120 posts / 0 new
Last post
Alec's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 2 hours ago
Joined: 08/10/2007 - 21:06
Posts: 6123
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

Can we not just use this?

CnoEvil's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 15 sec ago
Joined: 21/08/2009 - 18:01
Posts: 12832
RE: Alternative sources of green energy....

....what about harnessing methane. Every house should have a "Fart Bank", where it is collected and used as a source of energy.

There is also the "Rectal Methane-collecting backpacks that can be connected to cows!!

You heard it here first! :roll:

"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we should let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines."  Nelson Pass

Electro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 30/03/2011 - 11:34
Posts: 1395
RE: Alternative sources of green energy....

There is a 50/50 chance that the inflammable part of a human fart is in fact Hydrogen and not Methane Smile

It all depends of the type of bacteria you have in your gut , if you are lucky enough to have archaea bacteria then you will produce methane gas , if you lack this type of bacteria then it will be hydrogen .

A fun way of finding out which gas you produce is to set light to you fart and if it burns a pretty blue then you are expelling methane but if the flames are striking orange then it is hydrogen ....... apparently  :grin: :cheer: :cheers:

 Electrocompaniet EMC 1 UP , Monarchy Audio DIP, Electrocompaniet ECD 1 dac , EC4.8 preamp , 2x AW180 monoblock power amps , PMC PB1i speakers . Thousands of Cd's .

CnoEvil's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 15 sec ago
Joined: 21/08/2009 - 18:01
Posts: 12832
RE: Alternative sources of green energy....

Electro wrote:

It all depends of the type of bacteria you have in your gut , if you are lucky enough to have archaea bacteria then you will produce methane gas , if you lack this type of bacteria then it will be hydrogen .

Oooh, you mean I might be Hydrogen powered...how very 21st Century! Dirol

"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we should let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines."  Nelson Pass

Electro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 30/03/2011 - 11:34
Posts: 1395
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

The_Lhc wrote:

Electro wrote:
I agree with most of your points but I am still convinced that far more could be done to speed up the transition to a hydrogen based society .

There is some good work being done by most of the major vehicle manufacturers especially Honda who have a working hydrogen fuel cell car that is fully developed but only available to lease in Japan and the United States where hydrogen filling stations have been made available .

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufacturers/honda/6501889/Honda-FCX-Clarity-review.html

 

The link below highlights almost everything that I am trying to say . It is a video about the first public UK Hydrogen vehicle filling station in Swindon .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14983805

Can't see what you've changed in your recent edit but it doesn't matter, you really don't understand "not currently feasible" do you?

I disagree using  hydrogen as  energy storage has been feasible since the early 60's , Hydrogen fuel cells provided electricity and drinking water for the Apollo space mission .

The first internal combustion engine to power a car was invented by Francois Isaac de Rivaz and used hydrogen as it's fuel in 1807 .

Physicist William Grove developed the first crude fuel cells in 1839.

I could go on but I suspect you get the idea Smile

All that is lacking is the political and corporate will to drive it forward and of course the general public must be made aware that there is a real viable alternative to fossil fuels . 

The future of humanity depends on it Smile

 Electrocompaniet EMC 1 UP , Monarchy Audio DIP, Electrocompaniet ECD 1 dac , EC4.8 preamp , 2x AW180 monoblock power amps , PMC PB1i speakers . Thousands of Cd's .

Paul.'s picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 26/11/2010 - 21:44
Posts: 3053
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

I think Hydrogen is the future in the same way that flying cars and meals in pill form were the future in the 50's.

 

The actual future will probably look like this...

 

 

(Tesla S )

 

I saw an interesting lecture given at @Bristol a little while ago, and the chappie was arguing that if we hadn't rushed in to Wind power for political reasons and spent the money iterating the technology instead of implementing an immature tech, that Wind would be capable of contributing far more to the grid than it is today.  

