The hydrogen economy

badboy2

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
949
The Infrastructure for storing hydrogen already exists. Every town and road has a shop with a big tank under it.

Its called a petrol station.

if these people want to stay in business when oil prices start to reflect the true cost of burning oil they will have to diversify to survice. Obviously it would hep if the Govt subsidised the transition.

There was a very amusing Myth Busters on Discovery this week, where the team tried to increase the fuel efficiency of some cars. The fact that it did not dawn on them to suggest a smaller car shows how mono dimensional peoples thinking is.
 


soubresauts

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2007
Messages
3,186
badboy2 said:
The Infrastructure for storing hydrogen already exists. Every town and road has a shop with a big tank under it.

Its called a petrol station.
So, you dreamt that last night, and woke up with the "Eureka!" feeling.

It doesn't get us very far.
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,845
Auditor #9 said:
SPN said:
As already mentioned, hydrogen is NOT an energy source.

It is very important to remember this!
I think Ehh said it was a storage medium and not that it wasn't a source. Source, not a source... semantics. It can be used as a source of energy, you'd agree with that? How it's produced is irrelevant as long as it's sustainable. Where it's produced on the other hand ...
It isn't semantics!

It is a fundamental part of the discussion. If you don't understand that hydrogen is not a source of energy, then your assumptions will be flawed from the get-go.
 

riven

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
2,366
david said:
riven said:
It is funny but fusion could be possible in 25 years
Fusion is forty years away, just like it was forty years ago, funnily enough.
True enough but in 25 years there will be far more tomohawks out there and you never know one of them might work
 

jpc

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Messages
4,252
Another option for storing energy.Giant fly wheels running in a vacum on frictionless bearings.Wind turbines supply the initial energy .When the stored energy is required the energy in the flywheels is drawn down as electricity.Not as flakey as it sounds.
 

Auditor #9

Active member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
237
Website
www.*******.com
SPN said:
Auditor #9 said:
SPN said:
As already mentioned, hydrogen is NOT an energy source.

It is very important to remember this!
I think Ehh said it was a storage medium and not that it wasn't a source. Source, not a source... semantics. It can be used as a source of energy, you'd agree with that? How it's produced is irrelevant as long as it's sustainable. Where it's produced on the other hand ...
It isn't semantics!

It is a fundamental part of the discussion. If you don't understand that hydrogen is not a source of energy, then your assumptions will be flawed from the get-go.
Hydrogen is a carrier of energy which itself needs to be produced or seperated from oxygen in water using ... energy. Unfortunately too much of it perhaps ...

"It is an energy sink - if you don't understand this then mail me 10 dollars and I'll send you back one dollar" according to the website below. She just killed the hydrogen economy for me with a very good analysis. That means no cool cars in the future :cry: :cry: :cry: and while she's at it she predicts a Terry Gilliam-style future, too :shock:. Could one's day get any worse I ask you?

(though I still think the element has a part to play in batteries created as a by-product of surplus wind)

http://www.culturechange.org/alt_energy.htm
 

dsmythy

Active member
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
134
Excuse my scientific ignorance but isn't hydrogen explosive and potentially dangerous? Or is it about as dangerous as other forms/carriers of energy?
 

Simon.D

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
797
Auditor #9 said:
Hydrogen is a carrier of energy which itself needs to be produced or seperated from oxygen in water using ... energy. Unfortunately too much of it perhaps ...

"It is an energy sink - if you don't understand this then mail me 10 dollars and I'll send you back one dollar" according to the website below. She just killed the hydrogen economy for me with a very good analysis.

Auditor to be quite honest that was a rather $hite analysis.. She's overlooking the fact that 60%-70% of the energy being poured down this sink was free in the first place.. i.e. it doesn't cost us anything to make the wind blow or make the sun shine..
 

Auditor #9

Active member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
237
Website
www.*******.com
You thought it was schite? I wonder about the statistics she quotes for the efficiency of wind to hydrogen - 3 units wind to 1 unit hydrogen, "an overall 25% efficiency" but assuming she's correct it's still not bad for what you say - the wind or solar (which has higher efficiency...?) was free in the first place and as I've said myself it would be surplus wind anyway blowing at night when the lights would be off so might as well get it doing something useful.

I imagine she's thinking of the industrial production of hydrogen which is used for hydrogenated oil among other things.
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,845
Lads!

Just buy yourself a bicycle. ;)
 

Auditor #9

Active member
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
237
Website
www.*******.com
dsmythy said:
Excuse my scientific ignorance but isn't hydrogen explosive and potentially dangerous? Or is it about as dangerous as other forms/carriers of energy?
It is flammable but not necessarily explosive (depends on how it's stored). Compared to petrol it burns much less visciously because it's the lightest element and disperses quickly as it burns according to this single factsheet http://www.hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/facts/einsafety.pdf which also tells me that the storage methods differ from the 'good analysis' website I quoted earlier which said that hydrogen needs heavy tanks because it eats metals. Doctors differ, eh?
 

riven

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
2,366
jpc said:
Another option for storing energy.Giant fly wheels running in a vacum on frictionless bearings.Wind turbines supply the initial energy .When the stored energy is required the energy in the flywheels is drawn down as electricity.Not as flakey as it sounds.
Except that current vacuum technologies are not up to the task. They could be 5-10 years though but it would be interesting to see
 

John_C

Active member
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
129
riven said:
Except that current vacuum technologies are not up to the task. They could be 5-10 years though but it would be interesting to see
Current vacuum technology? Has the technology evolved beyond pumping the air out of a chamber?
 

sparkey321

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,380
Vacuum technology involves much much more than pumping air out of a chamber. wehave never acheived a true vacuum and probably never will. Most vacuum pump wont even bring you close. Also you cannot use standard bearing in a vacuum as all the grease would be pulled out. Heat cannot disipate throught he air so bearings will overheat.

There is alot of science behind vacuum technology. And I would argue that we are alot more than 5-10 years away from science you are talking about. Friction losses will still be and a huge stumbling block.
 

riven

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
2,366
John_C said:
riven said:
Except that current vacuum technologies are not up to the task. They could be 5-10 years though but it would be interesting to see
Current vacuum technology? Has the technology evolved beyond pumping the air out of a chamber?
:shock: :roll:

It is not as simple as putting a pump on a chamber and emptying the air. The only pumps that can get from near zero pressure (full vacuum) to atmosphere in one pump would not be able to produce enough vacuum.

The pumps that can do the vacuum cannot pump to atmosphere alone and need a train of backing pumps to get the gases there.

Why do we need to exhaust to atmosphere. Well if we dont there will be a build up of gases in the pump.

Further you have not considered the gases that evolve from the chamber walls. Also there will probably be a leak as it is not a sealed chamber as there will have to be some incoming line to feed the flywheel.
 

badboy2

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
949
Actually to be scientifically correct, hydrogen is an energy source.

Why?

Because e=mc^2. I used to know the mass of a proton, however I don't have much use for it any more.

Back in the world of classical physics (for those of you who missed the 20th century)
Hydrogen is as much a source of energy as crude oil. Its just a matter of time.

All energy on the earths surface comes from the sun. Plant Photosynthesises and turns carbon dioxide into plant fibre. Plant fibre becomes crude oil, crude oil gets burned, sun's energy is released.

The trouble is that this happens over a very long time. Solar panel creates electric current. Electric current causes Water to become Hydrogen gas plus oxygen. We burn hydrogen creating water.

The principle is exactly the same.

Obviously there is a huge loss of energy in the meantime, however do you believe it to be lower or higher than the energy loss in the oil cycle.

The hydrogen economy is possible. Its within our grasp. It could create a new economic boom (the hydrogen rush). This will allow the fat cats to get richer and richer (a neccesary factor in any change).
 

riven

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
2,366
e=mc2 relates to the energy in matter which can only be harvested by nuclear.
 

jc

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2003
Messages
28
Auditor #9 said:
I wonder about the statistics she quotes for the efficiency of wind to hydrogen - 3 units wind to 1 unit hydrogen, "an overall 25% efficiency"
25%, eh?

Thats better than the combustion engine.
 

riven

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
2,366
Depends. There are going to be limitations on howthat energy is ued.

In general I would say wind would be more efficicent but we are not comparing like with like.

Petrol is a mobile source. Wind has to be huge and is therefore not mobile.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top