If you don't see your question here, please ask it and I will add it to the list.

Q: How will we get the hydrogen?
A: Hydrogen is not generally available in its pure form. We will not find hydrogen gas wells that we can drill, and even if we could, that would not be a sustainable solution. The only clean and sustainable method for hydrogen generation is through electrolysis of water. Simply explained, running an electric current through water causes hydrogen to collect at one electrode, and oxygen at the other. This hydrogen can be gathered and stored very easily.

Q: How will we store the hydrogen?
A: Hydrogen is the lightest element, and therefore its energy density with regard to volume is very low. There are several popular storage formats (such as compressed hydrogen or liquid hydrogen), and any of them is acceptable for the semi trucks. These trucks use large amounts of fuel, so the temperature losses for liquid hydrogen will be minimized (since each full tank is used more or less within one day). These truck are already very large, so they have a large volume to store compressed hydrogen tanks.

Q: Isn't compressing or liquidifying hydrogen too expensive to be practical?
A: It will require approximately 30 kWh of electricity to compress or liquefy 100 kWh worth of hydrogen. Similar costs are incurred by preparing fossil fuels for consumption. Obtaining oil requires energy to drill deep into the earth, pump the oil up to the surface, ship it thousands of miles, refine it into various products, pipe it to distribution stations, and then truck it to the gas stations and other points of sale. Every one of those steps requires energy, but we are so accustomed to it that we don't even give it a second thought during our normal lives. In many areas of the US, 75% of the cost of coal is the cost to transport it to the location where it will be burned. One of the key points of the RENEW program is that the hydrogen is generated very close to where it is purchased by the end user. In addition to providing huge national security benefits, this eliminates the costly transportation expenses mentioned above.

Q: Won't a hydrogen vehicle cost more? And where are all those big hydrogen storage tanks going to go?
A: One of the great things about hydrogen fuel cells is their small size. A fuel cell that can power a car is about the size of a shoe box. The motors for each wheel (yes, built-in 4-wheel drive!) are similarly sized. If you think about the design of a current gasoline vehicle, and remove the huge engine mess from under the hood, you now have a very large area in which to place much more hydrogen storage than is needed. Since we are removing the expensive, heavy, and complicated gasoline engine, and replacing it with little shoeboxes and air tanks, the weight of the vehicle will decrease significantly (increasing fuel efficiency) and the price of the vehicle should be similar to a gasoline vehicle. Maintenance on the vehicle should be significantly lower, since there are now much fewer moving parts to service. No oil changes, transmissions, spark plugs, distributors, carburetors, etc. Best of all, less time wasted sitting around at the mechanic's shop!

Q: Aren't solar and wind power too expensive to use? If they really are cheaper than coal and oil, then we would be using them everywhere already! The only reason they are used at all now is because of government subsidies.
A: Yes, at the current time, solar and wind power are more expensive than fossil fuels. The biggest reason is that solar panels and wind turbines are not mass produced. Mass production of almost any item makes the cost per item much much less than if only a few items were made. For example, it costs Ford Motors millions and millions of dollars to make one prototype car, but by making a million cars, they are able to make them for only a few thousand dollars each (and then charge significantly more than their actual manufacturing cost). Why aren't solar panels and wind turbines mass produced? Because the demand is too low. Why is the demand low? Because the solar panels and wind turbines are too expensive. One of the key results of the RENEW program is to get these devices past this "catch 22" and into mass production. Another reason that wind power is expensive is that the wind turbines are not usually placed in the areas with the best wind resources. This is because people tend not to live in very windy areas. Since wind power increases with the cube of wind speed (doubling the wind speed multiplies the wind power by 8!), it is very important to utilize the high wind regions of the country. The RENEW program will pay to install high voltage power lines to carry this very cheap electricity to the areas where the energy is needed. These factors contribute to making wind energy an estimated 60% cheaper than fossil fuel energy.

Yes, solar and wind power are subsidized. However, fossil fuels are also heavily subsidized. It is important to assist new technologies that are better in so many ways to come into the market. However, subsidizing the fuels that we need to stop using is shooting ourselves in both feet.

Q: Aren't solar panels and wind turbines ugly? We don't want to obscure our beautiful homes and land.
A: Ugliness is 100% an issue of perspective. We are not accustomed to seeing solar panels on our roofs, or wind turbines in our backyards, so we may not like them. However, chimneys are ugly. Smog is ugly. Asphalt and concrete are ugly. There was a time when people thought homes were ugly, and they knew it was time to move when they could see smoke coming from the neighbor's chimney. Humans have the ability to adapt quite easily. When people realize just a small fraction of the benefits that clean and domestically sustainable energy sources provide, they would be foolish to reject it. The choice is windmills in the fields, deep blue panels on your roof, economic prosperity, increased national security, inexpensive energy, and clean air vs. dirty smelly air, dependence on unstable nations, economic instability, and expensive energy. Which would you choose?

Q: What about the birds that might be killed by the windmills?
A: In the 1980s there was an experimental wind farm setup in southern California. Unfortunately, the issue of avian fatality had never been encountered, and the wind farm was placed directly in the middle of a migratory route. This mistake is what prompted concern about wind turbines' impacts on birds. In countries like Denmark, there are no concerns about harm to birds since their devices were installed in regions outside of flight paths. Also, modern wind turbines have blades that spin much more slowly, so it is much easier for birds to navigate around them. Given these developments, it is easy to see how it might be more likely for animals to be killed by fossil fuels (say by an oil spill) than from clean energy.