If the Llewellyn blog that The_Lhc linked to was correct, it looks like Hydrogen is being pushed as an alternative by the Fossil Fuel companies so they can retain their grip on energy sales?  Screw those guys...

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 12 hours ago
Joined: 16/10/2008 - 13:23
Posts: 13178
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

Electro wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

you really don't understand "not currently feasible" do you?

I disagree using hydrogen as energy storage has been feasible since the early 60's, Hydrogen fuel cells provided electricity and drinking water for the Apollo space mission .

So that's a no then. It's woefully inefficient, hugely expensive, dangerous and impractical, the loss in efficiency from creating hydrogen using solar power means you might as well just use the solar generated electricity directly. That's what I mean by not feasible, we CAN do it, but there's really no point.

Quote:
The future of humanity depends on it :)

You missed the bit about water vapour being a very good greenhouse gas then?

Electro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 30/03/2011 - 11:34
Posts: 1395
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

The_Lhc wrote:

Electro wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

you really don't understand "not currently feasible" do you?

I disagree using hydrogen as energy storage has been feasible since the early 60's, Hydrogen fuel cells provided electricity and drinking water for the Apollo space mission .

So that's a no then. It's woefully inefficient, hugely expensive, dangerous and impractical, the loss in efficiency from creating hydrogen using solar power means you might as well just use the solar generated electricity directly. That's what I mean by not feasible, we CAN do it, but there's really no point.

Quote:
The future of humanity depends on it :)

You missed the bit about water vapour being a very good greenhouse gas then?

You really need to do a little research for yourself because it seems you are anti everything that I say which is of course your prerogative Smile

 Electrocompaniet EMC 1 UP , Monarchy Audio DIP, Electrocompaniet ECD 1 dac , EC4.8 preamp , 2x AW180 monoblock power amps , PMC PB1i speakers . Thousands of Cd's .

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

professorhat wrote:

I seem to remember hearing something similar to this in a BBC documentary on space-based solar power - though to be fair, it wasn't "a fraction" of the money spent on oil exploration, it was all the money spent on oil exploration in a couple of years I think.

That's the crux of it really. You can make these sums of money seem smaller and reasonable if you say "oh, it's only a fraction of what we spend on X", but the sums of money involved are in fact still vast. I would be the first to agree that research and development gets a far smaller slice of GDP than it should, but it's still big numbers. There are a lot of projects worthy of serious investment in this regard - take fusion as an example. The cost of the next research reactor (ITER) is going to be somewhere around 15 billion Euros, over a few decades. Compared to what the electricity industry turns over annually, it's a small percentage - but someone somewhere has to pay up 15 billion Euros to the project, at a time when everyone is scrutinising the spend of every last penny. You don't just find that sort of cash lying behind the back of the sofa. Most people appear to be in agreement that more research is needed, but try introducing a levy on electricity bills to pay for that research and then watch the fireworks. And that, in a nutshell, is why more of this sort of thing isn't happening - when it comes down to it, there is a collective lack of will to accelerate development at the sort of pace you are asking for. People are too selfish and short-termist to bear the extra costs, even if they are small as a percentage of total spend and in the long term will probably make them better off. Personally I hope that some progress will be made through a reasonable level of carbon trading and taxation, because by this mechanism we can raise significant funding for R&D whilst at the same time putting different generation technologies on a more even footing by making the full cost of carbon emissions visible at the point of consumption.

Electro wrote:

I disagree using  hydrogen as  energy storage has been feasible since the early 60's , Hydrogen fuel cells provided electricity and drinking water for the Apollo space mission .

Yes, hydrogen is used a lot in space travel. Because the tanks are large, weight is critical, rockets can be fuelled at the last minute and space is very cold, it can feasibly be stored cryogenically in liquid form for rocketry purposes. For road vehicles, because these criteria aren't met cyrogenic liquid storage isn't viable. Cost is of course also not so much of a concern in space travel!

