has its own set of problems (not insurmountable, but real), (2) making hydrogen from solar is inefficient on a large scale because it takes more energy to make the hydrogen than you get out of it, so you might as well just use the solar power directly (of course, there are many applications where solar is not practical and hydrogen is), and (3) ALL energy sources are subsidized, not just big oil. In fact, I would not be surprised to find out that hydrogen and/or solar get more federal coin per kilowatt-hour that oil.

So Catholic Trotskyist is a joke identity? I sure hope so.