Skip to comments.Hydrogen Powered Cars! HA!
Posted on 01/25/2002 12:12:08 PM PST by John Jamieson
click here to read article
Recycle them, as the French and others are doing. And as we would be doing except for the peanut farmer.
Bear with me here, since 746 watts=1 HP, then 1000/746=1.34 HP ideally; efficiency losses brings us to between 1.5 and 2 HP depending on engine used and fuel efficiency.
One cubic foot of any liquid is 7.48 gallons, are you sure of your temperature for liquid hydrogen? I get -431(-257C) from Langes.
Question: Why just use the hydrogen? Why not use the oxygen too?
In other words, build an engine with "injectors" of some sort and inject the proper amount of hydrogen and oxygen into the combustion chamber.
It seems to me like that might increase the efficiency of the overall process as opposed to just using the hydrogen and "throwing the oxygen away" as it were.
Thanks for the info
What a great article! I tell me husband that we shoud "burn it all" all the time! Thanks for writing this up!
Maybe I'll start watching Ballard once again.
They have clean diesel power all over Europe ... it is only political considerations keeping it out of the U.S.
Plenty of sun out here in the desert southwest. Almost all of it is wasted.
Chemical Batteries like lead acid, gel deep cycle and even the lithium have life times that are short by a cars lifetime definition. They are heavy; they are a problem in an accident; Disposal is a problem. Chemical storage is bay far the best way to store the energy for a car. Whats wrong with a nuclear power plant producing hydrogen to fuel our cars with, and hydrogen stations with Spare tanks that a re a universal size and shape (Vehicles could use one or more, i.e. bigger vehicles four or six, etc) We can then drive cross country, stopping for refills as we do now, and we can not pollute (Fusion reactors can eat the waste of Fission reactors, so no waste to bury.) no pollution, no oil from Saudis whats the down side?
Oh, the oil companies stocks would drop like a stone and these reactors would be terrorist target.
Know your topic, look good
The storage system: http://www.billingsenergy.com/Research/HWV-Chapter_07.pdf
(In fairness I met Dr Mel billings the brother of the founder of Billings Energy Corp. several years ago and talked about this, so in a way I am cheating)
But hey, even if this is not the solution, Im sure with a little incentive, we can figure something out.
Necessity, the mother of invention Love quotes.
BTW, If I remember correctly, I was told the tests of these metal hydride storage tanks included being shot with incendiary rounds, and all that happened was they set it on fire (and it burned very brightly, and for two days IIRC.
MIT degree, 27 years working with hydrogen fuel at NASA KSC.
I should know something about it.
You need to stop getting the cheap ones from the supermarket and get the good ones from Sporting Goods stores.
Ballard did hit 13 in May for a day, now a rock solid $6. You should buy some.
You said Liquid Hydrogen is the densest form. It takes about two pounds to make the equivalent energy of one gallon of gas. Two pounds of hydrogen liquid occupy about 7 gallons of space, leak through most materials, cost about $50, boils off about 7% a day when stored in very heavy cryo tanks. Gaseous storage requires even heavier and larger tanks.
Other than that, it's an excellent fuel.
I pointed out a new Way of doing things (while admitting I was not an expert, and saying I was Cheating by having talked to the inventors brother)
You said MIT degree, 27 years working with hydrogen fuel at NASA KSC.
I should know something about it.
So, does this process I linked you to work? What are its flaws? Can they be fixed? Will it be cost effective? How long to build it (if its going to be worth it)? If youve got the expertise, share
Or do you mean Hey Ive got a degree, so dont question me or confuse me with the facts!
(When I put together a team I like to have 4 degrees and two self taught geniuses Its entertaining and they bring out the best in each other, structure, and outside the box solutions)
Oooh, we have another hydrogen pimp on FR!
It used to, now they are using ethanol.
Because no heavy fuel needs to be transported.
Good Luck, I've been hearing that we are "20 years away from fusion" for 40 years now
Yes, CTNF has always been 50 years in the future, for the last 50 years, and always WILL be 50 years in the future. BUT it has a LARGE lobby of physicists in congress, they've been throwing oodles of money at that black hole all these years and it will NEVER get past the Lawrence Coefficient(break even point). Their new scam is this ITER thing in france. It is these same jokers who bad mouth Cold Fusion, 17 years of it now.....As to the "hydrogen economy", another sorry joke; they never tell you WHERE the energy comes from for hydrolysis other than solar, wind....gimme a break...
>> Please read your links yourself before wasting my time.
I read, the link, but didnt see the ramifications like you did, (Not my specialty) now that you point it out, yep, it needs work. I hope they find a solution to these problems, but not holding my breath either.
It may not be Obvious to you, but I dont have an MIT degree, and 27 years of experience with hydrogen. Thats why I like Free Republic; you ask answers, you get questions (Ok sometimes the reverse).
I am sorry you feel I made you waste time reading something that Looked good to me but I am not an expert in your field. Which is why I asked you to go and look at it and evaluate it for us? I say us because I often read a post such as this for information without commenting, and I am sure I am not the only one who learned something here.
P.S. Drop the condescending tone, it makes you sound small and petty. (I am willing to bet thats not how you talk in person, as for me, I really am funny in person Honest!).