No one will argue that wind power is the most promising alternative. Unfortunately it is in the
wrong places.
The most reliable and powerful energy winds are near the poles. Put the wind farrms in the
Aleutians, Iceland, etc. Use much of the energy to liquefy the hydrogen. Ship the liquefied hydrogen
on tankers to the southern US.
Boil off the hydrogen to chill water for air conditioning (an extra 40% energy load, not including
the inefficiency of replaced air conditioners) then distribute the gas. During winter, cool
groundwater to store up for summer use. Winter heating is better addressed with by super-insulation
and biomass heat.
Considering we won't be needing LNG tankers and gas pipelines when natural gas dwindles, and
building anything after the upcoming energy crunch will be outrageously expensive, it just makes
sense to me.
Anything I am missing aside from the political dilemmas? Speaking of which, I would rather see 10
billion worth of windmills and electrolysis / cryogenic plants in Alaska (What about the east
coast?) than an ICBM shield that won't do squat against cruise missiles or anything else.