Paul. wrote:

 

I think Hydrogen is the future in the same way that flying cars and meals in pill form were the future in the 50's.

 

The actual future will probably look like this...

 

I disagree with you here Paul. Hydrogen is currently in a much better place than batteries for vehicle propulsion - energy density is significantly better and you can refill in minutes, and you don't have the same issues of batteries wearing out. To quote Peter Ritchings (a senior green technologies chap in Jaguar Land Rover) "The trouble with current automotive high-voltage batteries is that they are too big, too heavy and too expensive, they take too long to charge and they don't last long enough. Apart from that they are absolutely perfect". Hydrogen vehicles have a fair bit of development required yet, but compared to batteries they are miles ahead and have much more surmountable problems.

 

 

Paul.'s picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 26/11/2010 - 21:44
Posts: 3053
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

The question is, how long will it take to design and implement hydrogen creation, storage and distribution infrastructure? Getting it past regulatory bodies?  You think that will happen faster than battery tech maturing to the point of feasibility?  It's safe to say that normal people will not drive further than 8 hours @ 70 ish mph in one day.  You think battery tech will take longer to support a 600 mile range than the infrastructure implementation mentioned above?  I don't know the answers myself, but I would place my bet on batteries.

Electro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 30/03/2011 - 11:34
Posts: 1395
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

Paul. wrote:

I think Hydrogen is the future in the same way that flying cars and meals in pill form were the future in the 50's.

 

The actual future will probably look like this...

 

 

(Tesla S )

 

I saw an interesting lecture given at @Bristol a little while ago, and the chappie was arguing that if we hadn't rushed in to Wind power for political reasons and spent the money iterating the technology instead of implementing an immature tech, that Wind would be capable of contributing far more to the grid than it is today.  

If the Llewellyn blog that The_Lhc linked to was correct, it looks like Hydrogen is being pushed as an alternative by the Fossil Fuel companies so they can retain their grip on energy sales?  Screw those guys...

 

The Tesla s is a beautiful looking car but unfortunately it is already obsolete because it uses batteries , long recharge time and short driving range makes it totally impractical .

In an ideal situation it will be possible to dismantle the electrical grid and generate power locally with  much smaller and more efficient local grids using solar or wind power to release the hydrogen for storage to fuel a large fuel cell power station .

Here is a link to a crude version of what they probably will be like .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZEiQ8-vf1Q

 

 Electrocompaniet EMC 1 UP , Monarchy Audio DIP, Electrocompaniet ECD 1 dac , EC4.8 preamp , 2x AW180 monoblock power amps , PMC PB1i speakers . Thousands of Cd's .

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 12 hours ago
Joined: 16/10/2008 - 13:23
Posts: 13178
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

Electro wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

Electro wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

you really don't understand "not currently feasible" do you?

I disagree using hydrogen as energy storage has been feasible since the early 60's, Hydrogen fuel cells provided electricity and drinking water for the Apollo space mission .

So that's a no then. It's woefully inefficient, hugely expensive, dangerous and impractical, the loss in efficiency from creating hydrogen using solar power means you might as well just use the solar generated electricity directly. That's what I mean by not feasible, we CAN do it, but there's really no point.

Quote:
The future of humanity depends on it :)

You missed the bit about water vapour being a very good greenhouse gas then?

You really need to do a little research for yourself because it seems you are anti everything that I say which is of course your prerogative Smile

Research? I'm reading crap on the internet and then pretending it's my opinion. Exactly the same as you are. And I'm refusing to listen to any counter-argument, again, exactly the same as you are. Irritating isn't it?

Paul.'s picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: 26/11/2010 - 21:44
Posts: 3053
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

siggy_7 wrote:

To quote Peter Ritchings (a senior green technologies chap in Jaguar Land Rover) "The trouble with current automotive high-voltage batteries is that they are too big, too heavy and too expensive, they take too long to charge and they don't last long enough. Apart from that they are absolutely perfect". Hydrogen vehicles have a fair bit of development required yet, but compared to batteries they are miles ahead and have much more surmountable problems.

