Jack Nicholson Supported Hydrogen And Solar Power In 1978

Jack Nicholson was an early adopter of the green scene, as can be seen below. Nicholson supported hydrogen power, which, judging by the reactions of the others in the video, was a very strange idea back then. Alternative energy sources weren't a blip on the radar at this point.
Clearly Nicholson's support didn't help hydrogen power at all. Maybe the gas industry's Nurse Ratched lobotomized hydrogen's McMurphy? Gasman threw the Hydrogen Joker off a building? Something about Mars Attacks?

WATCH:

Comments

[SmellyOne]

Wow. Neat.

Well, it has taken this long to have the oil become expensive enough to make the technology legitimate.

[DRaymond]

The bottom line is that for automobiles Hydrogen offers two significant advantages over batteries:

1. Rapid recharge (fill-up)

2. Extremely high energy per pound. Way higher than even the newest lithium technologies. That not only saves you energy pushing all those heavy batteries around but also saves structural weight in the vehicle itself.

As for the infrastructure, all it takes is water and electricity to create hydrogen. You don't need centralized refineries or fleets ot tankers and trucks. Any service station could add a hydrogen generator and a storage tank. And you can have a home unit to make your own overnight.

[perk]

Does the "high energy per pound" include the rather heavy container required to transport the hydrogen?

Do you realize that the energy required to separate the Hydrogen and Oxygen molecules, in a perfect environment is at best, the same as the energy produced? Though such an efficiency (100%) has never been obtained on this planet?

Sorry for the questions, I am just an engineer that has to make reality out of this sort of fiction and I fail every day. Hey, take a high school level physics class before you write such a fantasy. Alternatively, label the post as "Science Fiction" before spouting such non-sense.

[perk]

Ok, I was being harsh without holding your hand through the full impact of this "thinking error".

Here we go:
The newest, cleanest, most expensive, natural gas combined cycle power plant, is about 60% efficient in producing electricity from fossil fuels.

Tragically, the heat rate (or efficiency) of the power reaching that outlet in your garage today is about 35% ( this includes a 15 transmission loss) . So you charge your fuel cell at about 85% of that, which is ( if you have the $50 000 or so it takes to own a mobile fuel cell to power a $30 000 fully electric vehicle big enough to carry your family and groceries 100 miles.

Now, you are fully 50% ( or one half, for the non-math-set) as fuel efficient as a car that gets 25 MPG and costs $12,000.

Get practical people. Yeah, you have to know some math and physics to understand energy use and conservation, so take a class. It is our life here in the USA.

[perk]

I remember that time in the 70's well. There were shortages of gasoline and we waited in line to fill up every day one summer.

Sadly, when gas prices dropped and a new generation came along, we forgot about the warnings of "peak oil" and forgot how to conserve fuel and limit our driving.

Truly, the only way to get the attention of Americans is to hit them very hard in the pocket book. That is why the current energy crisis is a perfect solution to the problem. Of course, we have a short memory.

[OldKnute]

Actually, this goes back to 1840,,, not 1940.

Everything we needed was already developed by 1850, Solar Cells, Fuel Cells, Hydrogen from water.

What got in the way?

Ummm,,, Fossils,, the same THEN,,, as today.

OLD FOSSILS!

Insert names HERE ____ and _____ and_____, and_____!

All the best

Knute Neo-LIB

[Jess27]

We put a man on the moon in 8 years but we can not get hydrogen cars available for the masses in 30 years. Where are the priorities?

[saltpeter]

The Earth and the universe are funny things. They have their own ways of generating energy. Many of these methods (solar power, wind, tides, hydrogen) can be used by humans with little or no effect to the original source. AND they are EVER ABUNDANT. Especially hydrogen (the most abundant element in the universe). We have a giant yellow orb that is nothing but a big ball of hydrogen glaring at us each and every day. It's our lifeline and when it goes, we go. But oil will dry up. And when it does there will be chaos. But we will adapt because that's what humans do. But when the sun runs out, the last thing you're going to be worrying about is how it's going to effect your stock portfolio. It's ridiculous and counter-productive to rely an finite energy source when energy needs are growing everyday with the addition of ever-developing nations like India and China to the planet's energy strain. China's growing effect alone is similar to a country the size of Brazil being added to the power grid EVERY YEAR. Let the physical realities of the universe be our guide and stop fearing science, it equals progress. The problem is (as far as big business is concerned) is that nobody owns the sun. It is available to all. But for the rest of the world that is the BEAUTY OF IT. Don't worry, we'll find other things to fight about.

