Researchers Generate Hydrogen Without The Carbon Footprint

[Devilinbaggypants]

ScienceDaily (July 18, 2008) — A greener, less expensive method to produce hydrogen for fuel may eventually be possible with the help of water, solar energy and nanotube diodes that use the entire spectrum of the sun's energy, according to Penn State researchers...

[Devilinbaggypants]

http://www.myh2opoweredcar.com/hhofuel/

[CowboyJay]

may eventually

One need read no further.

[RightWhale]

Seems like hydrogen tech is advancing on a daily basis. Alcohol is probably a better, more practical fuel and nearly as clean. The exhaust is often cleaner than the intake air.

[martin_fierro]

I can do some pretty tricky stuff with methane.

here, pull my finger

[massgopguy]

Why would Hydrogen leave a Carbon footprint? They’re both Elements.

[Ingtar]

Too bad burning that hydrogen to make energy creates water vapor. Water vapor constitutes Earth’s most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth’s greenhouse effect. Neither of which are actually significant in the cycling weather we are seeing, but let’s not confuse people with facts here.

[taxcontrol]

You know, every time I mention this to the greens, dems, tree huggers, and just about anyone who believes in global warming .... they almost seem to go into shock. You can actually see the cognitive dissonance in their faces. It actually funny to watch.

[bpjam]

to creaate carbon currently, you have to burn fuel to separate the H from the H2O. This is the reason that most people in the energy field aren’t holding their breath on hydrogen as a solution to anything.

But real science can create solutions to problems where liberalism just turns problems into disasters and larger government and lower quality of life.

[JamesP81]

Alcohol is probably a better, more practical fuel and nearly as clean.

Actually, it isn't. If every acre of corn grown in 2007 was used for ethanol, there'd only be enough to satisfy about 20% of our auto fuel needs.

Under optimal, best case conditions, you can get 500 gallons of ethanol out of an acre of corn. Given how much gasoline we burn, you'd need over 400 million corn acres for enough ethanol. Last year, farmers planted about 90 million acres, which was the most since 1944.

Sugar cane would be better, but you'd still need around 300 million acres for it.

In fact, ethanol is so bad right now that it requires more conventional petroleum-based fuel to produce a gallon of ethanol than you get from that gallon of ethanol when you burn it. Truth is, you'd be better off, energy-wise, just not making the ethanol period.

Biodiesel from soybeans has the same problem.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" To create carbon currently, you have to burn fuel to separate the H from the H2O. "

Not unless you use nuclear power plants to separate hydrogen from oxygen.
Solar is a possibility, but, it cost to much.. and unless the technology improves, it won't be enough.
Coal to gas is another possibility if coal gasification can be made to burn clean.
So nuclear is the way to go if your going to use hydrogen.

[ModelBreaker]

Not unless you use nuclear power plants to separate hydrogen from oxygen.

Uh, Prophet, read bpjam's post again. That's exactly what he said, "You have to separate the H from the H2O" is exactly the same as "separate the hydrogen from the oxygen."

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Please read again :
He said " to ( create carbon ) currently, you have to ( should have said ( fossil fuels ) burn fuel to separate the H from the H2O.
This is the reason that most people in the energy field aren’t holding their breath on hydrogen as a solution to anything. "

[Dutch Boy]

I do the same.... That is a trigger word for fiction.

BTW - I never understood the reason to drop oil as fuel. First we are told that we are running out, which proved to be a lie. The US has over a trillion barrels of recoverable oil off our coasts and on land. A 2 minute web search shows that. I also have read that we have more then 110 years of oil if we imported zero barrels from foreign sources if we wanted to drill. Secondly we were told that is was to help the environment. Then we find that GW is a fraud and biofuels often pollute more than oil based fuel in addition to raising food prices.

It seems that every excuse to dump oil for some other fuel has been disproved time and time again but no one seems to connect the dots.

[TChris]

Truth is, you'd be better off, energy-wise, just not making the ethanol period.

Better off in more ways than one.

The economic ripples of shunting corn production into fuel are many.

Stop Burning Food

[dalereed]

I don't want anything but pure unadulterated gasoline made from crude oil!

