Hydrogen vs. ethanol.?

Question

So… I saw a “go yellow” advertisement the other day encouraging the use of ethanol as a means to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Given that hunger is still a major problem in many parts of the world, does anyone else consider it absurd, especially in light of the fact that the technology to move to a hydrogen based economy currently exists, that we as a nation are not only encouraging turning food into fuel, it is actually been mandated that a certain percentage of our fuel supply be based on ethanol?

Answer 1

The food used in making ethanol would not be going to starving people otherwise.  However, ethanol is not a good large-scale alternative because it takes agricultural land away from food crops.  We don't have enough agricultural land to supply both a significant amount of biofuels and all the necessary food crops, and the more ethanol is produced, the higher the price of food will go.

However, hydrogen is not a technologically viable alternative for transportation, and won't be for several decades yet.  We need to be focusing on hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and electric vehicles as alternatives to gas cars.

Answer 2

Hydrogen is only a good solution when;

you have a lot of alternative energy plants, like nuclear, to make the hydrogen; the technology is better; and the infrastructure to move hydrogen around is decent.

Ethanol can be a good short term solution.  Better than corn would be to make ethanol from low value plants like saw grass.  Plants that grow on poor land with little water.  People are working hard on that.

Answer 3

People are starving not from the lack of food being grown its the lack of money that they have . Greed runs the world no money no food . The system sucks for allot of people