Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hydrogen Cars, Coming Down the Pike (which pike?)
New York Times ^ | Nov, 29, 2014 | (The Editorial Board)

Posted on 11/30/2014 9:35:53 AM PST by Olog-hai

The once-distant promise of clean, affordable hydrogen-powered cars is starting to become a reality. Several major automakers, including Toyota, Honda and Hyundai, have started or will soon start selling these cars, which will be more expensive than comparable gasoline models but a lot cheaper than they were just a few years ago. Executives at Toyota say that the cost of making the critical components of hydrogen vehicles has fallen 95 percent since 2008. […]

The broad adoption of hydrogen-powered cars, which emit only water and heat, could play an important role, along with electric vehicles, in lowering emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants responsible for climate change. […]

Most hydrogen today is created from natural gas in a process that generates carbon dioxide. But scientists say fuel cells are still good for the environment, because making hydrogen produces far fewer emissions than burning fossil fuels. Hydrogen could be produced more cleanly by using alternative energy sources like solar and wind power to split water into hydrogen and oxygen atoms. And it can be generated from renewable sources like sewage and animal waste. …

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Science; Travel
KEYWORDS: climatechangehoax; electrolysis; globalwarminghoax; hydrogenfuelcells; liberalagenda; solarpower; windpower
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last
To: freedumb2003

Goodness!!!! They will emit “heat”????????? What about globull warming? Boycott this technology until these cars look like unicorns and emit only Skittles.


61 posted on 11/30/2014 11:42:14 AM PST by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Absolutely right. Hydrogen, at least when produced via the “preferred” hydrolysis method, is in essence a battery.

Do you know if anybody has run the numbers for efficiency of electricity “stored” this way vs. in more typical battery types?

Quite a while back I ran some numbers best I could to compare the energy and emissions of burning fuel directly to generate movement via IC, compared to burning fuel to make electricity, transmit it to charging station, charge battery, then use electric motors to generate movement.

If I remember correctly, the electric car came out slightly ahead, but not nearly as much as the hype would have us believe. The problem is that IC is a one-stage process vs. the electric car, which has at least four stages that lose efficiency at each step. Even if each step is quite efficient, the losses add up.

I suspect a diesel hybrid might be more efficient than a pure-electric car, if we used the highly efficient diesel engines used in Europe.


62 posted on 11/30/2014 11:44:37 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
I said that hydrogen is not a source of energy but (like a battery), a medium for energy-storage. Not quitee true.

Hydrogen refined from nat gas is as much a source of energy as any other refined product like butane or propane.

Hydrogen generated by hydrolysis, which is what gets the greenies all excited, IS a battery.

63 posted on 11/30/2014 11:47:17 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Takes 31.7 megajoules (about 30,046 btu) of energy to split a liter of water into hydrogen and oxygen using electrolysis.

That's only a part of the energy needed. You have to compress the hydrogen considerably to use it. Compressing gases takes a LOT of energy.

64 posted on 11/30/2014 11:49:21 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: gunsequalfreedom

Actually there are two major problems.
Extracting H2 costs energy and costs more than you get out.
H2 molecules are so small that Hydrogen leaks are almost impossible to avoid.
Other than that, it works fine


65 posted on 11/30/2014 11:49:42 AM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

How many Coal fired plants will be required to produce the Hydrogen ? Will the first car be named after the Hindenburg ?


66 posted on 11/30/2014 11:50:21 AM PST by molson209 (Blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: molson209

Heck if I know.

Leaving the transportation and storage issues out of it, I’m curious how much energy it would take to produce (by hydrolysis) and compress to usable pressures hydrogen equal in energy potential to 10 gallons of gasoline.

Then you’ve got something vague resembling an apples to apples comparison.

Also am curious the volume this hydrogen tank would take up relative to the 10 gallon gas tank.

But I’m too lazy to run the numbers myself.


67 posted on 11/30/2014 11:55:20 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
That it does. The number I cited is just the energy that needs to go into the water molecule to break apart the hydrogen bonds to oxygen, and IIRC there is a thermodynamic penalty as well when the hydrogen atoms join to form H2 molecules.
68 posted on 11/30/2014 11:58:16 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed

Not so. We run high purity hydrogen in our generators to cool the rotors of the generators. Upper explosive limit is 59%.


69 posted on 11/30/2014 12:05:42 PM PST by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zathras
And it seems like H2 would be more volatile than gasoline since it is a gas at room temperature and would be under pressure in whatever storage container is used.

It if the container were ruptured, the gas would quickly disperse within the air and, if a ignition source is available, would more likely ignite all of the fuel instantly.

FAE bombs function the same way.

Not so with a gasoline in a gas tank. Actually, gasoline has to be atomized in order to burn properly.

70 posted on 11/30/2014 12:11:39 PM PST by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai; All
The ideal combination would be Thorium (LFTR) electricity generation, with Hydrogen energy storage.

With the advances being made by the Chinese, low-cost Thorium energy could be only a decade away.

Let's hypothesize that, ten years from now, Thorium-generated electricity costs 10% per btu what gasoline costs and that the conversion to Hydrogen through electrolysis is 50% efficient. In today's terms, that would mean hydrogen would cost the btu equivalent of $0.60 per gallon of gasoline.

71 posted on 11/30/2014 12:24:22 PM PST by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

There are no “advances made by the Chinese” that the communists did not steal.


72 posted on 11/30/2014 12:27:39 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
There are no “advances made by the Chinese” that the communists did not steal.

That is true. Since we are content to sit on our duffs, however, we need to look elsewhere for improved living standards.

73 posted on 11/30/2014 12:30:30 PM PST by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

Nuclear power is the obvious choice for a tool to generate hydrogen from water. But nuke power is in a very difficult position these days, despite the incredible advances in technology.


74 posted on 11/30/2014 12:32:14 PM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
"The spread of hydrogen-powered personal transportation will come with the opening of the hydrogen mines and the distribution of hydrogen through the gaslines yet to be built."

That's a joke. Right?


75 posted on 11/30/2014 12:49:12 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Of course.


76 posted on 11/30/2014 12:56:41 PM PST by gunsequalfreedom (Conservative is not a label of convenience. It is a guide to your actions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

There are also wood-gassers, which home-built units produce hydrogen and methane for combustion at about a 30% loss of power (maybe not that much at higher altitudes). They don’t produce much pollution, but there wouldn’t be enough wood and waste for everyone to use them. They might be a small part of a solution, though, along with several other technologies and human adjustments.


77 posted on 11/30/2014 1:03:48 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Compressing gases takes a LOT of energy.

What I remember from compressor stations, the lighter the gas specific gravity, the more waste heat generated in the compression, ie more energy to compress.

Hydrogen, then is more inefficient to compress than natural gas.

78 posted on 11/30/2014 1:10:35 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Nuc 1.1

Upper explosive limit is 59%.

75%

https://www.mathesongas.com/pdfs/products/Lower-%28LEL%29-&-Upper-%28UEL%29-Explosive-Limits-.pdf

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/explosive-concentration-limits-d_423.html


79 posted on 11/30/2014 1:14:07 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Both the Germans and the Japanese are pushing hydrogen cars pretty hard while keeping their hand in electric cars. They have no chance of energy independence as long as they depend on oil for internal combustion engine cars.

I don’t think this stuff is a fad. Price/performance for these cars has improved steadily over the last 10 years. Its likely in the next 5-10 price/performance of these cars will meet or beat internal combustion cars. Then their sales volumes will go up parabolicly.


80 posted on 11/30/2014 1:17:18 PM PST by ckilmer (q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson