08 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseI just wish that they would stop wasting all the research money and media focus on the ridiculous Bush era 'Hydrogen economy' nonsense and just get on with rolling out hybrids and fully electric cars.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090406102049.htm
Can anyone here figure out just how much hydrogen this stuff can store in a real car? The figures show the surface area but are short on actual storage details.
Didn't anyone tell the scientists that Obama won the election?
08 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadI to have been very sceptical of the wisdom of trying to create a 'Hydrogen economy' -I don’t think that would be the most practical way to stop carbon emissions because there are just too many problems with hydrogen. Better to stick to ultra energy dense batteries and ultracaps etc or, if not that, better to develop a fuel cell that can directly use white sugar as its fuel (ordinary white sugar would be the ideal biofuel because it is relatively cheap) -why is it necessary to use such an energy dense but awkward fuel such as hydrogen? Sugar has an energy density of very roughly half that of octane which is more than adequate for cars if a reasonably energy efficient fuel cell can be made to use it.
I just wish that they would stop wasting all the research money and media focus on the ridiculous Bush era 'Hydrogen economy' nonsense and just get on with rolling out hybrids and fully electric cars.
Didn't anyone tell the scientists that Obama won the election?
08 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think you think it nonsense because of the inefficient means of generating hydrogen at this time. It would clearly not make sense to use say, a coal fired electric plant to electrolyze hydrogen to use in cars. However there is a lot of work going on to use solar energy to split water into H2 and O2, as evidenced by this article just out today:
I just wish that they would stop wasting all the research money and media focus on the ridiculous Bush era 'Hydrogen economy' nonsense and just get on with rolling out hybrids and fully electric cars.
Didn't anyone tell the scientists that Obama won the election?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090406102555.htm
08 Apr 09
Originally posted by sonhouseI agree with you up to a point, Obama winning the election is no reason to stop researching technical solutions to the carbon emission problem.
I think you think it nonsense because of the inefficient means of generating hydrogen at this time. It would clearly not make sense to use say, a coal fired electric plant to electrolyze hydrogen to use in cars. However there is a lot of work going on to use solar energy to split water into H2 and O2, as evidenced by this article just out today:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090406102555.htm
Where I think there´s a problem is that the solution is essentially non-technical. What is required is a carbon ration. Everyone on the planet has an equal right to energy - so divide the total level of sustainable emissions by 7.5 billion (or whatever we´re up to now) and that is what you should get. You could use a ration as a transitional mechanism as well. You´d start it off at the mean in your country and then lower it to what is needed over a decade or two. I´m getting into the realms of the debating forum here so I´ll stop.
08 Apr 09
Originally posted by DeepThoughtDid you read the article? If solar energy can be harnessed for hydrogen power, there is no CO2 emission, no carbon generated, it is ultimately H2 power via solar power so it is zero emission automatically. And no water is actually consumed, when burned in an engine or fuel cell, it turns back into water, so that argument doesn't hold water so to speak🙂
I agree with you up to a point, Obama winning the election is no reason to stop researching technical solutions to the carbon emission problem.
Where I think there´s a problem is that the solution is essentially non-technical. What is required is a carbon ration. Everyone on the planet has an equal right to energy - so divide the total level of sust ...[text shortened]... eded over a decade or two. I´m getting into the realms of the debating forum here so I´ll stop.
There are efforts to do what you said anyway so we need all the different avenues of energy use and renewable energy for sure.
09 Apr 09
Originally posted by sonhouseNo I do not think that the use of hydrogen in fuel cells is nonsense. I think that the whole idea of a 'hydrogen economy' is a tactic by US automakers and US government and Big oil to try to delay or outright avoid moving to electric vehicles.
I think you think it nonsense because of the inefficient means of generating hydrogen at this time. It would clearly not make sense to use say, a coal fired electric plant to electrolyze hydrogen to use in cars. However there is a lot of work going on to use solar energy to split water into H2 and O2, as evidenced by this article just out today:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090406102555.htm
There is nothing directly technologically wrong with the whole fuel cell concept, however it is many years away from being the best solution and there is no clear indication that it will ever be the best solution. Electric cars on the other hand are already viable, are already here and just need a little stimulus to get pushed out universally. As long as the main research money is going on the 'hydrogen economy', the electric vehicle revolution will be delayed. Of course the US automakers are as always shooting themselves in the foot because other countries will not sit around waiting for them. It wont be long before Chinas electric vehicles get good enough and have high enough production levels that they can start exporting big time. By that time the US will simply not be able to compete.
09 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe killer there is the battery situation. I see innovations coming but right now lithium ion cells are just too expensive and have to run between 30 and 80% of full charge, they have to be overrated electrically or die an early death which further restricts the range unless you have 30 thousand bucks worth of batteries onboard and you still have to generate the electricity to run such a vehicle. Use coal for instance and you are back to square one carbon wise. Its not the panacea that you think it is. At this stage of the game you cannot deep discharge a lithium ion cell, the life goes down drastically.
No I do not think that the use of hydrogen in fuel cells is nonsense. I think that the whole idea of a 'hydrogen economy' is a tactic by US automakers and US government and Big oil to try to delay or outright avoid moving to electric vehicles.
There is nothing directly technologically wrong with the whole fuel cell concept, however it is many years away ...[text shortened]... t they can start exporting big time. By that time the US will simply not be able to compete.