[sloop]

don’t we make fertilizer from petroleum?

i read it takes 1700 gallons of water to make 1 gallon of ethanol

[CowboyJay]

"Not unless you use nuclear power plants to separate hydrogen from oxygen."

In which case battery-powered cars are probably a better use of the electricity produced (at least for commuter vehicles). No one has yet come up with an electrolysis process that nets more power than it consumes.

[BooksForTheRight.com]

If the Hydrogen is generated using free and clean power directly from the Sun, this is good. However, the effect of the product of combustion, water, needs to be considered. Water is a greenhouse gas too.

[CowboyJay]

"It seems that every excuse to dump oil for some other fuel has been disproved time and time again but no one seems to connect the dots."

You can actually count me as one who sees the need to get off the Hydrocarbons. Anthropogenic Global Warming is a laughable hoax. Our dependence on Middle East Crude is neither funny nor a hoax. I still don't put any stock in Hydrogen power. There is no energy-efficient production method for Hydrogen, and it is highly explosive.

[NVDave]

No, some types of fertilizer (eg, urea or anhydrous ammonia) use natural gas as an input. But not oil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#Synthesis_and_production

Phosphate production comes off rock phosphates and potassium production comes from potash.

Diesel fuel is used to transport and apply fertilizer, but that’s about the extent of it.

[NVDave]

And the second law of Thermodynamics says that they never will.

;-)

[Wonder Warthog]

"In fact, ethanol is so bad right now that it requires more conventional petroleum-based fuel to produce a gallon of ethanol than you get from that gallon of ethanol when you burn it."

Absolutely NOT TRUE. Corn ethanol has a positive energy balance of ~1.4 MMBTU per 1 MMBTU of energy input, and most of the energy used is NOT "petroleum based"--but from natural gas used to produce fertilizer.

[Dutch Boy]

We could end out dependency on all foreign oil sources if we chose to commit. It is not a can we or can’t we question. It is a will we or won’t we question.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

The thing is, we got to still keep trying.
Just like when mankind was trying to find the solution to ( lighter than air flight ) ......
Of course there were many failures, and some started to believe that man would never be able to fly in the sky like the birds.
Until one day 2 brothers found the solution.
I am sure out of hundreds of thousands of people experimenting with this process we will find the solution soon.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" Stop Burning Food "
Maybe that was the communist/Marxist/liberals/environmentalist plan and agenda after all, they can't stand a world that is over populated... they want a world wide genocide.

[houeto]

I can do some pretty tricky stuff with methane. here, pull my finger

I tried not to laugh. It didn't work.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFifFR-4C28&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCI4WuCpZPE&feature=related

[phs3]

The water can easily be condensed to liquid...

[JamesP81]

Absolutely NOT TRUE. Corn ethanol has a positive energy balance of ~1.4 MMBTU per 1 MMBTU of energy input, and most of the energy used is NOT "petroleum based"--but from natural gas used to produce fertilizer.

I think you're forgetting all the diesel fuel being burned to operate the farm equipment and transport the finished product.

Nevertheless, even if you're completely correct, that doesn't change the fact that there literally isn't enough corn being grown in North America to make a meaningful inroad into our gasoline usage. Ethanol is a terrible idea; maybe the worst one every thought of to this point when it comes to alternative fuels. You're better off with electric powered cars by far.

[NVDave]

You get a whole lot of stuff off of crude besides gasoline:

http://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_iv/otm_iv_2.html

Take a look at the right side of Figure IV:2-6, and you get a better idea of everything that they get out of crude. Gasoline is perhaps one of the largest output components, but it is by far not the only component to come out of a barrel of crude.

One of our problems just now is that diesel is in greater worldwide demand than gasoline. Given refining margins, I soon expect to see refiners start “tuning” their refining process to try to get more distillate out of crude than in the past, and some of this will come at the expense of gasoline fractions.

[dalereed]

What I was refering to is take the lousy alcohol out of the gas.

I’d really like to see them go back to leaded gas.

[CowboyJay]

"It is a will we or won’t we question."

Precisely. What's needed is a Presidential mandate (along with an executive order) along the lines of Kennedy's re: Lunar Exploration. I'm not a big fan of mandates, but this is that important. IMHO it's naive to believe the free market will fix this given what's transpired in the 30 +/- years since our last fuel crisis.

