The case for nuke cars—it's called 'hydrogen.' [Fuel cells make ZERO sense.]

Car And Driver magazine ^ | October, 2005 issue | Patrick Bedard

[upier]

This is the same issue I have with electric cars. The EvroWacks pretend that the electricity they put in their cars comes from fantasy land. It had to be produced in a power plant that unless was nuclear, most likely is causing more total pollution than a gas powered cars would.

[yankeedame]

Have you seen the new Chevy Mallard? The car seats two, the rest of the vehicle being occupied by the reactor, the cooling tower, and 5000 tons of concrete shielding.

Ah, go on! That's nothing. Have you see the new Mitsubishi Cantaloupe?

[Kenny Bunk]

Rest easy, hydrophobics. (And a great post)

The next wave for the internal combustion engine is ultra-pure low-sulfur diesel fuel, plus computerized diesel management and exhaust handling.

The engines will be small, 3-4 cylinders 2-liter max, ...about 20 BHP, and will be used in a hybrid configuration to both drive the car as needed and to charge the batteries for electric motors at each wheel. It will be, unlike the PRIUS, a plug-in set up that can be charged overnight to complement dynamic charging on coast or while braking.

And this makes sense because we can use our coal and nuclear resources to provide the elctrical energy needed to supplement fossil, or vegetable fuels. A big plus is that diesel needs somewhat less refinement than gasoline, and can be mixed with bio-fuels.

A peppy family car in this configuration might deliver 55mpg, overall, or even more. Read it and weep, O Sons of Allah! This is already happening in Europe. I suspect that if Chrysler could get enough small diesels from D-B, they would be trying it now.

BTW, today's IC engines are absolutely fabulous, with micro-finishes and tolerances managed out to the 100 Thousandth, they last forever and make even the cheapest flivvers one hell of a lot hotter than many Americans can handle.

One complaint: I cruise my ancient 240,000-mile M-B at 75. I am being continually left in the dust by Honda Civics, which showing their huge rear exhaust pipes, blow my doors off at easily 100+mph, and then disappear over the horizon. What's with this trend?

[yankeedame]

I used to have one of those until I drove inside the Washington beltway. It accelerated to 200 mph and then the engine caught fire.

LOL! We had this wonderful old junker of a Audi when we lived in Germany (you know, back when the earth's crust was cooling) and one day my husband decided to "really try it out" on the Autobahn. So, peddle to the metal, he let 'er rip. That Audi gave it her all: 35mph-60mph in 45 seconds! My husband laughed that cruel laugh of triumph you husband's have.

"There!" he crowed. "And you said she'd never go over 45[mph]!"

[Kenny Bunk]

Was that you that went by my Borgward Isabella just outside of Karlsruhe?

Whiplash!

[mission9]

This article was written by someone who has never experimented with Hydrogen, and is not even very well read on the subject. His proposal to rely on coal for electrolysis is supposed to scare you off. Coal can be more directly converted to hydrogen by a refining process, the energy used and the chemicals made in the process add value to the refiner. Most serious hydrogen experimenters do not store the hydrogen in pressure tanks.
Gasoline is an attractive fuel no doubt. But don't hold your breath for the politicians to release the dogs of production. Even Jeb Bush opposes offshore drilling, as does every Republican of Stature in the State of Florida.

[TX Bluebonnet]

Bookmark for later

[playball0]

ping

[marktwain]

There are at least two assumptions in this hit piece that are either unwarranted or uncertain.

First, there is no reason that we cannot use nuclear power plants to break the chemical bonds of the hydrogen compounds, such as water.

Second, it is far from certain that the hydrogen will have to be compressed. There are some promising technologies that allow for storage chemically.

[Our man in washington]

One possibility (mentioned in this month's Scientific American) is that cars could be a lot lighter than they are today by using various space-age materials that are both far lighter and stronger than what we use today. And if you have a lighter car, you can use a lighter and smaller engine to move it. Combine light small cars with hybrid technology and biofuels, and we can tell the Saudis to drink their darned oil for all we care.

