Posted on 08/21/2016 11:27:39 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Hydrogen fuel-cell cars face an uphill battle toward mass adoption.
Both cars and fueling infrastructure need to be made widely available before large numbers of consumers can seriously consider switching from gasoline to hydrogen.
But under certain circumstances, hydrogen could prove very attractive to consumers for one simple reason.
When produced using renewable energy, hydrogen could cost nearly the equivalent of 50-cent-per-gallon gasoline, according to a study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).
That will only happen if "the stars align" and several factors work in hydrogen's favor, notes industry trade journal WardsAuto noted in a June report on the findings.
The NREL plan assumes large-scale production of hydrogen through electrolysis, but with renewable energy used to provide the majority of electricity in place of fuels that produce high levels of carbon emissions.
Thanks to anticipated emissions standards for power plants and other factors, the NREL anticipates much greater use of renewable energy in the coming decades. Renewable sources could generate as much as 80 percent of U.S. electricity by 2050 using currently-available technology, according to NREL data....
(Excerpt) Read more at greencarreports.com ...
“Park your Hydrogen car for a month at the airport. You are running an air conditioner freezer 24/7 for a month.”
Not only would you be running the air conditioner freezer, but your fuel would be disappearing.
From wikipedia: the hydrogen will gradually leak away (typically at a rate of 1% per day).
A gallon of liquid hydrogen has about 14 percent as much energy as gasoline. Check me by going to “liquid hydrogen” in wikipedia. So instead of a 20 gallon fuel tank you’d need a 142 gallon tank.
And there’s that explosion hazard.
“Park your Hydrogen car for a month at the airport ...”
One more thing. At 50 cents per gallon of hydrogen which has 14 percent of the energy of a gallon of gasoline, that’s about $3.57 for the same amount of energy as a gallon of gasoline.
Hydrogen is the answer to cheap clean independent energy and jobs. Great post.
Here’s a glimpse of the future:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb7LgbJJGhk
Instead of sending money to the middle east- we can make our own fuel. Toyota and Honda already have shown that cars run on hydrogen work.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LTlF8ndygU
Building a Hydrogen station in 48 hours anywhere there is water and electricity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjGaNGhz1pE
After spending the last 2 years posting about this fantastic tech there’s no doubt in my mind that it is being suppressed. Ask around - how many people even know that Toyota has perfected a car that runs on hydrogen. No one in my case.
“So, said another way, hydrogen cells will work great provided”
No. As I said earlier, it appears to be a more expensive source of energy than gasoline.
Someone else mentioned the tax on gasoline. That makes the comparison of hydrogen with gasoline even worse.
LOL
Also minus 30% loss to cool/liquefy it.
I was being cute. The Von Zeppelin company used hydrogen because the U.S. would not sell Germany helium.
Actually NH3—anhydrous ammonia, can store more hydrogen by volume than cryogenic hydrogen liquid, and at a pressure and density similar to propane. Ammonia is typically difficult to ignite at atmospheric pressures and temperatures. If one wants to enhance safety due to toxicity, then store the ammonia as adsorbed vapor in a magnesium salt—Mg(NH3)6Cl2 solid storage device.
There are solid oxide fuel cells which can reform ammonia vapor to hydrogen and nitrogen, and utilize the hydrogen at high efficiency to produce electricity for powering an electric vehicle. Hydrogen gas requires elaborate procedures and equipment to minimize losses, as it will eventually diffuse through the container walls; and, mixed with oxygen has a very wide by percentage explosive range.
Hydrogen will be an energy source; but, not as commonly envisioned. The line of thinking per the article is about hydrogen per unit weight is about 25 times as much energy content as TNT—a lesser multiple as compared to liquid fuels in common use which contain carbon—with Methane (CH3) of NG coming closest to pure hydrogen. They diminish the storage issues when considering using H2 as a transportation fuel.
There are very recently developed cheap catalysts of common materials, which also cut the energy required for electrical hydrogen separation from water; and, which simplify the electro-chemical cell construction by allowing a single common electrolyte to be employed.
I hope that it is so. It will be a revolutionary development if truly economical and energy efficient methods of producing hydrogen through electrolysis powered by “renewable” energy become available. You will have to forgive me however if I remain skeptical.
This exact scenario has been hyped for years and we do not actually seem any closer than when I first read articles about the new hydrogen economy many years ago. There always seem to be recently developed inexpensive catalysts and new methods just around the corner. Countless billions have been spent over the years "perfecting" these technologies. It is this easily obtained government money combined with loose controls and oversight that fuels the hype. It is more believable than things like “cold fusion” but the actual numbers seem to always be exaggerated.
I have read all of your posts with great interest and enthusiasm. Thank you for sharing your knowledge on this subject. I apologize for being such a curmudgeon.
They have had hydrogen powered internal combustion powered vehicles for many years now using compressed hydrogen. I truly hope that the fuel cell technology is coming along as well as reported. I remain skeptical however because of so many disappointments in the past.
"could"? ...That will only happen if "the stars align" and several factors work in hydrogen's favor, notes industry trade journal WardsAuto noted in a June report on the findings.
When it does cost less than gasoline, and is just as convenient, then it'll become popular.
Vote Trump!
Hydrogen fuel cell powered electric vehicles and also stationary power units have been around for quite awhile now. Mostly for industrial applications where they have certain advantages. It is just that the up front costs have been greater and they generally have not been any more economical to use than internal combustion powered vehicles and they require a fuel that is not available in multiple locations. It is going to be a matter of economics as to when they eventually replace fossil fuel powered vehicles. If the technology and infrastructure improves enough that they are competitive soon then we will probably see this process accelerate.
Total BS.
The article says that hydrogen currently costs about $5 per kilogram when the current actual cost is approximately $13.50 per kilogram. The article headlined that the price will get down to “$.50 a gallon” when using renewable resources. I have done some research on this in the last couple of days and this claim is completely ridiculous at this time.
Just our government alone has spent billions of dollars on research perfecting fuel cell technology. And we have about as much to show for it as with most other “alternative energy sources” which is basically very little.
When ANY fossil fuel or biofuel is used it also produces water.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.