December 25, 2008
The Law: Going from Bad to Worse
December 24, 2008
History + Comedy = Rothbard
December 24, 2008
Lectures on Macroeconomics, No. 11
December 23, 2008
Banana Republic Economics, Continued
December 23, 2008
Theory, Explanation, and Policy
December 23, 2008
Education, Ideology, and Awkward Weddings
December 23, 2008
Finally, Some Good Economic News
December 23, 2008
Which Sector Should Lead?
December 23, 2008
A Microfinance Skeptic


“Jeremy Rifkin numbers among current hydrogen zealots--while skipping over the small matter of where we get the hydrogen.”
Shucks, I guess I’m just a cynical dude. It seems to me that those who are most infatuated with the idea of hydrogen power could care less whether it makes any sense. On a gut level, they merely conclude: “Water isn’t yucky like that nasty oil. It’s clean and pure. Therefore, it’s got to be a good thing.” Why let a few facts get in the way of one’s utopian schemes?
How will hydrogen power really help us? If it has to come from natural gas, coal, oil, or atomic energy, how will it really help? I understand that it is not polluting, but won't the processes needed to obtain it be polluting and also, except for atomic, use up non-renewable energy sources? However, doesn't using atomic power use up non-renewable energy?
Only solar or wind seem to be useful and practical sources of non-renewable and non-polluting of energy. Of course, hydroelectric is there, but haven't most of the useful places been utilized. It does take material and energy to build a dam and a power plant, doesn't it?