B
Bill
Guest
Specialized wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:28:20 -0700, "Jack May" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> There is no need for fuel cells. Hydrogen works great in modified internal
>> combustion engines.
> Yes, IC Engines like it though there are some tweaks that have to be
> made. Crankcase oil lasts much longer, for example.
> One such effort is at http://www.safehydrogen.com/technology.html
> But to be honest, hydrogen "fuels" are really an energy storage and
> transportation medium, not a primary fuel, and if one looks upstream
> it is very expensive energy, and there is still CO2/carbon produced in
> its formation, whether from the generation of electrical power used in
> electrolytic preparation, or from splitting from methane, etc.
> People feel good about nothing but water coming out of an exhaust pipe
> or fuel cell, though, despite what the overall system does, or costs.
> Then there is the 'Hindenberg" aspect. Most drivers we see should
> not really be trusted with a petrol tank, let alone a 6,000 PSI
> Pressure Vessel.
> The above URL attempts to address the high presure storage problems.
I don't want to start another flame war but Hydrogen only freezes at
absolute zero and has to be really damn cold just to become a liquid.
Anybody that thinks this stuff is safe is not thinking with a full deck.
Methane is available and much safer, even though the molecule does
contain some Carbon (CH3). I really would not want to see some poor
driver thinking he is doing so good for the economy just fuel up and
then get nailed by a semi, train, or whatever could break the tank.
****, he's gone and anyone near him.
For some perspective, dig into the news about 15-20 years ago when a
Propane tanker went off the road and caught fire. The flames were
invisible so people didn't even know what was happening to them. It was
at a campground in France or Spain and survivors reported seeing people
walking out with their skin just falling off. Not a pretty way to go.
Batteries for me.
Bill Baka
> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 21:28:20 -0700, "Jack May" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> There is no need for fuel cells. Hydrogen works great in modified internal
>> combustion engines.
> Yes, IC Engines like it though there are some tweaks that have to be
> made. Crankcase oil lasts much longer, for example.
> One such effort is at http://www.safehydrogen.com/technology.html
> But to be honest, hydrogen "fuels" are really an energy storage and
> transportation medium, not a primary fuel, and if one looks upstream
> it is very expensive energy, and there is still CO2/carbon produced in
> its formation, whether from the generation of electrical power used in
> electrolytic preparation, or from splitting from methane, etc.
> People feel good about nothing but water coming out of an exhaust pipe
> or fuel cell, though, despite what the overall system does, or costs.
> Then there is the 'Hindenberg" aspect. Most drivers we see should
> not really be trusted with a petrol tank, let alone a 6,000 PSI
> Pressure Vessel.
> The above URL attempts to address the high presure storage problems.
I don't want to start another flame war but Hydrogen only freezes at
absolute zero and has to be really damn cold just to become a liquid.
Anybody that thinks this stuff is safe is not thinking with a full deck.
Methane is available and much safer, even though the molecule does
contain some Carbon (CH3). I really would not want to see some poor
driver thinking he is doing so good for the economy just fuel up and
then get nailed by a semi, train, or whatever could break the tank.
****, he's gone and anyone near him.
For some perspective, dig into the news about 15-20 years ago when a
Propane tanker went off the road and caught fire. The flames were
invisible so people didn't even know what was happening to them. It was
at a campground in France or Spain and survivors reported seeing people
walking out with their skin just falling off. Not a pretty way to go.
Batteries for me.
Bill Baka