It's simply shameful that it hasn't already been done. Apparently Hi-Def TV is of greater importance to our continued viability and security as a nation?

[NVDave]

Ah.

OK, there’s two issues going on here:

First, the oxygenate requirement. Thanks to the loons in California, you and I are saddled with a requirement that our fuel contain an “oxygenate” component to reduce CO emissions. At first, MTBE was added to gasoline, but this was found to cause widespread groundwater contamination.

So along comes ethanol, which oxygenates the fuel, reduces the potential for rapid transmission of gasoline into groundwater supplies, and has political upsides on top of it. That’s how we got here on ethanol.

The second issue, “lead” in fuel: Tetra-ethyl Lead (TEL) was an “anti-knock” compound (ignition retarder - to prevent pre-detonation in gas engines. Knocking is something different). What TEL does is raise the effective octane of gasoline.

There are many compounds that can be used to raise the octane of gasoline. TEL puts lead compounds into the air, and as such, as found to raise the lead levels in people’s bloodstreams in urban environments. So it was banned.

Toluene and other aromatics raise octane, but they’re pricey.

Ethanol raises octane, and you already have it in the fuel for the oxygenate requirement. Two birds, one stone.

[NVDave]

The problem is made even more pressing by monetary economics. By that, I mean the macro-economic issues of currency.

We’re shipping so much money out of the US (ie, our “current account deficit”) at these elevated crude prices that it is has the potential to seriously deflate the long-term value of the dollar.

The only way to really turn the dollar around in a $150+/bbl crude world is to clamp down on oil imports.

Let’s take as a given all the geopolitical issues - ie, that we shouldn’t be pumping more money into the middle east, where it just comes back to bite us. Let’s just concern ourselves with the current account deficits.

The only way we keep a reasonably sane value of the dollar is:

1. Produce more energy domestically, radically reduce our oil imports.

2. Get ready to have the oil producing nations buy up hard assets, stocks, bonds, etc with the money we shipped them to buy oil.

So far in the Bush administration, we’re seeing #2 happen with increasing frequency.

[Balding_Eagle]

Stop Burning Food

What should we do with the excess, plow it under?

See my tagline.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUGX0bq9vUs&feature=related

[sloop]

“And the second law of Thermodynamics says that they never will.”

don’t froget the democrat solution trumps physics

hope + billions of taxpayer dollars / polling results = reality

[ctdonath2]

Most hydrogen is bound to something else. The easiest source currently is “reformulating” carbon-based fuels (natural gas, propane, oil), extracting the hydrogen but producing CO2 as a by-product (why environmentalists are he11-bent on denying plants more food, I don’t know...).

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Ands solar cells and nanotubes are made from fairy dust. /sarcasm

Gimme a break!

[TChris]

What should we do with the excess, plow it under?

If Ethanol was made only from excess, then the price wouldn't go up. But it does. So, your concerns are irrelevant, because ethanol is not made just from excess production. In fact, farmers are switching away from other crops because corn for ethanol is more profitable. This then decreases the supply of other foods too.

Overproduction is a separate issue.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

You get far greater net efficiency out of a hydrogen fueled engine, than you would get from a gasoline fueled engine, and that is going with Thermodynamics.
You get must more power per unit from hydrogen, than you would get from gasoline.
People may have a PHD in Thermodynamics, but, don't know the fundamentals of a I.C.E. engine ( internal combustion engine ).

A gasoline fueled engine puts more work on the working surfaces in a engine and less efficiency in a engine than a hydrogen fueled engine would.
In a gasoline fueled engine, the timing is set before ( a few degrees before ) TCD ( top dead center ) .... therefore,this puts back working pressure and forces against the piston, friction on the cylinder walls, greater loads on the crankshaft ( more friction and kinetic energy, vibrational energy ) in which you lose energy from the back forces, friction = lose of horsepower and fuel efficient and engine life........ this is also not addition to the lose of thermal heat into the cylinder walls, piston, cylinder heads, crankshaft, oil.
In a hydrogen fueled engine, with the timing at TDC, you don't have the back pressure on the piston ( improvement of horse power ( not accounting, more power in hydrogen than gasoline )... less friction on the cylinder walls, lose of heat through the cylinder walls, cylinder head, piston before the combustion is used fully in the power stroke of the engine with hydrogen.
You are getting more power by the fuel it's self with hydrogen, and the inherent fact that you have to retard the timing ( getting more power used per unit of fuel ).
Hydrogen is simply the better fuel to use in a I.C.E.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUGX0bq9vUs&feature=related

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUGX0bq9vUs&feature=related

[wita]

I don’t want anything but pure unadulterated gasoline made from crude oil!