10 Apr 09
Originally posted by sonhouseThere are working electric cars in existence and have been since cars were invented. The whole battery is not good enough - the consumer wont accept it story is propaganda made up by the car companies. There are reasons why US automakers are in such bad shape. Make a reasonable electric car in my price range today and I will buy it. In fact my sister is seriously considering buying one from China and if it works reasonably well I will do the same - the problem is getting it from there to here is half the cost. The other problem is that I am relatively poor and cant afford a new vehicle anyway. Luckily the Chinese electric cars are very cheap.
The killer there is the battery situation. I see innovations coming but right now lithium ion cells are just too expensive and have to run between 30 and 80% of full charge, they have to be overrated electrically or die an early death which further restricts the range unless you have 30 thousand bucks worth of batteries onboard and you still have to generat ...[text shortened]... stage of the game you cannot deep discharge a lithium ion cell, the life goes down drastically.
Look around on the internet and you will find a lot of people have made their own electric cars because the car companies simply wont make them.
The so called 'hydrogen economy' is less efficient in general. It too depends on electricity but looses some efficiency along the way.
Luckily I come from Zambia where 100% of our power is hydroelectric.
10 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadSure, that's great for Zambia and other hydro powered countries but we (US and China mainly) more or less depend on oil or coal fired plants, only some 12% coming from nuclear for instance and maybe 4% from renewables like solar. Hydrogen has a bad rap only because of the conversion efficiency problem, and I am not a great hydrogen fan, just pointing out the fact that a lot of engineering work is going on. For instance, the electrics touted here only goes about 60 Km without recharge, barely enough to get to work and back, I personally would buy one but can't afford one right now. Did you read that article or just dismiss it out of hand?
There are working electric cars in existence and have been since cars were invented. The whole battery is not good enough - the consumer wont accept it story is propaganda made up by the car companies. There are reasons why US automakers are in such bad shape. Make a reasonable electric car in my price range today and I will buy it. In fact my sister is s ...[text shortened]... iciency along the way.
Luckily I come from Zambia where 100% of our power is hydroelectric.
11 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseI do not see any chance in the near future for hydrogen coming from anywhere else except electricity or fossil fuels. Even if we do find another way it would make far more sense to me to use that hydrogen in a central place to produce electricity. The whole concept of building a national liquid hydrogen network just seems ludicrous to me and smells of political BS.
Sure, that's great for Zambia and other hydro powered countries but we (US and China mainly) more or less depend on oil or coal fired plants, only some 12% coming from nuclear for instance and maybe 4% from renewables like solar. Hydrogen has a bad rap only because of the conversion efficiency problem, and I am not a great hydrogen fan, just pointing out th ...[text shortened]... one but can't afford one right now. Did you read that article or just dismiss it out of hand?
I am not aware of any process that converts fossil fuels to hydrogen without not only loosing some of the energy available but also producing just as much CO2 as cars do now.
Yes, all-electric cars mostly have a fairly short range, but many people would be willing to live with that. I would live with a 60km range if it reduced my fuel costs. My sister worked out that it would cut her fuel costs by 90% and for that she would be willing to have a 40km range and a top speed of 40km/h.
I think that if electric cars were reasonably priced and readily available that many people would have an electric car for shorter trips and a hybrid or internal combustion car for longer trips.
The other solution is to have battery swapping available at filling stations. This is not something I just dreamed up, it is something that is already being put into practice in some places.
A large part of the worlds problem regarding fossil fuel use is the fact that people choose to live too far away from work. I mean, what on earth are you doing living nearly 30km away from your place of work?
Yes I read the article and it is interesting science, but as I said it is science that is being over sponsored because the US government has been in the hands of big business and big business does not want electric cars for a number of reasons.
I am not sure if you know this but electric cars require far less spare parts than internal combustion engine cars. The result is that many parts dealers would go out of business - this includes the car companies that make a large amount of money selling parts.
12 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadThere is another issue, and that is the motors that are presently used in electric vehicles do not last for 200,000 Km like most good gas engines.
I do not see any chance in the near future for hydrogen coming from anywhere else except electricity or fossil fuels. Even if we do find another way it would make far more sense to me to use that hydrogen in a central place to produce electricity. The whole concept of building a national liquid hydrogen network just seems ludicrous to me and smells of pol ...[text shortened]... t of business - this includes the car companies that make a large amount of money selling parts.
As far as getting a job 30 km from home, that is a big improvement on my last job which had a round trip of 200 Km. In these bad economic times and at my age, well above average working age, any job I can get is good, with full benefits. Not many people my age can say that and so they live on the dole and barely survive. At least I can support my family that way. Not that I would do that if I had another choice but my retirement went from 214,000 US to 2000 in just 4 years so instead of paying off my house and bills, I am forced to go back to work because of the IT bubble in 2000. Itshay appensay.
13 Apr 09
Originally posted by sonhouseDo you have any info on that including the cost of replacement parts? What I heard was that gasoline engines require far more maintenance. The main cost of electric vehicles is said to be battery replacement, which it is hopped will come down over time.
There is another issue, and that is the motors that are presently used in electric vehicles do not last for 200,000 Km like most good gas engines.
As far as getting a job 30 km from home, that is a big improvement on my last job which had a round trip of 200 Km.
I wasn't really criticizing you in particular but rather saying that better city design in combination with encouraging people to live nearer to their place of work - or even encouraging working from home would probably do far more in terms of reducing fuel use than electric cars would.
I lived three blocks away from my place of work for several years and now work from home. I am doing more to reduce fuel consumption than any electric car could ever achieve.
Here in Cape Town another major factor is people taking their kids to school. It is amazing how traffic drops dramatically during the school holidays. If more effort was put into encouraging people to use buses to get their kids to school then it would make a big difference.
Of course there is also improving public transport etc (I believe Obama has that one in the pipe line).