[sfsoldier]

ping

[pillbox_girl]

The so-called "Hydrogen Economy" is a pipe dream. Pure and simple. But the enviro-nitwits have never been ones to let reality interfere with their dedication to "the cause".

Hydrogen does have a very high mass energy density. This makes it a very good rocket fuel. But rockets are not a good way to transport people on their daily commute.

The weight of a fuel is not so important in a surface vehicle application. The volume the fuel takes up is. Hydrogen, even liquefied hydrogen, has a very low volumetric energy density. This makes it a lousy transportation fuel.

Add to it's low volumetric energy density the inherent inefficiencies of using hydrogen as a fuel and it becomes down right impossible. And trying to get around those inefficiencies (and deficiencies) by using fossil fuels to produce hydrogen only produces more wasted energy and pollution as burning the fossil fuels directly.

There are better renewable and alternative fuels out there. But the enviro-nitwits have dedicated themselves to hydrogen. And the fossil fuel companies are more than willing to jump on the hydrogen bandwagon. After all, even though the enviro-nitwits haven't cottoned on yet, the fossil fuel companies have already figured out the "hydrogen economy" means more consumption of their fossil fuel products, not less.

[edsheppa]

The energy required to [pressurize H2 to 4000psi] further trims the yield to 17.4 kilowatt-hours. Pressures higher than 4000 would increase miles available from each fill but cost more energy for compression.

This energy could be mostly recaptured. Also, new materials will soon enable much higher pressures so this concern is not a reasonable one.

[GSlob]

There's more fun to it: since in cold fusion cell it does not matter how the atomic deuterium inside palladium electrode is generated [as long as there's high enough concentration of it], one could theoretically use palladium sponge and saturate it with gaseous D₂. Now, if such a system were to experience sudden increase in deuterium gas pressure, one would have a thermonuclear explosion without any nuclear trigger - simple and cheap.

[edsheppa]

and will be used in a hybrid configuration to both drive the car as needed and to charge the batteries for electric motors at each wheel. It will be, unlike the PRIUS, a plug-in set up that can be charged overnight to complement dynamic charging on coast or while braking.

Yes, plug-in diesel hybrids are a good next step, but the next after that is to eliminate the mechanical drive train altogether.

[freekitty]

"Of course, all of today's electricity doesn't come from coal"

Don't they use coal up where Teddy Kennedy lives? Now I know why his brain ain't working. LOL

[sionnsar]

You'll need 32 quads of coal, which is twice the energy actually consumed in 2000 with gasoline.

But energy goes into the manufacture of gasoline. What's that number?

[pillbox_girl]

I would like to see a similar analysis using the Canadian anhydride's as the hydrogen source instead of the expensive water or natural gas which is useful for other purposes.

Last time I looked, various anhydride chemicals were co-products of hydrogen generation from natural gas sources. I haven't heard of natural anhydrides being a hydrogen source. Explain the process please.

[Entrepreneur]

Fuel cells help Libs feel good while doing little other than pushing the emissions from the tailpipe to the power plant. It reminds me of recycling, which has a net energy and environmental cost. Of course, the facts don't matter. What matters is that the Libs get to feel good and act self-righteous.

Frankly, we've got plenty of fossil fuel, just little will (thanks to the Libs) to extract it...

The report by the RAND Environment, Energy and Economic Development program says that between 500 billion and 1.1 trillion barrels of oil are technically recoverable from high-grade oil shale deposits located in the Green River geological formation, covering parts of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming.

The mid-point of the RAND estimate – 800 billion barrels – is three times the size of Saudi Arabia's oil reserves. This is enough oil to meet 25 percent of America's current oil demand for the next 400 years.

Download the full report (pdf)

Download the summary report (pdf)

Read the press release (html)

[Echo Talon]

Hydrogen is the most plentiful element on earth, but there's no underground pool of it we can drill into.

There's no underground pool of gasoline either... Crude has to be refined...