Gasoline is also a means of energy storage (any chemical fuel is) it's just that it was stored by the plants and animals that it came from long ago.
Alcohols would be another relatively cheap fuel for combustion type engines and can be produced now. I don't believe that if alcohols are adopted as our main fuel (as gasoline/diesel now are) that they would be a transitional thing. Industry and people wouldn't want to change over from combustion powered vehicles, so as you said it would be a replacement.
This would not really be in the long term interests of humanity as I see it. Issues with exhaust emissions, though different, would still exist. We would still be running complex mechanical engines that wouldn't capture even 40% of the energy they are consuming.
I congratulate the OP on his efforts to modify an existing vehicle into a less polluting one that runs on a sustainable fuel source. I do believe however that a switch to producing vehicles of that nature is not the best course of action. I believe that electric drive train vehicles are the way to go due to; simplicity, few parts to wear, better torque curve than combustion engines, and overall greater efficiency of energy transfer from fuel to the wheels.
This is not to say we don't have an energy storage (battery, fuel cell etc) problem to solve but isn't that the problem we are trying to solve with our current mechanically powered vehicles? Were running out or oil to make gas so what do we replace it with? How about taking this opportunity to upgrade to an entirely better drive system?
To sum up Yay Electric vehicles!
Yes, but the oil was made and the hydrogen stored in it long ago.
I don't see ammonia, alcohol or hydrazine being pumped out of any holes drilled in the ground, it all must be MADE, in geological terms it must be
made immediate to it's use
Electric vehicles? Great, IN USE no pollution from the vehicle.
But that ignores that most electricity is produced by burning coal and much of the rest by burning Oil, Natural gas or Uranium thus there is "hidden" pollution and energy use, it isn't free and it MUST come from somewhere.
wind generation? Gotta deal with the NIMBY's
GREENPEACE picketed the site of a proposed windfarm in rural vermont.
a friend in vermont was denied a permit to put up a wind generator
sued the township to get the permit anyway and was promptly sued by a local environmental group... does this make sense?
Solar power? still gotta deal with the NIMBY's
Commercial Geothermal? Try drilling a deep hole and see how quickly greenpease is on your ass!
Nuclear? Don't even ask (NIMBY/Greenpeace/Obama and anyone else who isn't busy)
And that also doesn't adress the limited range of electric cars.
and that related ENTIRELY to energy density.
that is a hurdle that will likely NEVER be overcome.
(unless you STEAL the hydrogen from the Bearded Spock
alternate universe and store it in another (unocupied) alternate universe)
and "burning" the fuel in a fuel cell is STILL burning it
LONG RANGE transportation will required liquid fuels The fact that
hasn't been grasped as reality by many here is only proof that you
just don't understand how dense an enegy storage media liquid
fuels are.
REAL Mass transit would solve much of the problem
However other associate issues with those make them problematic.
the infrastructure cost of extending mass transit lines makes them cost prohibitive (essentially not gonna happen) Add to that Most mass transit systems are near useless unless you are moving "radially" to or from the "hub" of the urban center.
There are no meaningful concentric lines to complete the "web"
(you can add here "Ain't gonna get fixed either")
so if you need to move across the circle the only way to do it
is travel to the core then back out.
Most people don't want to spend two HOURS commuting 10 miles because the cross connections don't exsist.... "becase they aren't economically viable"
Electric vehicles are "toys", playthings for those amused by such.
The lack of basic understanding about how people actually move outside of an urban area and how vehicles are actually used outside of a dense suburban area makes me kinda grim about the future possibilities bycause I KNOW in both my head and my heart that the engineers and those paying them simply don't get it.... and I doubt to the core of my soul that they ever will.
That and the general lack of understanding about energy density....
Frankly there is no getting away from liquid fuels and any and all methods to do so are doomed to failure by simple reality.
If you don't understand that then there is no hope for you.
A Prius is "great" for driving from your suburban home
to the "Park & Ride" at the commuter train station.
Getting in one for a long highway trip? demonstration of stupidity.
The simplest fact is that pure electric vehicles are great for
City dwellers and mabey 1/3 of suburbanites.
PURE electric vehicles are utterly useless for the vast
majority of people that live in Sub-Rural and true rural areas
with the marginal exception of retired people who only
need to mae a twice weekly run for groceries and the
pharmacy and to church on sunday.
I'm gonna say it again to hammer it home, it's all about
energy density and other than liquid fuels of one form or
another, nothing else will do what needs to be done.
RENEWABLE liquid fuels ARE the future.
If you GAVE me an electric car I couldn't really use it....
it doesn't do what I (or the majority of others) NEED to do.
What I WANT to do is a FAR higher standard.
AD