Author Topic: Hydrogen Car (Read 1140 times)

funkedup · « **Reply #30 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:07:45 PM »

Honda just released their ($1.6M per unit) fuel cell car. They are leasing them to the City of LA for $500/month. It's a 3700 lb vehicle with 80 hp. Imagine an old Honda Civic towing another Honda Civic.

They built a solar plant to create hydrogen from water. It can produce enough hydrogen to fill up one of the fuel cell cars. In a week. I think the plant cost like $100k.

If they can bring down the price of the car and the fueling station by like a factor of 100 and increase the energy density of the fuel cells by like a factor of 10 then they might have a viable product.

Mini D · « **Reply #31 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:10:31 PM »

Miko,

You do not drill for gasoline, you drill for oil. Crude is unusable as a practical fuel in its natural state. Refinement is necessary. Refinement itself also requires energy, as does the shipping, drilling and everything else. Both gasoline and hydrogen need to be extracted from the chemical home they naturally enhabit.

Hydrogen processing would minimize the transportation of the crude product since the source is readily pipeable from virtually anywhere in the world. Both need refineries.

As for renewable sources of energy... it is ALSO about that. Sorry that you don't really feel it is... but you've been known to be wrong before.

MiniD

vorticon · « **Reply #32 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:13:35 PM »

"wheres hydrogen???" theres a bloody great hydrogen feild in between the continents...h2o...h is hydrogen you fill up the car on water you give off pure water at the end...

Mini D · « **Reply #33 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:17:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by vorticon
"wheres hydrogen???" theres a bloody great hydrogen feild in between the continents...h2o...h is hydrogen you fill up the car on water you give off pure water at the end...

This is so very wrong. Water will be the byproduct, not the source of energy. Water will be an abundant source of hydrogen, but it may not be the most effecient source. I can't say I know what is the most efficient source either.

Regardless, hydrogen will have to be extracted from something.

MiniD

funkedup · « **Reply #34 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:19:22 PM »

Quote

You do not drill for gasoline, you drill for oil. Crude is unusable as a practical fuel in its natural state. Refinement is necessary. Refinement itself also requires energy, as does the shipping, drilling and everything else. Both gasoline and hydrogen need to be extracted from the chemical home they naturally enhabit.

Hydrogen processing would minimize the transportation of the crude product since the source is readily pipeable from virtually anywhere in the world. Both need refineries.

MiniD: It's an energy balance equation. Making H2 from water takes more energy than is generated by using the H2 in the fuel cell. Making gasoline from oil takes only a very small fraction of the energy in the oil.

So H2 is not really an energy source. It's just energy storage. You still need to get the energy from somewhere. Like burning fossil fuels, fission, wind, solar, etc.

vorticon · « **Reply #35 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:20:38 PM »

maybe...it would seem to be efficeint overall...how effecient is nuclear energy when you think about it...of course all we really need is some way to turn heat into energy directly with no catalyst...

ra · « **Reply #36 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:35:15 PM »

If hydrogen is so easy to seperate from water and use as a fuel, why doesn't the Sierra Club or Greenpeace just build one small fuel plant and one car to prove it? Probably because the resulting car would end up with the net energy efficiency of a Ford Excursion towing a Bayliner up Pike's Peak.

Simpler yet, they could just build the fuel plant and use the Hydrogen gas to heat a home, that way there are no storage issues. If they can do that more efficiently than heating the home on natural gas, I'll listen. Until then this is all hippy talk.

ra

Mini D · « **Reply #37 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:38:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by funkedup
MiniD: It's an energy balance equation. Making H2 from water takes more energy than is generated by using the H2 in the fuel cell. Making gasoline from oil takes only a very small fraction of the energy in the oil.

So H2 is not really an energy source. It's just energy storage. You still need to get the energy from somewhere. Like burning fossil fuels, fission, wind, solar, etc.

Ah... I see you're point in regards to energy potential, though H2 can be generated much more cleanly than gasoline. It can be burned much more cleanly than gasoline and it can be disposed of much more cleanly than gasoline.

The energy is avialable regardless... making it mobile is another issue. Making it clean is an entirely different issue.

When we were building our first fab on the new Intel site, Intel began a campaign with the neighborhood trying to say that it wouldn't cause that much polution, nor use that much energy. It was somewhat of a flop because it quantified things in a manner that didn't make Intel look good. One thing from that:

Quote

The employees generate more emissions driving to work than the building will generate

At the time... there were about 200 employees working on the site (plus about 800 contractors). Currently there are about 8000 employees and 2000 contractors.

