Political Crossfire Forums

[Free Thinkr]

bob.appleyard wrote: Free Thinkr wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: poweRob wrote: The more you drive up car mileage and fuel usage, the larger that drop becomes.

OR: don't use a car.
Oh, well, that's realistic. :roll:

It is for me. I have no need for a car whatsoever.
You're in GB. Try that in the US. "Not bloody likely."

[poweRob]

Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

[perdidochas]

Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Depends on how you make the electricity to break down the water.....

Regardless, you would be better off using the electricity directly, than the inefficient process of 1st electrolyzing water, then the inefficient process of internal combustion. Using the electricity directly in a battery and from there to an electric motor is a better use of energy.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

However, hydrogen is one of the least efficient fuels in terms of volume/energy. A hydrogen tank probably is as complicated and heavy as a battery that can store the equivalent amoutn of energy.

[poweRob]

perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

However, hydrogen is one of the least efficient fuels in terms of volume/energy. A hydrogen tank probably is as complicated and heavy as a battery that can store the equivalent amoutn of energy.

Then lifespan and enviromental impact should be weighed in for a decent comparative. If they both hold the same energy, which one takes the most materials to make, and which one will last longer before it heads to the dump, and what impact does dumping it cause the environment?

Because you can make your own hydrogen for basically free in you invest in a home solar hydrogen producer.

Honda is in the works of making these.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

However, hydrogen is one of the least efficient fuels in terms of volume/energy. A hydrogen tank probably is as complicated and heavy as a battery that can store the equivalent amoutn of energy.

Then lifespan and enviromental impact should be weighed in for a decent comparative. If they both hold the same energy, which one takes the most materials to make, and which one will last longer before it heads to the dump, and what impact does dumping it cause the environment?

Because you can make your own hydrogen for basically free in you invest in a home solar hydrogen producer.

Honda is in the works of making these.

How is the hydrogen produced? If by way of photovoltaics, the most efficient use would be to go to a battery, rather than hydrogen.

Also,are they going to be able to pressurize the hydrogen enough for it it have the energy capacity necessary to be useful in a home producer?

[poweRob]

perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

However, hydrogen is one of the least efficient fuels in terms of volume/energy. A hydrogen tank probably is as complicated and heavy as a battery that can store the equivalent amoutn of energy.

Then lifespan and enviromental impact should be weighed in for a decent comparative. If they both hold the same energy, which one takes the most materials to make, and which one will last longer before it heads to the dump, and what impact does dumping it cause the environment?

Because you can make your own hydrogen for basically free in you invest in a home solar hydrogen producer.

Honda is in the works of making these.

How is the hydrogen produced? If by way of photovoltaics, the most efficient use would be to go to a battery, rather than hydrogen.

Also,are they going to be able to pressurize the hydrogen enough for it it have the energy capacity necessary to be useful in a home producer?

I'd like to see a home hydrogen producer from water. 3 tanks. one with water and then it splits to one hydrogen tank and one oxygen tank.

Photovoltaic solar power can then used to split the water molecule all day then you can plug your car into BOTH tanks, where your car has tanks for both oxygen and hydrogen, and a reserve water tank. The split hydrogen and oxygen tanks on your car are used to run through a fuel cell and combine into water which will then reside in the third tank.

Bring that water home and trade it back out for more hydrogen and oxygen.

Sound possible?


Here's a link to the Honda home hydrogen producer.

Makes no sense to me because it uses natural gas as its base component. Kind of defeats its own purpose if you ask me.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

However, hydrogen is one of the least efficient fuels in terms of volume/energy. A hydrogen tank probably is as complicated and heavy as a battery that can store the equivalent amoutn of energy.

Then lifespan and enviromental impact should be weighed in for a decent comparative. If they both hold the same energy, which one takes the most materials to make, and which one will last longer before it heads to the dump, and what impact does dumping it cause the environment?

Because you can make your own hydrogen for basically free in you invest in a home solar hydrogen producer.

Honda is in the works of making these.

How is the hydrogen produced? If by way of photovoltaics, the most efficient use would be to go to a battery, rather than hydrogen.

