If this holds up, I think it is adaptable to cars. If they can just match the energy performance of gasoline, hydrogen is a much better option than any battery.
1 posted on
04/21/2022 2:39:28 PM PDT by
Jonty30
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
To: Jonty30
Hydrogen is more combustible than jetA. Sounds dangerous. I won’t fly on one until Air Force One is so equipped.
39 posted on
04/21/2022 3:02:36 PM PDT by
Sgt_Schultze
(When your business model depends on slave labor, you're always going to need more slaves)
To: Jonty30
" on today's dirty jet fuel" I thought most fuels included some detergent to keep the engines clean.
To: Jonty30
hydrogen is a much better option than any battery. Check out the so called Diamond battery. It uses expended nuclear fuel and and diamond dust to generate electricity, has to be recharged ever few thousand years so probably not an option.{:~)
Diamond Battery on YouTube
58 posted on
04/21/2022 3:21:47 PM PDT by
itsahoot
(Many Republicans are secretly Democrats, no Democrats are secretly Republicans. Dan Bongino.)
To: Jonty30
The only thing that would have made this story better is if they somehow snuck in “graphine nanotubes.”
60 posted on
04/21/2022 3:23:25 PM PDT by
Organic Panic
(Democrats. Memories as short as Joe Biden's eyes)
To: Jonty30
Liquid hydrogen. Kind of like Hindenburg in a can.
62 posted on
04/21/2022 3:26:12 PM PDT by
Flick Lives
(The CDC. Brought to you by Pfizer)
To: Jonty30
The lighter the car, the longer it will take to stop.
63 posted on
04/21/2022 3:28:06 PM PDT by
MV=PY
(The Magic Question: Who's paying for it?)
To: Jonty30
If you spill some liquid hydrogen on some asphalt the best thing you can do is step on it.
To: Jonty30
76 posted on
04/21/2022 3:56:32 PM PDT by
Grampa Dave
(Anyone, who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.!" ~ (Voltaire)!!!)
To: Jonty30
Isn’t today’s “science” mostly BS? It’s what you get when you start from false premises.
1) Whatever you do to generate Hydrogen, it won’t be “clean”.
2) Unless you’re going to lug around pure Oxygen, too, any reaction you try with “air” won’t be “clean”, either.
The planes will probably just finally destroy the Ozone layer for good. We can all die of skin cancer, but at least we’ll feel “clean”.
To: Jonty30
10 years from now, it will still be 10 years asway.
87 posted on
04/21/2022 4:44:57 PM PDT by
dynachrome
("I will not be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.")
To: Jonty30
I’m just here for the Hindenburg pics...
94 posted on
04/21/2022 5:19:10 PM PDT by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
To: Jonty30
” planes running on today’s ‘’’dirty’’’ jet fuel. “
96 posted on
04/21/2022 5:26:19 PM PDT by
dljordan
To: Jonty30
Yeah, first you burn dirty cheap and available jet fuel, coal or NG or use hydro or other sources of power to make liquid hydrogen, then you burn it in airliners at much less overall efficiency and voila, a cleaner environment!
Can you whackos follow the pea under the shell?
103 posted on
04/21/2022 5:54:32 PM PDT by
Manly Warrior
(US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" )
To: Jonty30
Yeah, I can just imagine the results of a car with a liquid hydrogen tank getting rear-ended.
113 posted on
04/21/2022 8:56:35 PM PDT by
zeugma
(Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson