This plan provides an economic template and associated technologies necessary to eliminate America's dependance on for

America will deploy a hydrogen generation infrastructure in a scale sufficient to eliminate the USA’s consumption of fossil fuels for fuel, heating and electricity.    It will Eliminate USA's contribution to global warming by eliminating almost all greenhouse gas emissions while creating millions of new jobs.

The Government represents a key enabler in this plan but the underlying economics allow private industry to fund a majority of the deployment while developing and incredible long term national asset.   It can be deployed with two key technologies a solar thermal hydrogen system and a wave based hydrogen design developed by Joseph Ellsworth.   Delivery is feasible using existing pipe infrastructure.

This plan will create favorable economic conditions in the USA and is likely to provide the next generation’s economic boom in the same way that America’s previous investments in the Interstate Freeway and Apollo space programs provided this generation’s economic growth via the micro computer and internet.

Economic Feasiblity

XDOBS conducted a economic feasibility study during summer 2006 aimed at determining viability of deploying their wave based hydrogen generation system in a size necessary to replace energy output of the Brookshire Oil fiield in Texas.    

It was found that between 60 acres of the XDOBS system would be needed to replace the 600BPD (Barrels per day) produced by the brookshire field.   

Based on these numbers it would require 13 years to payback the original capital invesment at current energy prices.    When produced and installed in volumes required to replace 21 million barrels per day the prices would drop far enough to yeild a pay back less as short as 6 years.

The system could be expected to have a minimum of 25 year life with a 15% per year maintance investment which provides verry favorable lifetime returns even if energy prices drop.

When projected to a national basis it would require a band of ocean less than 3 miles wide surrounding the coastal united states to produce sufficient hydrogen to completely replace all petroleum for fuel  or heating in the USA during 2006.     This band could be installed at the edge of the EEZ  or territorial waters and would not be visible from shore.   The additional structures would provide new fish habbitats and would also provide large amounts of desalinated water.    It would ultimately cover 32,000 square miles which is less than 1% of the waters controlled by the USA in the EEZ.

Summary

1. Government will invest in building out a renewable hydrogen production infrastructure with the intent of selling or leasing the infrastructure to private industry in chunks as it is completed and enters production.  
2. Contractual requirements will specify that the infrastructure is kept in operation during the first 10 years after purchase or the life of the lease.
3.  The government would pre-negotiate discounted fuel prices to key customers such as Electrical generation facilities to pre-sale hydrogen from the first portion of the build out.   This allows sale of the facilities based on a guaranteed revenue stream while the customers benefit from a below industry cost for fuel guaranteed for 5 years.  Revenue from these sales is used to fund the next phase of build out.
4. Specialized tax incentives and rebates at the retail level will be used to motivate adoption of hydrogen fuels in stages A)  Electrical Generation,   B) Industrial heating ,   C) Home  and office space and water heating,  D)  Home and office co-generation,   E) Automotive and transportation.
5. Government would sponsor conversion of key natural gas pipelines to Hydrogen while using special development incentives to convert new developments over to hydrogen consumption for space heating, water heating and space cooling.

What problems could the plan solve?

1. Shifts a major economic flow from exported expenses into capital improvements.  This increases jobs in both the short and long term.
2. Provides a long term non tax revenue stream for the government similar to the oil windfall experienced by the Alaskan government.
3. Eliminating dependency on foreign fuel sources stabilizes the national economy and prevents unexpected recessions.
4. A 10% standard of hydrogen for domestic fuel uses would  bring the long term cost of hydrogen down to  $1 a gallon  (equivalent).   While a 50% electrical generation standard would take the strain off natural gas and allow it’s price to drop dramatically.
5. Pollution would be reduced to almost nothing when electricity is generated from hydrogen, because the only emissions are  what comes from small particulate and gasses matter in the air.
6. Dramatically reduces USA contribution to global warming and the related drought and other weather disasters.
7. Delivers billions of gallons of clean water for use in coastal cites as side benefit.
8. Allows government to convert a idle resource (ocean surface) to a revenue and job producing asset.
9. Provides two major export industries for the USA in the form of excess hydrogen and the related infrastructure.