Also,are they going to be able to pressurize the hydrogen enough for it it have the energy capacity necessary to be useful in a home producer?

I'd like to see a home hydrogen producer from water. 3 tanks. one with water and then it splits to one hydrogen tank and one oxygen tank.

Photovoltaic solar power can then used to split the water molecule all day then you can plug your car into BOTH tanks, where your car has tanks for both oxygen and hydrogen, and a reserve water tank. The split hydrogen and oxygen tanks on your car are used to run through a fuel cell and combine into water which will then reside in the third tank.

Bring that water home and trade it back out for more hydrogen and oxygen.

Sound possible?

Well, IMHO, the main problem is the pressure involved. Using current technology, in order to be able to carry a reasonable supply of hydrogen fuel in a reasonably size space, you have to store it at about 350 atmospheres (5100 PSI). That is problematic. Also, it is silly to store the oxygen in a tank, when we have a 20% mixture of oxygen freely available.... The danger of an oxygen tank of the size necessary in a vehicle is extreme.

Using current technology, I still think you are better off using the PV solar energy to use in a battery/electric car situation. When we get around the H2 storage problem, then maybe your solution will be practical.


poweRob wrote: Here's a link to the Honda home hydrogen producer.

Makes no sense to me because it uses natural gas as its base component. Kind of defeats its own purpose if you ask me.

Well, making hydrogen from natural gas is the cheapest way possible to make hydrogen.

[MplsBison]

Li Poly batteries are a much better option than hydrogren in a tank for portable energy.

[poweRob]

tman_ndsu08 wrote: Li Poly batteries are a much better option than hydrogren in a tank for portable energy.

What's a li poly battery? I'm familiar with Li Ion batteries. Is it one and the same?

Maybe if they can keep them from overheating that is...

What about considering the denegration factor? Not to mention you can go home and have hydrogen/oxygen fuel waiting on you to refuel but you can't change out your Li Ion battery.

[MplsBison]

poweRob wrote: tman_ndsu08 wrote: Li Poly batteries are a much better option than hydrogren in a tank for portable energy.

What's a li poly battery? I'm familiar with Li Ion batteries. Is it one and the same?

They're the same except that the electrolyte (the chemical substance that holds the charge) in an Li Ion battery is a gel. In a Li Poly it's a polymer solid.

What that means is that a Li Poly batter can not catch fire or melt like a Li Ion batter can (and have recently with the Mac notebooks).

They also have a better power to volume or power to mass ratio than the Li Ions. I can't remember which.


What about considering the denegration factor?[/quote]

All batteries lose the ability to maintain a certain voltage value over time.

But truthfully, ALL energy storage systems degrade over time.

A hydogen tank is no different. Esp. if it must contain hydogen under very high pressure. Eventually, it'll wear out.

Quote: Not to mention you can go home and have hydrogen/oxygen fuel waiting on you to refuel but you can't change out your Li Ion battery.

Why can't you switch batteries? I switch batteries all the time. One is at home charging.

[poweRob]

perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: poweRob wrote: Quell wrote: Or you could alter it to use water...Yes water...

That piece is quite misleading. I've seen it time and again. So many people sent that to me. Then he says right in the middle of the piece it takes water and electricity for the electrolysis process. Where does the electricity come from? It's just as much the fuel as the water. Once you run the water molecule through electrolysis process, then it isn't water anymore so water really isn't the fuel, it is like crude oil is to gas. Unfinished.

Unfortunately, it takes A LOT of electricity/energy to split the H2O molecule. he can make the claim that it only uses water, but I'd like to see his electric bill is now.

That being said, the other traits of his torch and such seem quite neat.

The point was, is that there are no direct emissions..

Maybe so but it makes no sense to fill your car up with water if you use electricity to break the h20 bonds. There would be less power to drive you car that way as compared to just running the car directly off of electricity. UNLESS of course you use electricity to break apart the water at home and use the hydrogen you created there to run your car. That way you don't have to have a battery bank on your car for all that intense electrical need.