Your buddy Peter Ritchings of Jag/Land Rover also said this in the same presentation...

Peter Ritchings wrote:

Richings also cast doubt on hydrogen technology, claiming it was always 10-15 years away. He said that JLR was “keeping an eye” on hydrogen advances, but felt the technology was too far away from commercial readiness and was hamstrung by the lack of a refuelling infrastructure.

 

 

Not sure how lacking world wide infrastructure is considered "miles ahead and have much more surmountable problems"

 

 

Electro wrote:

The Tesla s is a beautiful looking car but unfortunately it is already obsolete because it uses batteries , long recharge time and short driving range makes it totally impractical .

 

 

Seems a bit unfair to compare a working and available product to a mythical future technology.  Where was battery tech 15 years ago.  Where will it be in 15 years when Hydrogen is still possibly not implemented?  The Tesla is an important iteration in what will become the future.

 

Answer me this...  Why would you want to go somewhere to refuel?  In the future you wont need to plug your car in, it will just dock when you park and start charging.  Going somewhere is so 2015 Blum 3

Electro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 30/03/2011 - 11:34
Posts: 1395
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

The_Lhc wrote:

Electro wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

Electro wrote:

The_Lhc wrote:

you really don't understand "not currently feasible" do you?

I disagree using hydrogen as energy storage has been feasible since the early 60's, Hydrogen fuel cells provided electricity and drinking water for the Apollo space mission .

So that's a no then. It's woefully inefficient, hugely expensive, dangerous and impractical, the loss in efficiency from creating hydrogen using solar power means you might as well just use the solar generated electricity directly. That's what I mean by not feasible, we CAN do it, but there's really no point.

Quote:
The future of humanity depends on it :)

You missed the bit about water vapour being a very good greenhouse gas then?

You really need to do a little research for yourself because it seems you are anti everything that I say which is of course your prerogative Smile

Research? I'm reading crap on the internet and then pretending it's my opinion. Exactly the same as you are. And I'm refusing to listen to any counter-argument, again, exactly the same as you are. Irritating isn't it?

 

So how would you suggest we resolve this situation ?

My suggestion would be that we agree to disagree Smile

But surely something in one of my posts would have pricked your curiosity about the subject of future methods to power our society when fossil fuels run out or are not cost effective any more , maybe you have and alternative in mind ?

If so I would be interested to hear about it and I promise to listen to all your suggestions and thoughts with an open mind Smile

 Electrocompaniet EMC 1 UP , Monarchy Audio DIP, Electrocompaniet ECD 1 dac , EC4.8 preamp , 2x AW180 monoblock power amps , PMC PB1i speakers . Thousands of Cd's .

Electro's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 6 min ago
Joined: 30/03/2011 - 11:34
Posts: 1395
RE: Why are we not using hydrogen ?

Paul. wrote:

 

Seems a bit unfair to compare a working and available product to a mythical future technology.  Where was battery tech 15 years ago.  Where will it be in 15 years when Hydrogen is still possibly not implemented?  The Tesla is an important iteration in what will become the future.

 

Answer me this...  Why would you want to go somewhere to refuel?  In the future you wont need to plug your car in, it will just dock when you park and start charging.  Going somewhere is so 2015 Blum 3

I did not mean to dismiss the Tesla in a offhand manner , it is a beautiful and very clever piece of engineering .

The Honda Clarity is also a working production model albeit a rather expensive one but if it is mass produced the cost will be comparable to an average quality family saloon car .

Did you miss my earlier link ?

Here is a short video about the Honda Clarity .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-6B9jYQFm8

 Electrocompaniet EMC 1 UP , Monarchy Audio DIP, Electrocompaniet ECD 1 dac , EC4.8 preamp , 2x AW180 monoblock power amps , PMC PB1i speakers . Thousands of Cd's .

Pages

Log in or register to post comments