 

 The plan

1. Offshore wave energy sites in a band 3 miles wide area 17 to miles off the shore in our territorial or EEZ waters could supply all of our oil needs, as well.   The low-grade excess heat energy could be used to desalinate water and provide tons of fresh, drinkable water, whose only expense would be delivery.    
2. The XDOBS wave based  design  requires less space than the land based solar thermal implementation and will cost between 1/6th and 1/2th the deployment of land based systems.   In addition the federal government can convert ocean  surface they already own into a revenue producing asset.
3. A mere 1% of U.S. land area could offset 100% of the U.S.’s petroleum oil uses.
4. Currently, 1 KG of Hydrogen costs roughly $3.50, but if the government fully backed the program, we could see hydrogen costing less than a dollar a KG (roughly equal to a gallon of gasoline in energy output) over time.   As long as the price stabilizes it will provide a substnatial long term economic boost. 
5. Hydrogen can be shipped through our underground natural gas pipelines, with a simple plastic coating that can be retrofitted with relative ease.
6. Implementing the technologies into electricity generation via a slowly increasing federal standard would transcend to other sectors of the economy, including transportation and would become an effectively affordable solution.
7. Once fully built with a ready market it would be fairly easy to lease or sell the built out land and infrastructure, because it would be so profitable.
8. The current market cost of hydrogen assumes all of the costs associated with establishing hydrogen production.
9. Solar thermal energy is consumed onsite, used to produce hydrogen fuel that can be shipped via pipeline from the generating site to a usable point—removing the need to have transporting trucks—and saving more energy.
10. Reduces the need for long distance transmission of electricity because cost-effective regional dispatching is made possible, since the fuel is delivered to the electrical generation plant—and they need only provide electricity for their area in question.
11. An average day of sunlight could accumulate week’s worth of hydrogen fuel for a metropolitan area like Las Angeles with a mere 1,000 acre area.
12. 8 out of 10 new electrical generation facilities are using natural gas.  They could just as easily be using hydrogen which would reduce price shocks that impact those living on fixed incomes.

Funding the project

• The rapid adoption of the plan requires a ready made consumer for the hydrogen.  
• The most effective short term consumer which could consume large amounts in a relative short time is Electric Generation.
• To ensure large scale adoption of Hydrogen for electricity you must supply hydrogen below market cost for natural gas.
• Pre-negotiating with the electric plants to deliver the hydrogen at 10% below current natural gas with a price freeze for 5 years would provide  adequate motivation for them to convert their generators and re-route delivery pipes as needed.   It could also provide a huge regional boon for electricity to be generated in areas with the pipe infrastructure where the electricity is exported into other regions.
• Using this strategy it should be possible to pre-sell the hydrogen production from the first 100 Billion $ invested in installing the infrastructure and at current rates these would provide very good candidates for the government to sell off with a valuation that is revenue based just like service industries are sold today.
• If the Government can pre-sell the hydrogen based on a revenue model then they should be able to obtain funds for construction from  commercial bankers.   There are fairly standard formulas for selling revenue producing businesses and this one even with a 10% per year maintenance rate could provide a fairly good argument for  15 times annual revenue as a sales price.   
  
  For the Ocean based system this would give the government over a 100% return on investment for every system installed.  This means that every 100 acres they built and sold it would fund the installation of about 115 acres.    Since the government does not have to pay for the ocean surface space they already control this is a pure profit scenario where they are able to use somebody else's money to convert a currently non productive asset (ocean surface) into a critical national resource.         In this instance the buyer would have to agree to honor the 5 year pre-sale pricing agreement.
   
   
  

Risks and Environment

1. The average vehicle produces 1.2 lbs-3.2 lbs. of carbon per gallon, whereas a hydrogen powered vehicle’s emissions are equal only to the particulate matter pulled in, meaning they would produce a mere .02 lbs. per gallon of carbon—which can be broken down by atmospheric pressure and doesn’t present a major greenhouse gas risk.
2. Fossil fuel powered electricity emits from 0.6 to 1.2 pounds of greenhouse gas per KWh delivered.     The renewable hydrogen system eliminates this.
3. In many accident conditions Hydrogen is less dangerous than conventional gasoline and diesel fuel, because it can dissipate into the air instead of dripping onto an area, widening the radius affected.  
4. The environmental impact from a hydrogen spill is orders of magnitude lower than the risk from a Petroleum or gasoline spill.    There is no water contamination and ground water sources can not be contaminated due to a leak.   In most cases a slight wind is the entire cleanup needed.
5. The risk factors from Hydrogen are very similar to the risk factors from natural gas or propane.     The same best practices that have been developed over decades of Natural gas use are effective for hydrogen.
6. There are carbon fiber tanks that are made of reinforced material pushing out 3000 lbs. per square inch that are incredibly tough.   This prevents a leak in most cases.    If most accidents that are severe enough to breach these tanks the people involved have been killed by the impact.    If the tanks are breached hydrogen will quickly dissipate which minimizes risk of explosive fires.

Impact on Electric Grid

1. Electric generation is the ideal first major adopter.    This plan allows sub market pricing guaranteed for 5 years to early adopters in the electric industry.   This will allow them to stabilize prices and avoid price increases regardless of what happens in the world petroleum market.
2. Blackouts that are driven by local demand exceeding grid capacity would no longer be an issue because hydrogen co-generation can be easily used in e residential areas to eliminate that portion of the electric demand.  In addition hydrogen powered absorption chillers can be used to eliminate the need for electricity in peak demand cooling.
3. Stable fuel prices and micro generation capacity would reduce peak rate electricity and allow a greater degree of grid stability, which would eliminate the need for emergency grid upgrades—saving ratepayers money, and eventually moving us away from fossil fuel price volatility.
4. For every mile of delivery, power capacity is diminished substantially.   In California, for example, there are 2 Kw of power expended for every 1 Kw consumed.  This is wasting more fossil fuels and is extremely inefficient.    Smaller local hydrogen generating plants minimize grid related loses  while combined heating and electric units installed in individual homes and businesses eliminate the grid demand all together.
5.  Large scale adoption of micro generating capacity eliminates the need for upgrades of long distance high tension lines and other very expensive grid upgrades.
6. Conversion of natural gas turbines to burn hydrogen is easier than converting internal combustion automobile engines and many new generators already have the precision carburetion technology needed to burn Hydrogen.
7. Small and medium scale fuel cell generators and now available in the 0.2 to 12KW range which is adequate to operate most homes and small offices with no combustion by products.

What is preventing Exeuction of the plan 

1. A lack of awareness about viable strategies for large scale adoption of solar hydrogen use on a large scale.   These are perpetuated by narrowly focused specialists who are not taking a sufficiently broad national view.
2. Lack of national will to see the implementation occur or even widespread awareness that it is feasible for such an implementation to occur.
3. The DOE Hydrogen initiative is plagued by perfectionism and limited economic support.  The problems have in many cases been over stated and misrepresented.    For example you do not have to solve the entire problem of storing enough hydrogen to duplicate the range of Gasoline vehicles.  Most people commute less than 40 miles per day so if they could pay 50% less for fuel to meet their 40 mile per day requirement it would motivate buying an extra vehicle even if it does not have as much range.   In addition there is no immediate need to retrofit the automobiles there are short large short term gains available simply by switching electrical generating facilities over to hydrogen followed by home appliances.   
4. Lack of long term global thinking in the public sector is a problem: if the electorate doesn’t call elected officials to action there will be no large-scale implementation.
5. Lack of a Kennedy or Regan caliber national leader who is wholly dedicated to eliminating the USA dependence on imported petroleum. The DOE federal government has been making some hydrogen investments, but these focus mainly on esoteric aspects of how hydrogen would or could one day work, not on specifically implementable technologies.
6. Misconceptions by environmentalists about the problems associated with land use and concerns about hydrogen combustibility are exaggerated.
7. In the past five years, this administration has curtailed funding research that could specifically enhance the perception of viability of solar hydrogen power.
8. Lack of a cohesive executable plan with appropriate economic incentives.
9. Special interest groups have sewn up government incentives such that alternate implementations of renewable strategies such as solar thermal cooling, Wave hydrogen and Solar Hydrogen do not qualify for credit under the solar roof initiative or most state level programs.  This limits entry of new technologies into the market place.
10. Very strong industry lobbyists would prefer to see large scale methane stripping or large scale fossil fuel powered separation.    These special interests have strong lobbyists groups which can hamstring development.
11. This plan would disrupt the finances of major oil companies and their associated investors and as such will face stiff resistance. .  These groups have almost unlimited money for lobbying.   
12. This plan would eventually eliminate a majority of USA funds flowing into the Middle East oil exporting countries and could trigger economic crises in those countries.   If taken to it’s extreme it would also eliminate a large fraction of the oil revenues from most of Europe and parts of Asia.

Costs and impacts

1. The costs of conversion of electrical and industrial generation facilities to burn hydrogen could be recovered within the first year of retrofitting via a slightly discounted fuel rate.
2. Estimated 12 million acres of dry land in sunny states (less than 1% of the USA land mass)  or  a band of ocean 14 miles wide is needed to fully replace the 2005 level oil burned for fuel.
3. At current oil costs the estimated payback of original capital could be as short as 30 months for the wave based infrastructure.     Energy costs will drop as the hydrogen enters the market in large scale.   Even if energy prices drop to under $1.00 per gallon of gasoline equivalent payback can still occur in under 20 years.
4. The public majority does not have the time to understand the short and long term economic implications of the problem or the available solutions.    Hydrogen is perceived as too expensive but when put in context of the total cost of oil and the fundamental shift in economic flows enabled by a hydrogen solution it becomes  very viable and may in fact be essential for the long term economic welfare of the country.   The technology to deliver this plan is available and scalable lacking only the capital  and  national will for large scale deployment.  
5. Implementing this plan will require a national commitment and leadership comparable to  the Interstate Freeway system,   Major Hydro Electric dams such as Glen Canyon or the Apollo moon program.  It will have even larger direct and indirect economic  benefits to the country for many generations.

Administration: EPA  Mandates:

1. The USFG, through an act of Congress will convert sufficient ocean surface to hydrgen generation to meet 2030 exected energy demands. 
1. Each to be hooked up to the natural gas pipeline systems.
2. The natural gas pipeline system will be coated with industrial plastic and carbon fiber casing (3000 lbs. per sq. inch) to ensure safe deliverability of hydrogen.
1. When delivering hydrogen via pipelines it does not need to be delivered at high pressure.   The simple plastic lining is adequate and in many cases not needed.  The existing pipelines would be used at their existing pressures.
2. The high pressure carbon fiber tanks are needed to provide longer range hydrogen powered cars which are safe during collisions.  There are alternatives which store hydrogen in solid forms.   Existing hydrogen powered vehicles already have such tanks.
3. Government sponsored testing of real world explosive risks of hydrogen when using standard propane tanks as used in busses and RV’s today.   Put in contrast with Gasoline,  Diesel and Propane fuels.
3. Electricity generating companies will be strongly incented to begin an immediate switch to hydrogen power, and will be provided with implementation grants to allow hydrogen intake.  Target  2020,  80% of all electricity produced will have to come from hydrogen, with a 10% increase every decade until 2100: 100%.
1. It is not viable to mandate adoption.    Alternative is to offer a up to a 20% rebate  incentive for hydrogen powered electricity based on retail price to consumer.  
2. Make all hydrogen based electricity automatic qualified for Green energy credits provided the hydrogen was produced using renewable energy.   
3. Starting in 2010 Add 10% federal  tax to retial prices of all electricity produced using Fossile fuels increasing by 3% per year to a maximum of 30%.  Use these proceeds to fund  hydrogen based tax credits.
4.  Consumer gas appliances will be retrofitted to handle hydrogen intakes—moving previously gas-powered appliances completely off of the grid itself, and onto the pipeline system.
1.  Incentives for conversion of home appliances to hydrogen.  Includes  Heating, Water Heating,  Air conditioning,  Cooking or  any other appliance that has traditionally used natural gas or propane.   Forcing retrofit is difficult so initial deployments should be aimed at new  developments with retrofit’s incentives providing payoff in less than two years for older communities.  Smallest conversion unit is generally a major sub division or smaller city.
2. Rebate incentives for home based hydrogen based combined heating as typical of Wispergen.  These burn hydrogen in home  to provide local electricity generation,  heat and hot water from a single device.   With minor modifications it could also provide home cooling.
5. Automobile manufacturers will begin to phase out oil powered vehicles as follows: a 20% reduction by 2020, and a 10% every ten years, until by 2100 all vehicles are powered by hydrogen fuel cell systems that use the same carbon fiber casings.  In addition domestic auto manufactures will find major revenue boost by offering factory supportd conversions for existing vehicles.
1. Mandates seldome work it is better to use market pressures.
2. Offer a 40% tax rebate amortized over 5 years for new hydrogen powered vehicles.  
3. Offer a 80% tax rebate amortized over 5 years for retrofit of existing vehicles to hydrogen fuels. 
4. Offer standard retrofit kits purchased in bulk using government pricing to key retailers across the country at  a fixed margin and fixed installation price.   Any competitors who can beat this price are all the better.
5. Government sponsored testing the quantifies the environmental damage of increased NOX emissions versus decrease of Carbon and other emissions.  Determine if there is net positive impact from converting IC engines even if they have an increase NOX emission.   
6. By 2012 add a 10% sur tax on fossile fuel powered vehicles which is increased by 3% per year until it reaches a maximum of 30%.  This tax is used to directly pay for hydrogen based tax credits.   Same thing goes for fossile based fuels.
7. Home Fueling - Offer rebate incentive for home based compressors which burn hydrogen to compress pipeline delivered hydrogen for use in high pressure hydrogen tanks needed in hydrogen powered vehicles.
6.  The federal government will manage each solar thermal hydrogen plant until it is sold.   but will allow private companies to obtain thirty-year leases, if desired.
1. Government is not actually managing each facility. They are leasing them in a a way similar to how they lease BLM land and Oil bearing land.  They would only manage those facilities which are finished but not yet leased.
2. Government receives a commission on gross wholesale price of fueld sold.  Proceeds are used first to pay off bonds.  Once bonds are paid off proceeds are split evenly between Social security,   Deficit and operations.
3. Special provisions require that 80% of the production capacity of  these plants are maintained after least with  released to domestic USA market.  Failure to do so is breach of contract and realeases unit for re-bid. 
4.  The USA government retains 15-80% of the plants under direct control managed by external companies on 5 year contracts.  These plants sell their hydrogen into the domestic USA market at cost +10% and the contracts are awarded on a competitive basis.   All fuel for government vehicles is awarded from this pool the remainder is sold.     20% of these contracts reserved for small or disadvantaged businesses.      Only USA owned companies allowed to bid.    No company or coalition is allowed to win more than 8% of bids.
5. Government should keep building these plants unitl they are exporting approximately 35% of total production.
7. Funding: The USFG will ascertain funding from the maintenance budget of United States Armed Forces proving grounds.
8. Enforcement: The EPA in conjunction with state Public Utility Commissions.
9. The Affirmative reserves the right to clarify and holds the power of fiat, any questions—ask in Cross-Ex.
10. I would ask that you weigh the round in the framework of Net Benefits, meaning you look at what’s good about the policy, and what’s bad, then make a call.

Advantage:  Pollution Reduction.

A.    Electricity Generation is the single greatest source of air pollution.

Representative Henry Waxman, in 2003: in Legislation: The Clean Smokestacks Act of 2001:
“Electricity generation is our nation’s largest source of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.  Nationally, annual power plant emissions are responsible for about 40% of CO2, 64% of SO2, 26% of NoX, and 33% of Hg.  These pollutants are the major cause of some of the most serious environmental problems our nation faces: including acid rain, smog, respiratory illness, mercury contamination, and global warming.”

