At this point in time, we are past the question of if it will work. We have spent millions, are spending millions and will spend billions on R&D. GM and Ford have their prototypes made. Just a matter of time. Last I saw, they're looking at the distribution problem taken care of by 2010, with wide spread use sooner than 20 years.

Hydrogen is scary, but not that scary. You can use it for your gas grill with a bit of modification.

It's so much lighter than air that if you released a little filling a tank, it'll go straight up- Fast. Out of the atmosphere.

You know, if it hadn't been for the Hindenburg and the H-bomb, we wouldn't be having this discusion.

 

This has been an interesting thread, but no one has given any actual FACTS and no one is speaking from authorative knowledge on alternative fuels, MYSELF INCLUDED.

I can speak from a relatively strong knowledge base when it comes to fossil fuels.

I see it this way, as long as there is a supply of fossil fuels, that will be the fuel of choice. Period. They are simply the best alternative, not because we're familiar with them and the infrastructure is in place, but for the simple fact that they provide a cheap, enviromentally friendly (compared to any source of energy now available), and SAFE source of energy. The supply of crude oil currently recoverable will keep the world going for well over 100 years at current usage rates. People have been predicting the end of the fossil fuel supply since the 50's, and guess what, every year the discovered reserves only go up.

I'm not sure people understand the massive discrepency between Middle Eastern and North American oil reserves. To put it in perspective, we have to drill anywhere from 100 to 1000 wells to equal the output of single well in Saudi Arabia or Qatar.
Single gas wells in Qatar are capable of doubling the daily production of entire CBM FIELDS in Wyoming. Not to mention the massive reserves in Russia awaiting capital and technology. Unfortunately thems the breaks. I say IMPORT, IMPORT, IMPORT, and do it now while oil is cheap. Keep the North American reserves, especially environmentally sensitive areas like Alaska, as an ace in the whole. We might as well suck them dry first.

There are BILLIONS of barrels in shut in wells and oil sands IN NORTH AMERICA right now that are just waiting to be brought onto production when crude oil prices make them economic. In addition, advances in the petroleum industry technology continue to improve the recovery rates and economics of producing a barrel of oil.

The only thing that will bring about a change IMHO will be economy driven, ie. the price of fossil fuels becomes so high that other forms of energy that are now uneconomic will begin to become an economic alternative. People can talk all they want about the environment, the fact is that 99% of people act with their wallets. I'm opposed to legislating any type of move away from fossil fuels, provide an incentive for researching TRULY more enviromentally friendly alternatives yes, force change, NO.



But they did happen, and therefore we have to.

stormyrider and whistler nailed the issue of hydrogen.

IMHO, it is NOT a reasonable alternative for all the reasons they listed.

Propane is the closest comparison, but it is similar at best. Hydrogen requires much greater pressures to compress and is more explosive. I'm not sure where you heard that you could use hydrogen in your BBQ, I'd like to read that report.

BDV, you always site this hydrogen from organic matter deal, could you provide me with a link or some info on it? Not a challenge, I'd just like to see it for myself. I have big problems with these "organic matter" solutions to our fuel issues. IMHO they create more environmental problems than they'll solve, and are every bit as energy intensive as the current system.

Electric cars a fools errand IMHO. The electricity must come from somewhere, ie fossil fuel generation. As franktheman mentioned, replacing the power required in a 1 ton 4X4 would require huge amounts of electrical energy that has to come from somewhere. Even using the most modern methods available, the increased production of electricity required would negate the gains made in vehicle emissions.

Wind and Solar? No way. Not reliable, inefficient, and currently very cost prohibitive. Maybe in the future.

Hydroelectric? Massive impact on the environment. The Chinese are about to damn the Yangtze, thousands of acres of farmland lost, thousands of people displaced, countless archeological and natural treasures lost, not to mention the impact on the environment itself.

Nuclear? Gets my vote. I posted on nuclear before. It is the safest form of energy generation being used today, and that is an inarguable fact.

Now if you want to get a whole new hot topic going, let's talk about why people seem to feel there is an urgent need to find alternative fuels given the proven reserves of fossil fuels that exist. Global Warming my axe.

Waxy

 

You guys pose some interesting questions and ideas to the prospect of using hydrogen as a fuel. But there is one major problem with it. From what I read, hydrogen has to come from water, and have any of you guys looked at population growth statistics recently? They aren't very encouraging. China already faces problems with water shortages, so do many other countries. Oour earths resources are extremely limited, and with our current world population, they would run out fairly soon, but our population continues to grow. Drinkable water is growing more dificult to acquire as time passes, eventually we will be out of water. At least drinkable water. If this hydrogen has to come from water, then it is not an option. For you Americans, check the statistics. We as Americans are rather sheltered from what the world is faced with outside of our countries borders, and often times base our opinions, or beliefs only on what we see inside our borders. We are a very privilaged people, we have almost everything we need as humans for survival, but if we are not careful, we will be the ones responsible for using up all the earths resources. Eventually, it will catch up to us, and there would be nothing we could do about it. Think from outside the borders of America. Learn more than just America, because America is not the world.

 

"Drinkable water is growing more dificult as time passes, eventually we will be out of water".

seems like I mentioned that in a way earlier.