[saltpeter]

It is telling how resistant the oil industry was to change and still prevents progress even though their days are numbered. When we allowed the oil industry to have such control over other businesses (like the American automobile industry by keeping MPG standards arbitrarily low) and to exert control over our foreign policy (like our irrational and bombastic rhetoric toward the Middle East in order to maintain Western control of resources or, at least, puppet regimes, through chaos) then you know we given one industry more power than they can handle. The Dirty Little Secret is is that the OIL insudtry did not EARN that privilege. Nearly a century ago, the federal government passed a bill to tax coal and gave some of the windfall profits to the then-emerging oil industry to help with r&d and infrastructe building. This was done, with some encouragement from the likes of Andrew Carnegie who wanted to use oil to power his steel factories (and to cut down on environmental pollutants in industrial cities like his hometown of Pittsburg), to wean people off the use of coal and encourage the use of oil for ammenities such as heating and power. It was done to curb health concerns related to coal pollution and to spur on development allowing for more care use and an expansion of suburbs. But now oil is in the position was held by coal. It has become too pollutant and is actually hindering development.

[mlaiuppa]

1978. Thirty years have passed. And hydrogen cars are STILL ten years away.

In the meantime we have the Prius Hybrid and the Tesla electric.

By the time they finally figure out hydrogen we'll be using solar to charge our electric cars.

[leduck]

Hydrogen is a stupid idea to replace oil
it's like using batteries
neither hydrogen nor batteries are primary sources of energy
in order to solve the Oil crises -- the Peak Oil crises, you must replace it with a primary source of energy

can hydrogen or electricity help? Yes -- but first we must solve the problem

the Huffpo needs more people who are science literate

[AlfredoENewman]

talk about stupid. How much do they pay you to post this crap? Hydrogen is a fuel readily available.

[Josiwe]

You need to brush up on your critical perception skills. The hydrogen was intended to be produced through solar power. Thus sunlight, not oil, would have been the primary energy source.

[DaveC19]

Actually hydrogen is a -TERRIBLE- alternate energy source (carrier). Read:

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-03-12.html#feature

Energy density is poor, the tank pressure is so high at 3000 PSI (requiring thick HEAVY tanks). You need allot of energy just to move the heavy tank around.

Producing it requires alot of energy.

Gaskets and seals at this pressure don't last long and require expensive maintenance. A tiny microscopic leak can drain a tank fast.

Range is poor. a 400kg hydrogen tank/fuel gives 165 miles, a 73 kg gas tank/fuel gives 493 miles.

Since the energy density is poor the roads would be filled with tanker trucks delivering it as it takes up so much space for so little energy. There would have to be allot of constant deliveries just to keep up with demand. Trucks would have to be so heavy due to the volume and pressure.

Pipelines are not practical due to the super high pressure. Keeping up with leaks would be next to impossible.

It is dangerous. Can you imagine one of these tanks exploding in an accident?

The reason that this is being touted is because hydrogen production can easily be manipulated and be subject to "market values" (read: gouging).

Electric is much more practical but they don't like that as you can get that from too many different sources (even "free" if you have solar panels). They like things that they can control completely.

[AlfredoENewman]

You sound so authoritative and some probably bought what you had to say but it is wrong.

Technology exists today to release hydrogen from H2O easily at over-unity. Yes, I said it now make fun. Some know that the 2nd law of thermodynamics has been broken thanks to the efforts of a few people but most won't tell you and will even lie about it. We no longer have to carry high pressure vessels of hydrogen the way Jack demonstrated you just have a tank of non-volatile water. But, no, let's destroy the planet and keep our long held secret in tact. How do those that know sleep at night? Oh, that's right, they have no conscience.

[Erdgeist]

By analogy, the Republicans continue to keep us on expensive whale oil for our lamps wanting more access to whales to meet the short supply of lamp oil when there is abundant cheap kerosene.

[mouselion]

Gosh, those socialist torries.

[jeanruss]

Actually, Hydrogen WAS the topic of energy as early as 1940, but it was stricken from the history books. Walter Russell, an American genius, displayed his Hydrogen engine for NORAD in the 1940's. Walter Russell was a good friend of BOTH Roosevelt Presidents. When he had completed his engine, he called the President and happily told him "We are free! The world will finally have a clean, cheap and plentiful source of energy!" Sadly, nothing came of it (I wonder why...?...­) and here we are, in a fix that could have been prevented, if not for the greed of Big Oil. I can't believe some enterprising engineer or scientist hasn't looked at Russell's work and tried to use it. He was brilliant. His biography "the Man Who Tapped the Secrets of the Universe" by Glenn Clark shows what an amazing American he was.

[mouselion]

Wow, amazing -- a program called "Market Place" in 1978. Jack Nicholson putting his face up to the tailpipe to demonstrate no carbon monoxide. Nurse Ratchet mentioned. A blast from the past. One thing, hydrogen, may or may not be the future of energy, but the fact that Nicholson was touting it way back. Lets you know: don't give up on whatever form of alternative energy you feel called to tout.

Mous E. Lion,
Southern Vermont