B.    Air pollution causes death and disease.

U.S. DOE, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, “Environmental Benefits,” www.nrel.gov/clean_energy/environment.html, 2003:
“Energy from fossil fuels is a primary source of air, water, and soil pollution.  Pollutants take a dramatic toll on our environment.  Pollution poses major health risks to humans.  Air pollution contributes to lung disease and close to 335,000 people in the United States die from it every year.”

C.    A switch to clean, hydrogen power decreases the output of dangerous pollutants.

Ellsworth, as cited above, 2007:
“For every gallon of conventional fossil fuel burned for auto fuel, between 1.2 and 3.2 lbs. of JUST carbon emissions are emitted into the air.  Hydrogen, by contrast, emits a mere .002 lbs. of TOTAL emissions per gallon  (DOE, EIA, California Dept of Energy) —which isn’t even really an accurate comparison, since a mere 1 KG of hydrogen contains the same energy output as a full gallon of gasoline.  Using hydrogen on a large scale has often been criticized as a policy option because of the fossil fuel inputs it takes to make it workable, but using a large scale solar thermal system to harness thermal energy from the sun and consume it on sight to split hydrogen from water removes that concern.  The implication of this technology’s usage is a complete removal of new particulate emissions.  The small particulate emissions accounted for above could be broken down by atmospheric pressures, but an added benefit of hydrogen consumption is its tendency to take particulate matter out of the air, and add it to the process,   This means  there is little real emission especially when compared to gasoline and Diesel powered vehicles.    In most cases a net decrease in particulate matter. 


 

Advantage:  Fossil Fuel Price Shocks.

A.    Dependence on fossil fuels results in a cycle of price volatility.

Jim DePeso, policy director for REP America, San Francisco Chronicle, July 3, 2003:
“Increasing demand, especially for gas-fired power plants, has fueled the run-up that has driven gas prices to nearly twice last year's level. Gas consumption in the electricity generation industry has soared 37 percent since 1997, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.  While demand has increased, domestic gas production has fallen as a result of economic weakness, energy industry consolidation and reduced availability of production capital. Economics 101 is at work -- more demand and tighter supplies put upward pressure on prices.”

B.    Higher heating costs result in excess winter deaths, which impacts the elderly.

The Century Foundation, September 29, 2005:
“The Merck Manual of Geriatrics reports that “in the USA, about 75,000 ‘excess winter deaths’ occur among the elderly, including deaths from hypothermia and deaths associated with many other winter risks, such as influenza and pneumonia.  Among identified cases of hypothermia, the mortality rate is 50%.  Of persons with hypothermia, those over 75 years of age are five times more likely to die than those under 75 years of age.  To avoid hypothermia and its attendant risks, the elderly need to keep living areas at a temperature of 70 F, which is considerably higher than the temperature most people wanting to conserve energy or keep costs down will set their thermostats at this winter.” (point) These people are also very sensitive to summer heat and can be hospitalized or killed if when they loose air conditioning power.  They also tend to drive demand air conditioning for homes during peak demand hours which requires grid upgrades and can drive grid failures during hottest summer days.

C.    Hydrogen fueling takes pressure off of fossil fuels, so in the short term they are cheaper, and in the long-term they are phased out.

Ellsworth, 2007:
“If a large-scale solar thermal hydrogen system was set up and the United States moved toward becoming a hydrogen economy, economies of scale could surface.  In the short-term, this would take the pressure off of natural gas.  Natural gas plants are 8 out of 10 new plants that come online each day.  Within three years, the price per gallon of natural gas would drop below $1 a gallon as hydrogen began flooding  the system with cleaner hydrogen-produced electricity, and consumers began to attain hydrogen directly in their homes.  This would effectively remove petroleum price fluctuation’s ability to impact the average consumer’s budget.”
Advantage Three:  Food System.

A.    Fossil fuel dependence will result in the eventual collapse of our food system.

Daniel Murray, Earth Policy Institute, May 9, 2005:
“The U.S. food system uses over 10 quadrillion Btu (10,551 quadrillion joules) of energy each year, as much as France’s total annual energy consumption.  Fossil fuel reliance may prove to be the Achilles heel of the modern food system.  Oil supply fluctuations and disruptions could send food prices soaring overnight.  Competition and conflict could quickly escalate. Decoupling the food system from the oil industry is the key to improving food security.”

