It seems as though every alternative fuel is critically flawed or at least extremely impractical. There is one fuel system, not at all well-known, that doesn’t face these problems.

No one likes fossil fuels; thanks to them, the United States is the heaviest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, is dependent on foreign nations for a basic resource, and is on a path that will cause extreme economic harm when oil finally taps out. The disagreement regards whether this problem can be practically solved.

First, an outline of the problem: Many of the most flaunted alternative fuels experienced severe setbacks in the last few years. The first was the production of hydrogen through electrolysis. If we look at the production of hydrogen, we learn that we would spend three-to-four times as much energy manufacturing hydrogen for each car as we expend per house. In the process, we would release 4.2 pounds of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels to move a car one mile. A gasoline car releases .88 pounds of carbon dioxide per mile. Electric cars might be worthwhile; they are much more efficient than the electrolysis-fuel cell system, and much more practical. Every mile the average electric car travels, a power plant will release 0.84 pounds of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels to charge the batteries. While this is less than a gasoline-powered car, electrics have a limited range and carry bulky batteries.

Ethanol, which President Bush recently endorsed, also has its problems. First off, we would have to farm 32 percent of the United States for corn to supply our fuel needs. Further, modern farming methods are extremely energy intensive when one considers the energy costs of making fertilizer, making pesticides, running harvesters, and so forth. It takes 38,000 BTU (a unit of energy) to grow the corn to produce a single gallon of ethanol. At best, that ethanol can produce 23,500 BTU. In reality, we’ll be unable to use more than 20 percent of that energy; we get 4,700 BTU for 38,000. We can’t grow energy.

Hydrogen steam reforming is more promising. In this system, water and any hydrocarbon are broken down into hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The hydrogen can then be put through a fuel cell, producing more energy than the steam reforming used. The energy is released from the hydrocarbon fuel. Usually, the hydrogen is shipped to a car before being used for electricity. This entails the most severe problem; shipping and storing hydrogen is extremely difficult. In fact, it takes a substantial portion of the energy stored in a given amount of hydrogen to move that hydrogen to the point where it will be used. Hydrogen fuel tanks holding the equivalent of 10 gallons of gasoline can occupy as much as 250 gallons.

To escape shipping and storage issues, we can do steam reforming in the car. In this system, we put almost any hydrocarbon – preferably methane, but propane, gasoline, diesel, tar, and so forth could be used – in the fuel tank. This goes through the steam reformer to make hydrogen, which becomes electricity and water at the fuel cell. That energy is used to run the steam reformer and turn the wheels. The system can burn gasoline about as efficiently as a hybrid car, or use methane much more cleanly and efficiently. This makes the transition to the new fuel source quite easy; we can run steam reformer cars on gasoline until they’re popular enough that methane begins to be sold in significant quantities.

The other problem with steam reforming is the fuel used, is currently non-renewable and pollutes. The hydrocarbons to be reformed will be fossil fuels. In fact, it’s estimated that methane reserves would only last 50 years if all cars ran by steam reforming. We solve that by using naturally occurring methane. Methane oozes out of landfills, farms, sewage treatment plants, and so forth on a large scale. Some of it is collected and used. If we collected more, we could run our cars with it. That would create carbon dioxide, but methane is 21 times as strong a greenhouse gas. When we burn it, we reduce the greenhouse effect. We don’t even have to worry about mandating that naturally occurring methane be used; as methane reserves run low, it will very quickly become cheaper to use landfill methane.

This car could be built and marketed now. The technology exists; the infrastructure to run it on gasoline or propane exists. The only thing that doesn’t exist is awareness. I want a car that helps the environment and can burn practically any fuel. Who wouldn’t?.