People, by far and away, generate more polution by driving than virtually all energy generating and consuming sources combined. We can continue to trim emissions from factories all we want... it just might put a tiny dent in the current polution problem.

MiniD

funkedup · « **Reply #38 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:50:15 PM »

I still think the best way to make this kind of progress occur is to bring all the troops home. Let the price of oil rise to its natural level that it would be at without US foreign policy meddling. Then let the market take care of the rest.

Batz · « **Reply #39 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:57:43 PM »

Hydrogen is easy to extract from water in the sense that you just need the correct electrical current. That doesnt mean it is efficient. Hydrogen would cost more in dollars to produce and require a lot of energy to extract. More then what you would get from using the hydrogen as fuel. Plus storage and shipping would increase.

Quote

They built a solar plant to create hydrogen from water. It can produce enough hydrogen to fill up one of the fuel cell cars. In a week. I think the plant cost like $100k.

Funked is correct.

Mini D · « **Reply #40 on:** February 10, 2003, 01:59:14 PM »

You mean... time to get all 4 pipes from Alaska up and going 100%?

The consumption may dip a bit if you do that... though not enough to really matter. The fuel will just be sold cheaper elsewhere.... where consumption will bump up to cover any slum we see.

The automobile is the primary polution generator of the modern erra. It is time to seriously adress that issue.

MiniD

g00b · « **Reply #41 on:** February 10, 2003, 02:23:13 PM »

OK, about hydrogen powered vehicles, or fuel cell vehicles... Their are some huge misconceptions. All the hydrogen does for you is STORE ENERGY. Just like a big battery. You still have to generate the energy to begin with. There are some inherent bonuses to doing it this way. A power plant can generate power much more efficiently than our cars will ever be able to. You can use nuclear power plants to generate the power. Yah, I know everyone hates 'em, but just wait for 50 years, what are people going to do, give up driving or build more nuclear power stations. Dams, tidal generators, windmills, geothermal, etc... are all viable means of power if used intelligently. Remember you don't get energy for free, If we extract enough energy for the worlds population from our environment, I gaurentee there will be catastrphic long term effects.

Angus · « **Reply #42 on:** February 11, 2003, 05:29:00 AM »

Miko2D:
"Angus: Burning diesel in a power plant ... STILL beats the energy converted by a normal car engine running on gasoline.

The only places I've seen that cared to provide numbers contradict your statement. It's currently about equal efficiency."
Well, you're right. Its actually about equal, with the Hydro car in its infancy though. Had to provoke some responce though:D
For your info, a fuel cell car converts 80% of they Hydro's energy to electricity, and 80% of that electricity into motional power. A normal car running on gasoline converts about 20% of that energy into motional power. Gives a base to calculate from...
Also, static power plants use multiple power sources, while the car as it is demands particularly one.

Also:
"Internal combustion engines and hybrid systems can improve efficiency without radical change to the society.
And storing liquid fuel is much easier now than storing hydrogen and electricity. "
I don't get this. This IS the current efficiency, we are running on gasoline as it is. Its gonna change whether we like it or not, cos we're gonna RUN OUT OF IT. That's gonna be one radical change, and the sooner we do something about it, the softer the blow.
Also, Hydrogen IS one way to store electricity.

And finally:

1. Solar energy
1.1 Biomass - growing stuff and burning it (as wood, alcohol, oil, etc.) - requires a lot of land, which destroys ecosystems.

I have a comment on this. This is a part of agriculture, and agriculture in both Europe and the US is in a bit of a depression. It has been estimated that Europe's agriculture alone could cope with producing the energy to power itself completely without adding that much land. The magic is there is crop rotation, better utilization of goods already there (surplus biomass) and the Land which the EU is substitizing for being UNUSED (because of other products overproduction). Now Europe has more population than the US, and the US and Canada are Vastly better off regarding landzise than Europe.
Besides, the polluting manners of mankind ARE destroyng ecosystems.

1.2 Solar cells/reflectors - requires a lot of land, which destroys ecosystems.

Yeah, like powering your house with a cell on the roof destroyes a lot?

1.3 Wind (caused by sun) - my favorite
Windfarms are noisy, but they work well. NB: All three can be combinable, Crops, Wind energy and Solar energy.

straffo · « **Reply #43 on:** February 11, 2003, 06:36:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by funkedup
I still think the best way to make this kind of progress occur is to bring all the troops home. Let the price of oil rise to its natural level that it would be at without US foreign policy meddling. Then let the market take care of the rest.

I think you're plain right.

strange to read that from a ugly socialist frog