B.    Oil dependency, if not curbed, will result in mass starvation of billions of people.

Alex Kuhlman, Doctor of Economics, University of Amsterdam, “Peak Oil & Survival Strategies, January 2007:
“It may come as a surprise to you that the world’s industrial food supply system is one of the biggest consumers of fossil fuels.  Vast amounts of oil and gas are used as raw materials and energy in the manufacture of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, and as cheap and readily available energy at all stages of food production.  Fossil fuels are also essential in the construction and the repair of equipment and infrastructure needed to facilitate this industry, including farm machinery, processing facilities, storage, ships, trucks, and roads.  Industrial, green-revolution style agriculture is particularly energy intensive.  This style of agriculture increased world grain production by 250%, and was attributable to fossil fuel input.  Modern agriculture is merely a way of converting petroleum into food.  Without this energy , food supplies decrease and the current world population of 6+ billion has no hope whatsoever of sustaining itself at current levels.  It has been estimated that without hydrocarbons to provide energy, fertilizers, and pesticides, agriculture could not support a population greater than two billion.”

C.    Hydrogen fuels can fully replace petroleum oil, and provide cheaper inputs in other oil uses.

http://eedrt.com/eedrt-can-make-the-hydrogen-highway-a-reality.html, “Solar Hydrogen, cost effective, Large Scale replacement for petroleum based fuels using Today's technology,” 2006:
“In the USA we consume 20 million barrels of oil per day  so the 1.06 million barrels of solar hydrogen we could produce at Dugway alone represents 1/18th of the amount of land needed to produce a sufficient  amount of hydrogen to completely replace the Oil burned for fuel.   Ultimately we would need  15 million acres to produce sufficient solar hydrogen  to completely replace the 20 million barrels of oil.   15  million acres which represents  0.6% of the total land space in the USA or  30% of the land in Utah.  Less than 1% of the total land space in the USA is capable of producing a sufficient amount of Hydrogen  to completely replace the 20 million barrels of oil consumed by the USA every day. If  the deployment  was spread across several of the western states such as  UT, Idaho, Colorado,  Texas, AZ, Nevada, and new Mexico the land requirements would be less than 5% per  state  and there is plenty of desert land to use for this purpose.  Cheaper manufacturing costs would transcend to oil’s other inputs and allow cheaper recycling of plastics, and reduced-cost alternatives to oil in those inputs.  In other words, processes and systems at the mercy of fossil fuels and oil could become fully independent of oil, preventing price volatility and scarcity of finite resources from impacting system efficiencies.  The environmentalist may be concerned about using  that much land but when the alternative is mass pollution and global warming which could destroy our coastal cities it would be a viable trade off. The local residents may initially complain but if the local state government is allowed to tax the hydrogen exported from the state they will rapidly loose their objections especially in the western states where the revenue is badly needed.  In addition once those states realized how much capital would be spend in state during the construction phase they would be competing for the opportunity. Once 15 million acres of land was dedicated solar thermal power, it would completely eliminate the need to import ANY petroleum fuel.”

Advantage:  Economic advantages

1.  Long term revenue source for Federal government which does not depend on taxes.  May in fact allow taxes to be lowered over long term.
2.  Reallocate trillions of dollars exported for fuel today to pay for  capitial improvments  such as the solar thermal  and wave based hydrogen system.   Should provide long term economic benefits due to increase in capital value versus money just gone when exported for petroleum.
3.  Economic impact of spending  money to build large domestic systems represents a big boost. In many ways it can be the same economic driver as the construction of the interstate freeway system.
4.  Regional Labor – The contstruction and maintance of this ystem would employ hundreds of thousands of American workers.
5. Resistant to Middle East fluctuations -   Eliminate the risk of oil driven recession and depressions in the USA.
6. Reduce funds available for use by Terrorists by reducing amount of money exported into countries most likely to provide funding for those terrorists.
7. Experience gained installing this system will provide major export both for systems and produced fuel.