A few suggested changes “I don’t want anything but pure unadulterated gasoline from our own crude oil with lead additive for lubrication especially for use in aircraft and older auto and truck engines”.

While we are at it, lets get back to using what works more efficiently in automobile air conditioners, lead in paint has been proven over many years to be a worthwhile addition, and please oh please lets get back to one flush toilets.

There is more, so much more. What a sad commentary that years of research and knowledge is tossed out the window based on nothing more than idiocy and bleeding pc hysteria.

[CowboyJay]

Spot-on comments. The economic ramifications go way beyond some soccer-mommy bitching about a $65 fuel-up for the SUV.

Our currency is being undermined, and absolutely nothing goes to market without being transported. Until/unless this gets fixed the Carter years will start looking like gravy-days.

[Ditto]

Truth is, you'd be better off, energy-wise, just not making the ethanol period.

Now don't go get'n crazy on us. Who do you think you are... Carrie Nation?

I like my ethanol on the rocks, not in the gas tank.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdV9881tMFw&feature=related

[NVDave]

If I can assume a pure H2 for my fuel, why would I want an internal combustion engine at all? Just for the romance of hearing pistons go up and down?

From where I stand, if I had pure H2 as a fuel, I’d yank any ICE out of a car and convert it over to use a fuel cell and electric motors. The overall efficiency gain will be highest this way, since we could cover use hybrid-like technology to scavenge kinetic energy out of the car during braking.

Furthermore, if you wanted to do what the gentleman is talking of on the video you sourced, you don’t need to wait for hydrogen to become widely available to do the exact same thing today with ethanol. Ethanol has a much higher octane than gasoline (research octane of about 129). Ferrari has increased the HP and efficiency of one of their engines by simply increasing the compression ratio (you can put new pistons into an existing engine) and advancing the timing again.

If you were burning a mix of 50/50 ethanol and gasoline, you could probably push your compression ratio over 12:1 and increase your thermal efficiency to the mid-30% range quite easily in an Otto cycle engine.

But it seems as tho no one but Ferrari and the boys at MIT are interested in exploring the increased efficiency made possible by the higher octane of ethanol in gasoline.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I think you're forgetting all the diesel fuel being burned to operate the farm equipment and transport the finished product."

I'm forgetting nothing. The studies include that energy, and the energy balance still is what I quoted you.

"Nevertheless, even if you're completely correct, that doesn't change the fact that there literally isn't enough corn being grown in North America to make a meaningful inroad into our gasoline usage.

Which is why, eventually, other "feedstocks" than corn will be necessary. Switchgrass has about 8 times the energy return of corn, but isn't out of the research stage yet. Corn ethanol is a bridge to a broader feedstock base.

"Ethanol is a terrible idea; maybe the worst one every thought of to this point when it comes to alternative fuels. You're better off with electric powered cars by far.

Battery technology for electric cars comparable in power an d range to "flex-fuel" vehicles does not exist. Will corn ethanol be the sole fix---no---but it "is" a useful addition.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

In case you have not seen this video from Roy ( Hydrogen engine fundamentals 101 ) he says that with a engine running on hydrogen, can be made to be more efficient then even a fuel cell.
Now ? if that can be done with a I.C.E. engine, why would you want to pull your I.C.E. out of your car and send the money and out a fuel cell in it that would be less efficient than a hydrogen fuel run I.C.E. ??? watch the video, all 10 of them on youtube... it might be a eye opener for many people and interesting.
Just go to YOUTUBE and do a search for ( Hydrogen Engine Fundamentals 101 ).
Why should we replace millions of I.C.E. engines at a great cost to consumers, when they can be converted over hydrogen and be made more efficient than a fuel cell ?