|
Forums >
Off-Topic Discussion >
Hydrogen fuel from water
Nov 09 16 01:50 pm Link Seeing is believing. PM me. Nov 09 16 03:09 pm Link Anybody can use electricity to break down H2O. But that process uses energy. Periodically tales of super-efficient units come out but somehow they don't make it through the Patent Office (which is probably going to want to see a working model). Nov 09 16 04:23 pm Link As a fuel hydrogen is awesome. It is renewable, burns cleanly and consistently, and takes up very little space compared to other alternative fuels. It can also be pumped quickly or stored long-term like gasoline; most other alternative fuels lack one or both of those traits. I think it's the right direction to go. As an energy source, it is lacking - at least at present. The cost/power in v. out ratio doesn't compete with existing energy sources(at least not in large scale), and it doesn't operate passively like wind or solar power. Those two are horribly inefficient compared to nuclear or even coal ... but that's okay, because we just build them and they do their thing with relatively little maintenance. We'd need full time staff at a hydrogen plant. I could see cars going to hydrogen, and I think it would be a great idea. I don't see power plants going that route - at least not in the next few decades. Nov 09 16 05:38 pm Link Hydrogen and oxygen have been used as rocket fuel for decades. There is nothing new. Nov 09 16 05:55 pm Link Pesky fact: The laws of thermodynamics as applied to chemical reactions require that you must add as much energy to water to break it down into hydrogen and oxygen gasses as you will get when you burn them to produce water. Actually, they require that you use MORE energy. Since there are NO deposits of free hydrogen on this entire planet, hydrogen will never be a SOURCE of energy. At best it is a method of moving energy from one place to another. It cannot become an energy source. At least not unless you get into nuclear reactions, i.e. fusion. Nov 09 16 05:58 pm Link Seeing is believing (You are welcome to PM me, I don't know what you want) "The SimpleFuel device will be on public display Wednesday at an open house at PDC’s plant on Stout Drive in Warwick Township, Bucks County, that includes a demonstration refueling of a Hyundai Tucson SUV that has been outfitted with a fuel-cell power system." From renewable energy "Hydrogen can be produced from electricity and water or a fuel like natural gas. The SimpleFuel team wanted to use electricity as the energy source because the system could potentially produce carbon-free fuel, if renewable solar or wind power were the energy source." It maybe transferring energy from one place to another, but it can be a pollution free method of moving a vehicle. Is it patentable? "In January, the U.S. Energy Department named the SimpleFuel machine the sole finalist for the $1 million prize in the H2 Refuel H-Prize Competition, which aims to incentivize American innovators to create a small hydrogen-generation system that could resolve the chicken-and-egg issue that has bedeviled hydrogen fuel technology." Nobody said in the article that this was ready for widespread distribution. It cannot become an energy source, until it does. There is a possibility that technology may develop into commercial applications for hydrogen use someday. Using hydrogen as a fuel is not new. That is not what the article was about. Nov 09 16 07:41 pm Link Hydrogen has storage problems -- under pressure it will leak right thru steel containers (I doubt carbon fiber / plastic containers would be any better at leak resistance or any longer lasting) or as a metal hydride it is heavy and may need heating to recover the gas referring the article Sure - Millions of 10,000 psi fuel storage containers with 10 pounds of fuel in cars that crash and catch fire regularly that people will park in home garages that burn down and that simply won't be allowed in road tunnels, indoor or underground parking garages (for the same reason as propane now) as well as 10's of thousands of even larger pressure containers at fueling sites. The word uninsurable comes to mind. No insurance = no financing. Furnace oil is already and insurance issue. "Safe" does not always mean insurance can be found easily. handheld launcher w air / fuel -- so how dangerous is a small high preasure fuel canister? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emttQ3RwkXo http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction … rable-risk Hydrogen storage http://energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/metal- … -materials https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrT5MA_iTXs Nov 10 16 01:03 am Link To me it's all about the ROI. As stated in the article it's a pretty expensive piece of equipment. Then factor in the cost of the energy required to produce the hydrogen and the question becomes one of cost - how much would it cost to produce the equivalent of one gallon of gas? Obviously the ultimate goal would to be able to produce the hydrogen cost effectively and cleanly using only solar or wind energy. Not sure that could happen in less than a decade or two. Nov 10 16 03:29 am Link Michael DBA Expressions wrote: +1 Nov 10 16 07:23 am Link Michael DBA Expressions wrote: +100 Nov 10 16 07:43 am Link This is fuel cell technology that uses a molten salt bath to break down gasoline/oil to H2O and CO2. It works great once to get the salt bath molten. The issue is the time to do this and its weight which this group may have solved by using an alternative to the molten salt bath. Hydrogen gas systems also work great producing only H2O. The issue is storing a very low density gas and its incredible fire/explosive nature. Nov 10 16 08:01 am Link Interesting topic, Hunter - glad you brought it up. I thought I remembered that there is a lot of research activity on breaking down of water and various biomasses via enzymatic processes. Wikipedia has an interesting, if long, article on generating H2 via a number of methods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_ … generation In the section on the "Uses of H2" the project that the Navy has going to generating jet fuel by using part of the output from their shipboard reactors is briefly described. Pretty neat idea. Nov 10 16 09:42 am Link Michael Bots wrote: I don't know why you're worried. We all know jet fuel can't melt steel. Nov 10 16 04:20 pm Link I remember reading a story about a guy that was in a wreck in a vehicle that was powered by either propane or natural gas. When the tank ruptured, the gas spread along the ground and then erupted in a fireball. He burned alive. As I recall. The difference with hydrogen is that when it escapes and burns, it burns up. Verticle. If it escapes without flaming, it is rising away from the tank. When we were kids, a friend and I made hydrogen from muriatic acid and aluminum foil. We collected it and ran it through a tube, through a water bath and into an empty gas can. My friend then took a rubber tube and blew into the tank thru one orifice while holding a flame to ignite the hydrogen as it came out the other opening. It shot across the basement angling towards the ceiling. Everything went fine until my friend inhaled. The tank ruptured as he sucked the flame into the tank. The joists of the first floor got singed. My friend lost his eyebrows. His mom was pissed. A few years ago, I got caught in a propane explosion. One of those small handheld tanks that I had foolishly perforated. I saw the flame coming towards me, horizontally. I rolled backwards down a hill and was engulfed around my face and hands. There are a lot of cool colors inside a fireball. The skin peel off my face. An improvement, I was told. I was dressed to go dancing but I got a helicopter ride down to the city instead. Great exfoliation, interesting experience, but I don't recommend it. If I ever have to face a fireball again, I will opt for hydrogen because it will always be going to opposite direction that I will be. Nov 10 16 07:12 pm Link Hunter GWPB wrote: When we start seeing H2-powered cars on the road, can you imagine the intensive training that the fire, rescue and EMT folks will have to have? Nov 11 16 01:00 pm Link I have a bridge for sale... Nov 12 16 06:47 pm Link Brooklyn Bridge Images wrote: It's not a totally bonkers idea. As a fuel, like gasoline, kerosene, etc., it has many advantages. Maybe the problems can be worked out, maybe they can't. While the VW kerfuffle showed that diesel wasn't quite the miracle they claimed, there's no denying that it's a much better system than it was 30 years ago. Nov 13 16 10:23 am Link |
