Hydrogen technology - will it ever be feasible?

[xtremerus]

So you need a 48 panel solar system to produce that 500 gms of Hydrogen. And it still relies on 8 hours of off-peak power [base load] to make it, because you would want to make the hydrogen when the sun doesn't shine, ie night-time.
Seems to just rely on daytime power credits to offset the off-peak rate. It is not self-sufficient.
How much is the cost of a 48 panel solar system?????
And how much energy is in 500 gm of Hydrogen?

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

So you need a 48 panel solar system to produce that 500 gms of Hydrogen. And it still relies on 8 hours of off-peak power [base load] to make it, because you would want to make the hydrogen when the sun doesn't shine, ie night-time.
Seems to just rely on daytime power credits to offset the off-peak rate. It is not self-sufficient.
How much is the cost of a 48 panel solar system?????
And how much energy is in 500 gm of Hydrogen?

It'll depend on the Wattage of the system, different solar panels have different wattage outputs. I would also assume it'll have a batteries inside so you can charge the car at night.

[durtyharry]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

So you need a 48 panel solar system to produce that 500 gms of Hydrogen. And it still relies on 8 hours of off-peak power [base load] to make it, because you would want to make the hydrogen when the sun doesn't shine, ie night-time.
Seems to just rely on daytime power credits to offset the off-peak rate. It is not self-sufficient.
How much is the cost of a 48 panel solar system?????
And how much energy is in 500 gm of Hydrogen?

According to Honda, one kg of H2 has about the same energy as 3.8L of petrol

The fuel cell technology is basically 300% more efficient than actually feeding an internal combustion engine hydrogen.
Using the solar energy to charge batteries for electric cars would be far more sensible for short distance vehicles.
The hydrogen fuel cell has the obvious advantage that each kg of hydrogen will propel the car about 100kms, so for long range it could be much lighter than a battery powered car.

[xtremerus]

I might buy one. 8 hr charge gets me 50km range. It would only take me 18 days to go to Sydney and back home again for the 900km round trip. :

[cosmo20btt]

Mazda just last year done a deal to supply Norway with 30 Hydrogen RX8.
http://green.autoblog.com/2009/05/13...-re-in-norway/

[mik]

Originally Posted by Piotr

The Hindenberg was on fire for so long because the canvas caught on fire. The Hydrogen was burnt in a second or so

the hinden burg had a pretty good record if i remember correctly, except for the obviouse disaster, it turned out to be the coating they used to put on the skin was highly ,highly imflamable, a static electicty discharge set the skin on fire the rest is history.

[US kills Falcon]

Hydrogen technology is feasible - the only problem is no supply infrastructure exists.

[RG]

Originally Posted by US kills Falcon

Hydrogen technology is feasible - the only problem is no supply infrastructure exists.

It has a few more issues than just infrastructure methinks.

[BLSTIC]

Like efficiency. Hydrogen isn't free to produce, nor is it cheap to use efficiently (just try and make or repair a fuel cell).

That's my major gripe with it. People think you pour water down and hydrogen comes off, ready to use, with lilttle effort or energy and emissions free. Unless it's powered by a wind turbine, solar, or similar, even making hydrogen pumps out the CO2.

When are we getting lithium/air batteries in cars? That would make a good step towards an oil free transport industry... Electricity grid is well established...

[durtyharry]

Originally Posted by BLSTIC

When are we getting lithium/air batteries in cars? That would make a good step towards an oil free transport industry... Electricity grid is well established...

the grid doesnt produce CO2?

[BLSTIC]

yeah it does, but it's easier to control emissions at one point than several million. Also, the grid can be supplemented with green power, whereas directly solar, nuclear, and hyro cars are never going to happen (or at least nuclear won't in our life, and the other two never...).

[Airmon]

Originally Posted by durtyharry

According to Honda, one kg of H2 has about the same energy as 3.8L of petrol

This is true in Kg/Kg terms, but in L/L terms petrol still trumps Hydrogen with 1L of Petrol having as much energy as 3L of Liquid Hydrogen, much, much less in Gaseous form.

[durtyharry]

Originally Posted by Airmon

This is true in Kg/Kg terms, but in L/L terms petrol still trumps Hydrogen with 1L of Petrol having as much energy as 3L of Liquid Hydrogen, much, much less in Gaseous form.

Petrol trumps hydrogen?

You could have also pointed out how the extra mass of the storage tanks needed for hydrogen would offset any mass advantage of the fuel as further evidence of the superiority of petrol

ffs, no one on the planet is going to argue that liquid hydrocarbons that dont need to be stored under pressure are the best energy source for independent sources of transport, especially aviation.


Petrol unfortunately doenst come up "trumps", fails miserably, for CO2 emissions, that is why we are looking at alternatives.

