Joined
·
553 Posts
I call shenanigans.
The Cool, Green Future
1 - 20 of 100 Posts
Re: The Ignorant, Green Future
I invest in energy, so I have a keen interest in energy supply and demand. I think the "hydrogen economy" is a smoke screen.
Hydrogen is not a source of energy, it's an energy carrier. Energy is required to create hydrogen gas. Energy from fossil fuels, nuclear, or other energy source.
The energy yield in the creation of hydrogen is typically 14%. That means you put 100 watts in and get 14 watts out.
On top of that, the energy density of hydrogen is extremely low. Typically, hydrogen tanks are run at 10,000 PSI, and yet only yield (in the case of this honda) 6mpg. Is this sounding like a good idea yet?
To push a tractor trailer across the country, I think it takes something like 4000 gallons of hydrogen under great pressure. Hydrogen won't drive trains, aircraft, or ships because the energy density is too low. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html
One quick fix for our energy problems is $150-$200/bbl oil. Once prices hit that level, we'll have all the oil we'll ever need (through convservation & production), and as many alternatives as we want.
Oh, and those of you thinking that gasoline prices are going to drop forever, think again. The only reason we've seen gas drop so quickly is because Mr. Paulson's Goldman firm changed the % component of gasoline in the world's biggest commodity index from 8% down to 2.5%. This created a worldwide sell-off of the stuff. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/stojan1.html
I invest in energy, so I have a keen interest in energy supply and demand. I think the "hydrogen economy" is a smoke screen.
Hydrogen is not a source of energy, it's an energy carrier. Energy is required to create hydrogen gas. Energy from fossil fuels, nuclear, or other energy source.
The energy yield in the creation of hydrogen is typically 14%. That means you put 100 watts in and get 14 watts out.
On top of that, the energy density of hydrogen is extremely low. Typically, hydrogen tanks are run at 10,000 PSI, and yet only yield (in the case of this honda) 6mpg. Is this sounding like a good idea yet?
To push a tractor trailer across the country, I think it takes something like 4000 gallons of hydrogen under great pressure. Hydrogen won't drive trains, aircraft, or ships because the energy density is too low. http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html
One quick fix for our energy problems is $150-$200/bbl oil. Once prices hit that level, we'll have all the oil we'll ever need (through convservation & production), and as many alternatives as we want.
Oh, and those of you thinking that gasoline prices are going to drop forever, think again. The only reason we've seen gas drop so quickly is because Mr. Paulson's Goldman firm changed the % component of gasoline in the world's biggest commodity index from 8% down to 2.5%. This created a worldwide sell-off of the stuff. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/stojan1.html
How is this going to save any energy?
Okay I am taking NATURAL GAS and REMOVING THE CARBON from it and putting that into the air as CO2...
Then I am taking the hydrogen and using that.
So I am using some of the energy of the natural gas not to move my vehicle but instead to convert the natural gas into hydrogen that I then use to power my vehicle...
Ahh....
Hate to tell you folks this but you would save more "energy" and probably produce less pollution if you just burned the natural gas at a power plant and used an electric car.
Or used a natural gas powered hybrid.
Hate to burst anyone's bubble but getting hydrogen from natural gas isn't a huge help.
Now using a nuclear power plant to make hydrogen that would help a lot.
Okay I am taking NATURAL GAS and REMOVING THE CARBON from it and putting that into the air as CO2...
Then I am taking the hydrogen and using that.
So I am using some of the energy of the natural gas not to move my vehicle but instead to convert the natural gas into hydrogen that I then use to power my vehicle...
Ahh....
Hate to tell you folks this but you would save more "energy" and probably produce less pollution if you just burned the natural gas at a power plant and used an electric car.
Or used a natural gas powered hybrid.
Hate to burst anyone's bubble but getting hydrogen from natural gas isn't a huge help.
Now using a nuclear power plant to make hydrogen that would help a lot.
Joined
·
446 Posts
Re: There's a rumblin' in the Pacific Northwest
Oh, Balls. Now we'll have to rename every town and mountain range in the Southwest, along with all their Naval ships and boats.
Oh, Balls. Now we'll have to rename every town and mountain range in the Southwest, along with all their Naval ships and boats.
Re: How is this going to save any energy?
This is the problem - hydrogen and fuel cells won't alleviate our fossil fuel dependence unless we generate the hydrogen from other sources - like solar, wind, nuclear or biomass (plants).
There's an article in this week's Nature that highlights the CO2 problem - simply stopping the rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 isn't enough; the amount of CO2 emissions needs to drop to the rate of CO2 accumulation by the oceans and biomass.
Oh, and Nature isn't some sort of crazy greenie moonbat publication, fyi.
This is the problem - hydrogen and fuel cells won't alleviate our fossil fuel dependence unless we generate the hydrogen from other sources - like solar, wind, nuclear or biomass (plants).
There's an article in this week's Nature that highlights the CO2 problem - simply stopping the rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 isn't enough; the amount of CO2 emissions needs to drop to the rate of CO2 accumulation by the oceans and biomass.
Oh, and Nature isn't some sort of crazy greenie moonbat publication, fyi.
Re: There's a rumblin' in the Pacific Northwest
Don't forget St. Louis and St. Paul, along with the Saint Lawrence river. This last one will have to be negotiated with the Canadians. Also, Illinois, Oklahoma and the Dakotas are Indian names, as well as myriad city names across the country - looks like we are making fun of the Indians and using them as "mascots", so the names have to be changed.
Don't forget St. Louis and St. Paul, along with the Saint Lawrence river. This last one will have to be negotiated with the Canadians. Also, Illinois, Oklahoma and the Dakotas are Indian names, as well as myriad city names across the country - looks like we are making fun of the Indians and using them as "mascots", so the names have to be changed.
Re: Where Does Gasoline Come From?
Well, the oil has to be pumped out of the ground in the Middle East or Venezuela or Canada (about half of what we use); the oil then has to be pumped through a pipeline to a portside terminal, where it's pumped onto an oil tanker; the oil tanker has to take it across the ocean to the United States, where it has to be refined into gasoline; the gasoline has to be transported to a distribution terminal; from the distribution terminal, the gasoline has to be loaded onto a tanker and distributed to the gas station. And then you get to pump it into your car.
So which uses more energy, performing all of the steps above to produce gasoline, or converting natural gas to hydrogen in your garage?
Well, the oil has to be pumped out of the ground in the Middle East or Venezuela or Canada (about half of what we use); the oil then has to be pumped through a pipeline to a portside terminal, where it's pumped onto an oil tanker; the oil tanker has to take it across the ocean to the United States, where it has to be refined into gasoline; the gasoline has to be transported to a distribution terminal; from the distribution terminal, the gasoline has to be loaded onto a tanker and distributed to the gas station. And then you get to pump it into your car.
So which uses more energy, performing all of the steps above to produce gasoline, or converting natural gas to hydrogen in your garage?
1 - 20 of 100 Posts
Join the discussion
