I have followed this problem off and on for the past several years. As best I can tell the logic goes like this.
1) We need to get off our dependence on foreign energy.
2) Those guys at NASA have this cool energy source that doesn't produce any polution, just a little water that drips out of the tailpipe.
3) We need to make our cars run on this cool NASA stuff. The U S automakers are up to something. Yea, they're in bed with Big Oil keeping us buying their "inferior" <-[explicative deleted] cars that make us choke on smog just so they can earn millions off us.
It is all B/S.
We should move toward energy independence for the international political reasons everyone is aware.
NASA does have an interesting way of storing power for use in outer space.
But that's it! What NASA does for the space program in this regard is not a practical technology for ground transportation. I am dismayed that engineers get all hot and bothered about the possibilities when a couple quick studies would reveal this technology is not something that is going to yield fruit. If it were that simple somebody would have done it already.
And I fear it is all political. I doubt the politicians and the press understand the technical hurdles and so it is obvious to them we just need to throw enough money at it before it becomes reality. Next, they can fund the elimination of gravity so we don't suffer all those damn friction losses.
You know you've got problems when all but one other member of staff in your department buy into the water powered car hype.
For some reason I tried to point out little things like it was really hydrogen powered and you were just converting energy, conservation of energy etc but I'm sure I didn't convince at least one of them.
Still, made me feel intellectually superior for a while;-)
I can see a future where electricity is generated in poor countries using all manner of dirty and/or dangerous methods and used to produce hydrogen for the rich countries to run their "environmentally friendly" economies on. It could happen.
“said BMW spokesman, Wieland Bruch. “We see hybrid technology as an intermediate step to the hydrogen environment."
“The cheapest current method for producing hydrogen is not electrolysis of water, but rather to use a reaction involving oxygen and methane. Unfortunately, the energy in the hydrogen produced by thus process is less than the energy contained in the methane. The overall process: converting natural gas to hydrogen and then using that hydrogen in a fuel cell to generate electrical power would therefore not only result in an overall loss of energy, but it would also produce more carbon dioxide byproduct. This is true even though the fuel cell is 100% efficient!
There are additional troubles with a hydrogen economy. The storage and transport of hydrogen is a serious, unresolved problem. Hydrogen gas has a very low density. A tank of hydrogen, necessarily under pressure, possesses much less energy that an equivalent volume of natural gas or especially of liquid hydrocarbon (gasoline or diesel fuel). Moreover, hydrogen gas destroys welds in natural gas pipelines so that is would be difficult to ship hydrogen through these existing pipelines. There seem to be no viable methods to make hydrogen more dense except to compress it or to cool it to a liquid at very low temperatures. Both techniques are expensive.”
“Before hydrogen fuel cells are used for energy, there are still a few puzzles left to solve. We need to make enough hydrogen to power vehicles, homes and businesses. We also need ways to store and distribute it widely. And we need to bring down the prices of fuel cells, so that enough people will be able to buy them.
Making the change from fossil fuels to hydrogen fuel cannot happen overnight. It will take time to solve the puzzles and to make changes in the fuel infrastructure. Infrastructure means all of the structures that allow fuel to be delivered where it is needed, such as refineries, pipelines, pumps and delivery trucks. How will hydrogen fuel be delivered to buildings for energy? How will cars and trucks be filled with hydrogen fuel? One answer may lie in the infrastructure that already exists to deliver natural gas to homes and businesses, and today’s network of gasoline stations. With some changes, this infrastructure can be adapted for hydrogen fuel.”
“Mr. Rifkin delivered the closing keynote presentation at the World Hydrogen Energy Conference in Lyon, France on June 16, 2006. Mr. Rifkin said that the introduction of the fuel cell and a new hydrogen energy regime in the coming decades would have as powerful an impact on the global economy in the 21st century as the introduction of the coal fired steam engine of the 19th century and the oil powered internal combustion engine in the 20th century. Mr. Rifkin urged delegates to make the vision of a hydrogen economy and third industrial revolution a reality by 2030.”
"“Before hydrogen fuel cells are used for energy, there are still a few puzzles left to solve. We need to make enough hydrogen to power vehicles, homes and businesses. We also need ways to store and distribute it widely. And we need to bring down the prices of fuel cells, so that enough people will be able to buy them."
Yes. Apart from the durability of the fuel cells, I think that covers all the main reasons why hydrogen is a hopeless joke so far as reducing the use of hydrocarbons, and/or climate change.
We can't make the hydrogen, store it, move it, or use it efficiently. But apart from that, yes we're close to solving all the problems.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
![[atom]](/data/assets/smilies/atom.gif "[atom] [atom]")