[Airmon]

Im not arguing that Petrol is the greatest fuel source in the world. Simply that Alternatives are not always as perfect as they are marketed, an example of which you brought up in the case of Honda's manipulation of facts to 'market' hydrogen.

[durtyharry]

Originally Posted by Airmon

Im not arguing that Petrol is the greatest fuel source in the world. Simply that Alternatives are not always as perfect as they are marketed, an example of which you brought up in the case of Honda's manipulation of facts to 'market' hydrogen.

I brought it up?

FFS, someone asked how much energy is 1kg of hydrogen worth, the answer of the same as about 3.8L of petrol was totally appropriate?

The only thing getting "manipulated" here is your own conspiracy theory.

[US kills Falcon]

Originally Posted by RG

It has a few more issues than just infrastructure methinks.

Such as?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by US kills Falcon

Such as?

Ever tried to store hydrogen in bulk?

It's such a small molecule that it tends to diffuse right through some materials.....

[RG]

Originally Posted by US kills Falcon

Such as?

Storage, safety, economy, reliability, economy. So just a few things mate.

Hell could you imagine what would happen if a hydrogen powered car went up in flames for whatever reason? As far as I'm aware Fire Authorities are yet to come up with a way to deal with fires involving hybrid vehicles, hence the stickers now required on the rego plates.

[RG]

Originally Posted by durtyharry

I brought it up?

FFS, someone asked how much energy is 1kg of hydrogen worth, the answer of the same as about 3.8L of petrol was totally appropriate?

The only thing getting "manipulated" here is your own conspiracy theory.

Maybe you need a beer and a calm down?

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by durtyharry

I brought it up?

FFS, someone asked how much energy is 1kg of hydrogen worth, the answer of the same as about 3.8L of petrol was totally appropriate?

The only thing getting "manipulated" here is your own conspiracy theory.

Perhaps someone should've asked you how much volume 1kg of hydrogen occupies, many would be surprised. Given the density of only 67.8kg / m^3, 1kg occupies 14.75 L. So to hold the same "energy" as a 68 L Falcon tank you'd need 263.9L.. Something to consider.

[RG]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

Perhaps someone should've asked you how much volume 1kg of hydrogen occupies, many would be surprised. Given the density of only 67.8kg / m^3, 1kg occupies 14.75 L. So to hold the same "energy" as a 68 L Falcon tank you'd need 263.9L.. Something to consider.

Hence my points regarding storage and economy.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by RG

Hence my points regarding storage and economy.

Yes I totally agree. As others have said it's only viable with Nuclear electricity generation and even then very iffy.

Such a shame to have the largest share of the world's uranium and be too scared to use it.

[Airmon]

Originally Posted by durtyharry

I brought it up?

FFS, someone asked how much energy is 1kg of hydrogen worth, the answer of the same as about 3.8L of petrol was totally appropriate?

The only thing getting "manipulated" here is your own conspiracy theory.

No conspiracy theory here. As Jondalar has already stated, using mass kg for kg to show how much energy it has it irrelevant when talking about Liquid or gaseous fuels. My point wasn't that you chose the facts, but that Honda chose to show the better figure, kg v kg, rather then the L v L which is more relevant but shows Hydrogen at a disadvantage.

I thought that was pretty clear from my first reply, but if not Im sorry. And in no way was my post aimed at you.

[durtyharry]

Originally Posted by Airmon

I thought that was pretty clear from my first reply, but if not Im sorry. And in no way was my post aimed at you.

Appreciate that Airmon, sounds sincere.

[vztrt]

Lol, at Car advice having such a timely article....

http://www.caradvice.com.au/60993/ho...ling/#comments

Honda’s hydrogen future may lie with solar home refueling

March 15, 2010 by Matt Brogan

Honda says the future of its hydrogen-powered vehicles may lie with solar-powered home refueling stations.

The Japanese manufacturer hopes its latest idea will make hydrogen the fuel of choice for zero-emission cars, believing hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles offer the best long-term alternative to fossil fuels.

While many manufacturers, such as GM and Toyota, continue to invest heavily in battery technology, Honda is widely seen as the hydrogen leader, strongly tempted by the idea of a car that uses no oil and emits only water vapour.

The biggest barrier in hydrogen-powered cars so far is the lack of refueling infrastructure, which has lead Honda to decide the best alternative is public refueling networks combined with a modest home option.

Honda’s home option will comprise a solar-powered hydrogen refueling station using solar panels.

“Customers can choose how they interact with both of them based on their annual miles and their habits,” said Mr Stephen Ellis, fuel cell manager at Honda North America.

“The key thing to remember is that with five-minute refueling you are good for another 240 miles (387km).”

That number come from public “fast-fill” stations, of which only a handful currently exist in Southern California where Honda currently leases 15 of its FCX Clarity models (as pictured above).

It is estimated that the home fueling station would provide enough hydrogen for a trip of 50 kilometres during an eight hour ‘charge’ – or roughly that of the average daily commute.

