Model Sustainable/Hydrogen City
A few months ago, I wrote a letter to the editors of my local Macomb, Illinois newspapers describing my initial thoughts on why I believe Macomb would be a great place to develop a model sustainable and/or hydrogen city. The text of this letter is below. I would appreciate hearing peoples' thoughts.
This letter can also be found at my "Model Sustainable Cities" website at www.modelsustainablecities.weebly.com For some local discussion of this letter, see the "Model Sustainable/Hydrogen City" thread at the Macomb Journal's message board at http://macombjournal.proboards59.com...?board=general
Macomb's economic potential
To the Editor:
A few months ago, William Bailey, chairman of the department of agriculture at Western, wrote in a local column about Beardstown’s economic potential. I believe that a similar line of reasoning could display more of Macomb’s economic potential. The following quote can be found online at the Illinois Farm Bureau’s FarmWeek archive of “Perspective” columns. See July 25, 2007 “Perspective -- Ports of Beardstown, Los Angeles, Singapore share traits” http://farmweek.ilfb.org/viewdocumen...108&r=0.161297
"It is a bit more of a stretch to think of Beardstown as an international port through which containers of agricultural products could move to anyplace in the world. But that is certainly possible and is well within the grasp of a number of businesses who are attempting to make Beardstown into an international port."
Now, I propose that Macomb would be an ideal location to develop a model sustainable city. Perhaps this is also a stretch. But let me build the beginnings of my case.
What does such a city look like? Let me briefly describe a few techniques that could be integrated into a sustainable city. Buildings could be built or retrofitted to become hyper-efficient, using energy from their surroundings for heating and cooling and sometimes even lighting and electricity. Buildings so designed often return energy to the electrical grid. Hydrogen could serve as the premier energy carrier. It could be used as a fuel for transportation in fuel cells or hydrogen internal combustion engines (H2ICE’s). Hydrogen might also heat homes by combustion or by fuel cells producing electricity for heating and other household applications. The hydrogen will be produced from renewable resources such as biomass conversion or from the electrolysis of water using wind or solar energy. Before all our fossil fuels are consumed, they can be reformed to produce hydrogen as a steppingstone toward fully renewable sources of hydrogen.
Why would Macomb be a good place to accelerate our transition? First, other cities are already pursuing the goal of becoming sustainable. For instance, Columbia, SC is seeking to become “Hydrogen City.” A smaller city of 14,000 in Lolland, Denmark is also hoping to become the world’s first hydrogen city, H2PIA. So, there is precedent for bodies politic on the municipal level to spearhead this kind of economic development.
Second, leaders in the state of Illinois are already pursuing other projects in sustainability. Most of us are keenly aware of the importance of Illinois ethanol as a step toward sustainability. Similarly as in other states, northern Illinois is developing a hydrogen highway. This is in accord with the vision for the eventual national transition to a hydrogen-based economy.
Third, any time one wants to build a large, complex machine, one starts by building a smaller model, a prototype. If cities are large, complex machines, smaller cities could be developed that model the vision for the future development of the larger cities.
Are there any cities in Illinois aiming to become fully sustainable? Are there any locations in Illinois where there could be built a locally functioning, model hydrogen economy?
Let me be specific about Macomb’s characteristics that I believe make it an ideal place to build one such model economy. Macomb is both large enough and small enough to qualify as a model city. Macomb can be described as “micropolitan.” It has mechanics, movement patterns, and other qualities similar to a metropolitan area, except on a smaller scale. For instance, the satellite towns in McDonough County are to Macomb as Chicago’s suburbs are to the larger Chicago.
Next, Macomb is a city of learning. WIU is a primary economic engine. Much of Macomb’s core population is in the education industry. An excellent teaching opportunity exists for a community to develop itself as a model for sustainability. It would be like a giant field exercise or scientific experiment in research and development.
Third, Macomb’s rural setting with low population density is an advantage. Our agribusiness people understand the cyclic nature of agricultural production patterns. These patterns are very similar to sustainable energy production and consumption patterns. Also, our low population density will make it easier for the older technologies to be upgraded or replaced by the newer technologies. Think of it like the difference between the traffic jams around construction in metropolitan areas versus the only slightly more congested traffic around construction in smaller cities and towns.
Fourth, the use of economic cooperatives such as the electric and telephone cooperatives show that our people have a history of working together to bring to us goods and services difficult to procure by other methods. This is a kind of cooperation similar to the lifestyles that will eventually be necessary for life among the future’s sustainable energy infrastructure.
Finally, we are already connected to or near enough to companies who would likely be interested in cooperating in this project. For instance, large equipment manufacturers John Deere and Caterpillar are each only two hours away. These are only a couple possibilities of which I have personal knowledge.
How do we get started? I would suggest an expanded feasibility study. I have tried to show above some of the factors that make the project feasible. But there are professionals, such as Teska Associates, who could work together to develop a more comprehensive plan. Consider Macomb’s Comprehensive Plan, p. 65, Figure D – Action Plan Table, Line Four: “Action Step: Promote the use of green technology and clean energy. Purpose: To become a sustainable City and to reduce green-house gas emissions.”
With a little vision, we could tell a grand story, invite the investment of cutting edge technology, and develop an already great city into a model city. People will flock to Macomb to see how we did it. Students will live the future at WIU. And people will learn from our model in order to improve their own cities.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
















First of all, hydrogen is an
First of all, hydrogen is an energy carrier, not a producer. Second, the amount of energy in electricity it takes to convert water into hydrogen is greater than the energy you get by the end of the process: it's an energy sink. Third, who's going to build all the hydrogen infrastructure? Will the energy required be available?
Additionally, I see that you're implicating ethanol production. That might be appropriate for your community, but it is surely not a large-scale solution to the coming energy crisis. And then there's always the concept that it's not always a smart plan to burn your food in your gas tank. I urge you to do some more research before putting your hope into false solutions. Good luck.
Forget the damned motor car and build the cities for lovers and friends. -Lewis Mumford
Several of Today's Articles Relate to this Forum Topic
I thought I'd move my old thread back to the forefront of the forums, since several of today's articles relate to my thoughts from the past as herein contained.
about the hydrogen economy...
I can appreciate the passion and it reads well, however the hydrogen economy is a false solution. First of all, hydrogen is an energy carrier, not a producer. Second, the amount of energy in electricity it takes to convert water into hydrogen is greater than the energy you get by the end of the process: it's an energy sink. Third, who's going to build all the hydrogen infrastructure? Will the energy required be available?
Additionally, I see that you're implicating ethanol production. That might be appropriate for your community, but it is surely not a large-scale solution to the coming energy crisis. And then there's always the concept that it's not always a smart plan to burn your food in your gas tank. I urge you to do some more research before putting your hope into false solutions. Good luck.
Forget the damned motor car and build the cities for lovers and friends. -Lewis Mumford
Thank you for your reply
Thank you for your comments, compliments, and questions. I have read a number of opinions that say that the hydrogen economy is not a feasible solution. I have also read equally enthusiastic perspectives that claim that the hydrogen economy IS feasible. They say that the technological hurdles to constructing a hydrogen economy are not insurmountable.
Yes, hydrogen is an energy carrier. I noted this in my original post.
Yes, some energy in the electricity does not end up being stored in the hydrogen by the end of traditional electrolysis. I know of no energy storage process that has a 100% conversion ratio - not plants, not fuel-to-energy-carrier processes, not batteries. The energy sink effect will occur in any process where we are actively collecting renewable, sustainable energy. The only reason that this does not seem to apply to our perception of the economics of fossil fuel energy or nuclear energy is because we're not looking at the entire energy conversion chain. The energy was stored in these materials without human intervention... but if we look at the case of fossil fuels, the energy was greater in the solar energy that shown on the ancient plants, and the chemical energy in the ancient plants was greater than the energy stored in the fossil fuels. Most often, this energy that cannot be trapped in storage ends up as heat. So, eventually, we will have to accept the energy sink effect in any sustainable energy system. The only reason we've been able to believe that it is possible to get more energy in return than what we expend is because we've stepped into the middle of an energy conversion chain without putting forth human energy or effort in collecting the energy. And eventually, supplies of these energy dense, recoverable fuels will become more expensive, peak, decline, and be exhausted.
Who will build all the hydrogen infrastructure? Good question. I don't know. But I'd recommend a cooperative public/private, governmental/corporate strategy. Everybody has an interest in energy, yes?
Will the energy required be available? Another good question. I believe that a synergistic synthesis of techniques will be able to provide sufficient energy for the needs of humanity. I believe that optimizing the city system will be a beneficial strategy because cities are the dominant mechanical structure on the surface of the earth. They are the dominant form of human habitation. I believe that a combination of energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, urban density, and relocalization can supply and distribute sufficient energy, goods, and services to sustain human life on earth. But I haven't done any calculations on this.
Yes, I agree that food-based ethanol will not be a large-scale solution. In the industrial agriculural communities, however, it is often one of the first attempts at addressing the coming energy crisis. But as you mentioned, food prices increase and it's not always the best idea to burn food in the gas tank. So, at most, grain-based ethanol will not be sufficient. Algea and other non-food biofuels are another option, however. Are these better than hydrogen? Maybe. But they can also be feedstocks for hydrogen with carbon sequestration.
In sum, I ask whether a hydrogen economy is as false a solution as you believe it to be. I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts.