Hydrogen instead of gas for cars
Moderators: Xen, expert, ChenBeier
Hydrogen instead of gas for cars
Why cars do not use Hydrogen instead of expensive gas?
Re: Hydrogen instead of gas for cars
Cars which use hydrogen will cost much more, and they can explode easily.Xen wrote:Why cars do not use Hydrogen instead of expensive gas?
Im guessing it would be a stability issue. It would cost far too much money to research anyhow. I doubt the consumer economy is demanding a alternative car to a gas-guzzler. Until the day when we finally realize that resources are not unlimited we will not make the transition to an alternate source of power.
Other helpful site:
www.Chemicool.com/forum
It is true of the Nation, as of the individual, that the greatest doer must also be the great dreamer.
-Theodore Roosevelt
www.Chemicool.com/forum
It is true of the Nation, as of the individual, that the greatest doer must also be the great dreamer.
-Theodore Roosevelt
Re: it would be nice if we can implement
That doesnt have to be true. Gas powered cars were epxensive too, some years ago - only the rich had one - but because of mass production they got cheaper. I think it will be same with hydrogen carssd7668 wrote:...but it will be a more costly ...
The only issue I have with H2 based cars is the large explosion range for air/H2 mixture. This means if your Hydrogen car leaks odorless H2 (which is notoriously hard to confine), and your car is parked inside your house, you can lose more than just your car. Sleep on that.
--------------------------------------------
JohnB:
Don't confuse science and lobbying power in Washington. The fact that the powers-to-be OK bad fuel for your engine is just good business policy and not science. This, is a win/win scenario for the two major lobbyists in this case (sorry, but apparently you and me don't actually matter much with respect to the United States Congress). It is great for those selling ethanol mixes and good for car makers who get out of the engine warranty and make $ on repairs (I seriously doubt the engine warranty includes the consequences of any alternative fuels).
If this upsets you, your off base. You are all ready eating antibiotic treated food that has have the level of "acceptable" antibiotics increased a thousand fold since you were born (again, no science here either).
So live with it, or move to Canada (you will need your sweater). The good news is that the Canadian scientist (for so some unknown reasons) have ban imports of many of our diary and meat products. But, if you miss the good old USA, drive back and fill-up with some bad gas.
--------------------------------------------
JohnB:
Don't confuse science and lobbying power in Washington. The fact that the powers-to-be OK bad fuel for your engine is just good business policy and not science. This, is a win/win scenario for the two major lobbyists in this case (sorry, but apparently you and me don't actually matter much with respect to the United States Congress). It is great for those selling ethanol mixes and good for car makers who get out of the engine warranty and make $ on repairs (I seriously doubt the engine warranty includes the consequences of any alternative fuels).
If this upsets you, your off base. You are all ready eating antibiotic treated food that has have the level of "acceptable" antibiotics increased a thousand fold since you were born (again, no science here either).
So live with it, or move to Canada (you will need your sweater). The good news is that the Canadian scientist (for so some unknown reasons) have ban imports of many of our diary and meat products. But, if you miss the good old USA, drive back and fill-up with some bad gas.
ajkoer
-
GrahamKemp
- Distinguished Member
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 10:12 pm
Production is also an issue. Hydrogen just does not occur naturally on Earth.
Currently the major source of industrially produced hydrogen is through steam reforming of fossil fuels (natural gas, aka methane), which produces carbon dioxide as a byproduct. This doesn't exactly make it a greener alternative.
To use hydrogen as a renewable fuel, an economically feasible method of water splitting by a renewable power would have to be engineered. The basic principles are simple enough; it's just electrolysis of water. What needs to a cost-effective engineering solution needs to be found so the processing capacity can meet demand.
And before that, sufficient demand to make investment attractive
Currently the major source of industrially produced hydrogen is through steam reforming of fossil fuels (natural gas, aka methane), which produces carbon dioxide as a byproduct. This doesn't exactly make it a greener alternative.
To use hydrogen as a renewable fuel, an economically feasible method of water splitting by a renewable power would have to be engineered. The basic principles are simple enough; it's just electrolysis of water. What needs to a cost-effective engineering solution needs to be found so the processing capacity can meet demand.
And before that, sufficient demand to make investment attractive
Actually, research is not the issue. See as a single example "Clean, cheap hydrogen production from water using cobalt catalyst", Link: http://arstechnica.com/science/2011/06/ ... -catalyst/
The issue, per the author, is "As a proof-of-concept, this device is promising, but significant effort will still be needed to develop this concept into a functioning photoelectrochemical cell." My translation, need capital (most likely government) investment.
Yes, I can see it now, the oil lobby in Washington will just roll over and welcome an investment to facilitate the production of Hydrogen from water and sunlight.
Not convinced? Hence is another path: "Producing hydrogen from sea water". To quote: "A new catalyst that generates hydrogen from sea water has been developed by scientists in the US. This new metal-oxo complex displays high catalytic activity and stability, whilst being low cost, the researchers say". Link: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/ ... 041002.asp
Again, the same sorry story, invented in America, and soon the promise of some other nations future.
Someone has suggested that I should put my thoughts (including the above commentary) in a book. Any suggestions on the title? I was thinking " America, the Apple"
The issue, per the author, is "As a proof-of-concept, this device is promising, but significant effort will still be needed to develop this concept into a functioning photoelectrochemical cell." My translation, need capital (most likely government) investment.
Yes, I can see it now, the oil lobby in Washington will just roll over and welcome an investment to facilitate the production of Hydrogen from water and sunlight.
Not convinced? Hence is another path: "Producing hydrogen from sea water". To quote: "A new catalyst that generates hydrogen from sea water has been developed by scientists in the US. This new metal-oxo complex displays high catalytic activity and stability, whilst being low cost, the researchers say". Link: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/ ... 041002.asp
Again, the same sorry story, invented in America, and soon the promise of some other nations future.
Someone has suggested that I should put my thoughts (including the above commentary) in a book. Any suggestions on the title? I was thinking " America, the Apple"
ajkoer