At Honda’s Los Angeles Research and Development Centre, the FCX Clarity is refueled using a single-unit station connected to a series of solar panels that replaces a two-unit system, cutting costs and improving efficiency by as much as 25 per cent.

“This is wonderful progress, the biggest progress,” said Mr Ikuya Yamashita, the chief engineer of the station.

That station uses a 6kW solar array, composed of 48 panels and thin film solar cells developed by a Honda subsidiary. The station breaks down water into hydrogen in what Honda calls a “virtually carbon-free energy cycle.”

The FCX Clarity’s hydrogen stack (or electricity generator) is around the size of a brief case and is installed between the front seats for maximum impact protection.

It is anticipated that the Honda FCX Clarity will be commercially viable by 2018, while the solar hydrogen refueling system could move beyond the research stage and into the market as early as 2015.

“A lot of this work is not necessarily for today’s economic situation,” said Mr Ellis.

“This is for tomorrow, when most people feel energy prices will be higher.”

[388cube_edxr8]

So when everyone is driving zero-emission cars, how are Al Gore and the Hippies going to explain the still rampant Global Warming?

I hope I live long enough to laugh at them when it happens.

That said, I would buy a performance H2 powered car if it was at least close to the practicality refueling wise as today' performers.

[ltd]

At todays electricity prices and the impending 60% increase in prices over the next three years, Hydrogen has just taken another kick in the nuts.
Nuclear is the answer, it's just that it's ostensibly a poisoned chalice for whatever politician decides to act on it. There is no such thing as Green Energy. It is a term derived from those whom possess absolutely zero commercial skills.

* Hydroelectric used to be green energy however successive governments have ensured no dams are ever built so it is dwindling, it upsets the green vote.
* Solar panels may be greenish when they get here, but made in china lots of pollution just to make them, and they're only 8% efficient.
* Wind turbines? Wind doesn't blow all the time and just ask the several million migratory birds killed every year by flying into spinning blades. Besides they're fugly.
* Thermal, still in its infancy and inefficient.
* Hybrids? Nickel smeltering for one battery does more damage than a V8 does in its life, and then disposing of the bugger is an even bigger problem. For definition of "Ironic" look up Prius.

On a more serious note we are being dictated to by a bunch of lefty, greeny, commercially inept, sycophantic yes men and women with no vested interest in yours or my welfare; conversely they just want to dictate to us how to live. A big claim I know, but just check your next powerbill or more interestingly, check it in July of 2010, 2011 and 2012. The ETS which has been proven as nothing but a scam is already being paid for in our electricity bills, and they are increasing prices by 62% over the next three years to pay for it - a bill that has failed three times in the senate. I'm not trying to make this political in any way, merely pointing out how we are being ripped off by those in power wishing to feel green, when the whole thing has been proven the world over to be a ****fest extravaganza. Might be time to go live in Montana in the land of the all night nuclear power stations.

BTW for the future of energy for your cars, look to shale oil as well as coal

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by Fordoldie

do the math - there are 850,000,000 cars alone on earth and that figure grows by approx 6 % annually.

yet cars only contribute 20% of the world's emissions. the rest is industry

[ads]

Originally Posted by BLSTIC

Like efficiency. Hydrogen isn't free to produce, nor is it cheap to use efficiently (just try and make or repair a fuel cell).

That's my major gripe with it. People think you pour water down and hydrogen comes off, ready to use, with lilttle effort or energy and emissions free. Unless it's powered by a wind turbine, solar, or similar, even making hydrogen pumps out the CO2.

When are we getting lithium/air batteries in cars? That would make a good step towards an oil free transport industry... Electricity grid is well established...

+1.

From an engineering standpoint, hydrogen is very inefficient. You have to generate the electricity and convert water into hydrogen (+ oxygen). This process is at best around 20% efficient, i.e. for every Joule of energy you pump into the water, 0.2 Joules is recoverable and the rest is lost as either heat up a cooling tower or to the oxygen.

Put that through an internal combustion engine (like the V12 7 series someone mentioned) which is about 20% efficient and you end up with about 4% of the energy you originally made as electricity actually hitting the road. That's incredibly wasteful.

Even with an 80% efficient fuel cell you only get 16% efficiency from power station to tarmac.

Compare that to our already established electricity grid, which can get power drom power station to your power point at about 80% efficiency (a shade optimistic mebbe). Electic cars will probably then be about 80% efficient at charging a battery and then converting the stored energy later on into useable power - that's 64% efficiency from power station to tarmac, which is actually quite good.

BTW, my numbers are approximate so please no one come and say "well actually internal combustions engines are 28.39% efficient or whatever - you get my point. Obviously if I'm completely wrong go ahead and correct me.

[ads]

Sorry, here is a number. The efficiency of the electricity - hydrogen - electricity loop has been quoted as 25%. Still, compare that to 64%.