However, hydrogen is one of the least efficient fuels in terms of volume/energy. A hydrogen tank probably is as complicated and heavy as a battery that can store the equivalent amoutn of energy.

Then lifespan and enviromental impact should be weighed in for a decent comparative. If they both hold the same energy, which one takes the most materials to make, and which one will last longer before it heads to the dump, and what impact does dumping it cause the environment?

Because you can make your own hydrogen for basically free in you invest in a home solar hydrogen producer.

Honda is in the works of making these.

How is the hydrogen produced? If by way of photovoltaics, the most efficient use would be to go to a battery, rather than hydrogen.

Also,are they going to be able to pressurize the hydrogen enough for it it have the energy capacity necessary to be useful in a home producer?

I'd like to see a home hydrogen producer from water. 3 tanks. one with water and then it splits to one hydrogen tank and one oxygen tank.

Photovoltaic solar power can then used to split the water molecule all day then you can plug your car into BOTH tanks, where your car has tanks for both oxygen and hydrogen, and a reserve water tank. The split hydrogen and oxygen tanks on your car are used to run through a fuel cell and combine into water which will then reside in the third tank.

Bring that water home and trade it back out for more hydrogen and oxygen.

Sound possible?

Well, IMHO, the main problem is the pressure involved. Using current technology, in order to be able to carry a reasonable supply of hydrogen fuel in a reasonably size space, you have to store it at about 350 atmospheres (5100 PSI). That is problematic. Also, it is silly to store the oxygen in a tank, when we have a 20% mixture of oxygen freely available.... The danger of an oxygen tank of the size necessary in a vehicle is extreme.

Using current technology, I still think you are better off using the PV solar energy to use in a battery/electric car situation. When we get around the H2 storage problem, then maybe your solution will be practical.


poweRob wrote: Here's a link to the Honda home hydrogen producer.

Makes no sense to me because it uses natural gas as its base component. Kind of defeats its own purpose if you ask me.

Well, making hydrogen from natural gas is the cheapest way possible to make hydrogen.

True but it kind of defeats the renewability of using hydrogen. Every time Bush mentions a hydrogen economy he talks about using coal and natural gas. Seem utterly damn ridiculous. If we are to change, CHANGE, I say.

i personally want to get away from cars as much as possible so they are a want instead of a need. At least in major cities. Using PRT systems instead.

As far as carrying oxygen in the car... I said that only because if you split the water atom and produce pure oxygen and pure hydrogen, you'd save the hydrogen for use and have the byproduct of pure oxygen you'd have to release. Sound fine until you realize that you are releasing an abundance of a very flammable gas right next to your house. Don't know what the impact of loads of homes doing that would be.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: Here's a link to the Honda home hydrogen producer.

Makes no sense to me because it uses natural gas as its base component. Kind of defeats its own purpose if you ask me.

perdidochas wrote: Well, making hydrogen from natural gas is the cheapest way possible to make hydrogen.

poweRob wrote: True but it kind of defeats the renewability of using hydrogen. Every time Bush mentions a hydrogen economy he talks about using coal and natural gas. Seem utterly damn ridiculous. If we are to change, CHANGE, I say.

The thing is that using electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and water is a pretty energy intensive process. In terms of your PV solution, you'd be much better off using PV to power the household appliances, and use natural gas produced hydrogen to power the car. Personally, I think this home fuel station is a little foolish. I think we need to be working on bio-produced hydrogen, in which we use bacteria to break water into hydrogen and oxygen, and produce the hydrogen industrially, where we can get the efficiency of scale.


poweRob wrote: i personally want to get away from cars as much as possible so they are a want instead of a need. At least in major cities. Using PRT systems instead.

As far as carrying oxygen in the car... I said that only because if you split the water atom and produce pure oxygen and pure hydrogen, you'd save the hydrogen for use and have the byproduct of pure oxygen you'd have to release. Sound fine until you realize that you are releasing an abundance of a very flammable gas right next to your house. Don't know what the impact of loads of homes doing that would be.

The only problem would be right next to the oxygen source. I would rather dissipate the oxygen safely in the atmosphere, than worry about carrying a compressed cylinder of oxygen in my car.