"As franktheman mentioned, replacing the power required in a 1 ton 4X4 would require huge amounts of electrical energy that has to come from somewhere".

That's the whole idea. The effort is to eliminate big vehicles. This is just another ploy, like "suv drivers support terrorists". With electric vehicles, there won't be an big 4x4's.

OK, I give on two points. Hydrogen could be useful as a substitute in electric power generation plants. This would reduce the consumption of oil there, and release it for vehicles.

Also, I agree that nuclear is the only good way to go. Especially if electric vehicles ever make it. Nuclear power plants could give us power for thousands of years. All other methods have a shorter life, but all of them have longer lives than I do.

While I am no nuclear physicist, I do have a B.S. in Physics - 1975.

 

The thing these people don't realize is that the North American economy is largely dependent on large vehicles ie, the tractor/trailer due to our geography.

The second factor is our climate, while it's true that many people don't require a 4X4, many do as part of their daily lives, that's also something we can't change.

While a tiny one person vehicle that gets 200 mpg or runs on water would be great for many, it is simply not feasible for all.

Waxy

 

Waxy, I'm glad to see that while we don't agree on some things (and I do respect your rights there), we do agree on others.

 

I agree Winfordr, that's the beauty of this board. We can all disagree, and yet find common ground.

It is THE best medium I've found for meaningful debate of topics due to the wide spectrum of people that post here.

Waxy

 

thanks for the educational thread this looks like something to really keep an eye on the development.

 

well as far as hydrogyn goes i dont like it but it wouldn't make our water issues any worse if it was fully developed. i mean how hard could it be to hold the exhaust in a canister that you give back at the refual then the exhaust can be reconbined for water (maybe?) with propane still a fossil fuel. as far as electric goes i will never use it. i need my alternator to power my stereo. one idea i really like although itll never happen was the hybryd. a small turbine engine generates electricity for recharges and torqe por pulling out. so why couldnt i leave myne running all the time to power my amps??? you could combine any of the above with electric for that reason. i dont like the idea of the battery moving me around. sorry. i just dont like it. i feel like there should be a back up. i was thinking we can synthasize oil so why not gas. im sure it can be done we just dont know how. and im possitive it would also burn much cleaner than whet have now. just my thoughts.

 

The logical extension is "Oh no! We'll use up all of our water and die..."

The answer is: Mine the asteroid belt for ice.

- Either way, sooner or later we need to get off this planet.

 

If salt water does not need refining before the hydrogen can be removed there will be absolutely no problem whatsoever. I still like the ethanol idea though.

 

Anybody know what happened with the A 55 fuel. As I remember, it was naptha and water. Supposedly the the only emission was water. I can find the tax rate on it vis the internet otherwise no info.

 

Waxy,
I have no problem with being challenged to present facts and evidence; I actually appreciate it.
OK, so I might have to eat my hat on this one, because I can't find any evidence online. I do know this though: when enzymes, molds and funguses break down organic material, they produce waste in the form of various gases. I used to have a bunch of research material from college in my hard drive, but alas, I erased it to save space. I was researching the production of fuels from hemp ag waste, and I came upon an article that listed hydrogen as an example of one type of fuel gas that can be produced using this method. But damn me if I can find it anywhere...

OK, as for making hydrogen from water, and with regards to impending water shortages, consider this: no matter how polluted and nasty water is, it is still fundamentally h20, so the use of effluent and waste water could be a possible solution. But here's the catch: there is a finite and absolute amount of water on this planet, period. We drink water that Napoleon peed. So, if the processes involved in the production of hydrogen consume the water without recycling it, we would be shooting ourselves in the foot. The question is, do the byproducts of the hydrogen engine produce an equal amount of water as it consumes? If not, then converting water into energy would be foolish, in my opinion.

I think we can still use fossil fuels as a primary energy source, but we should strive to do it FAR more efficiently. I believe that the technology exists to make a car get 100mpg, but I think that the patents are held by our friends in the oil industry. It would seriously cut into the bottom line of these oil giants if cars ran that efficiently, so they sequester it.
That sucks.
BDV

 

Isn't the steam engine basicly a water powered engine? I mean, you heat up the water, it creates steam, and therefore it is technically water powered. Right? Well, the problem with steam engines, other than they weigh a ton, is that condensation escapes, and therefore you lose water. If water was stored in some type of tank after it had been used for the combustion process, wouldn't you have the same problem? Just a thought. Also, my college professors told me that enzymes only speed up a process, but you guys are talking about them like they actually perform the process. Just thought I would mention that.

 

No emissions. Mmmm...:P Get that grill going! (For Waxy)

http://www.homepower.com/files/h2bbq.pdf

Gee, look at all the money we've spent and are going to spend.

http://www.hfcletter.com/letter/March03/features.html

Hey, maybe the Hindenburg didn't blow because of Hydrogen.

http://www.hydrogenus.com/advocate/ad22zepp.htm

Wow, you want that electric car of yours to beat that Mustang off the line?

http://www.maxwell.com/ultracapacitors/


There's an old story about when Henry Ford was developing the Model T. The Engineers came up to him, very proud of the new carb they had developed. Henry took a look at it and said, "there are six moving part on this. Our customers have to be able to work on this on the side of the road with a couple tools. I want a couple moving parts on it." Engineers said it couldn't be done.

It was done.