Going Nowhere with Fuel Cells

I imagine the process will be much like early television, where people didn't want to spend that much money to see 2 channels, and companies didn't want to produce and broadcast shows for a few viewers. I think autos that can make use of both hydrogen and gasoline are needed first, because nobody wants to go travelling and get stuck miles from the hydrogen station near their home. Cars that use either will create a growing market for hydrogen, which will get more hydrogen stations built, which will eventually let the hydrogen-only market explode like the cell phone market did (is doing).

history + logic = future probability

You are right, If the car requires a station that can supply the fuel. What about these claims by some, that they produce their own hydrogen on board by just adding water to some sort of hydrogen generator? I see these videos on the internet, and I wonder if there is any validity to any of the claims. Many people claim to have cars that run on water

gadgetman

interesting reply did you get the idea for it from the text of epa's suit against the gasoline magnetizer comapny out of arkansas? looks VERY similar, but then again i'm not all that literate

re:- lamentation on poor progress in fuel cell technology research.

i don't know where you live in the world but i a m sure you may somehow avail yourself of

The Financial Post Newspaper

in the Markets section of that publications' Nov.17th, 2007 issue, one may read of the progress being made in developing that source of energy.

The writer presents that success ratios in creating that energy by Michel Laberge of Vancouver Canada given what he has to work with are nothing short of incredible./

halfnut

Other then the benefit to the environment, Hydrogen is a complete waste at this time. It still takes more energy to produce it from water then you can get out of it, so there goes the idea of on-board production. And, its incredibly explosive, so theres a lot of technical hurdles in creating a pumping station any idiot can use without venting the gas and blowing themselves up. Not to mention having a canister of explosive gas on a car designed to be as light as possible and could just as easily get into a collision as its gasoline chugging counterpart. American society will have to change the way it looks at cars before alternative fuels can gain wide acceptance. We have a love affair with the automobile and it boils down to 2 things: Looks, and power. Looks you can put on any car regardless of fuel source, but power is alot harder to come by. Look at what one might define as the iconic american cars: The Corvette, now sporting nearly 500 HP. The classic Muscle cars (Mustang, Camaro, 'Cuda, etc). And the Jeep, grandfather of the SUV. Hydrogen will not stand america on its ears untill it can power an average sized car from 0-60 in 5 seconds or less.

Agree 100% with your conclusions. However, I don't think American society (or any other) is interested in moving back to bicycles or horses.

The big issue is and will remain the cost of energy delivered to the wheels. Since it is impractical to produce hydrogen without incurring costs much greater than the carbon-based fuels to be replaced, it will never happen. Using more energy to provide a fuel of lower value (lb/lb) than petroleum based fuels and expecting automobile owners to accept them is ludicrous.

Considering that if we did use hydrogen, that hydrogen would be made using fossil fuels, thus there would be more fossil fuels burned if we were to convert over to its use. From an environmental point of view, I just don't see how hydrogen works.

Logistics is another problem. No infrastructure to supply the fuel to the public, and storage of hydrogen is a problem. The boiling point of the material is so low that it tends to boil off, espically if stored in a vehicle, before you can use it. Leave your hydrogen powered car at the airport for a week and you would come back to a car with an empty tank.

I just don't think hydrogen fuel cells are the answer.

Now if you could make one that ran off of natural gas... that is where the technology needs to be focused.

Natural gas vehicles have already been done and the market didn't accept them.

ONG here in oklahome runs their fleet off of natural gas.

sorry you do not have a copy of the article i reffered to the source is DEUTERIUM not hydrogen.

the element is common in the atmosphere the devices could operate for a million years with no green house gasses.

thanks for reading the article and thinking about what i posted. so far you maybe possible the third of one hundred plus responderrs who bothered to look beyond thier own nose.

Vehicles yes, but not fuel cells.

Along those lines.. making cars that run off natural gas, which is cleaner, have been around for years and only in fleet service such as city and government vehicles. They succeed in only limited applications, so even if hydrogen were a viable alternative, it would be met with the same lack-luster success as the natural gas vehicles currently in use.

I am from Pakistan, and am amazed at the lack of knowledge about alternative fuels in this country. Pakistan is a third world country, but about 60% of the cars run on natural gas there which is 90% cleaner burning than gasoline. The engine lasts a lot longer, the motor oil lasts at least twice as long, and it costs about a third of what gasoline costs. Best of all, you can have any car converted to natural gas for less than $1000 over there. You can even get a home compressor and fill up with natural gas at home. It is also a lot easier and safer to handle than hydrogen because the system operates at 3600psi vs 10000psi for hydrogen.

Hydrogen, .....why?

thanks for the reply

i had a 3/4 ton lorry converted to fuel by nvg. the costs

installation $ 3350.00 = certification of the system $ 350.00 fillup min 100 l. @ 0.48/ l = taxes min $ 54.00 yearly recertification of system $ 300.00 + testing of tanks and fuel lines biannually $ 120.00 both tanks.

Add to that - travel distance maximum of 60 kilometeres per fuel up - initial replacement of rear suspension to accomodate tank wieght $ 700.00, i did the labour to re and re the system + replacement of front shck absorber and strutworks $ 600.00 side = after 3rd year the stering box had to be replace due to the stress put on it from the added weight to the upgraded suspension parts cost of rebuilt unit installed $ 900.00.

i respect what you have presented but cannot grasp where any saving in converting to a ngv vehicle can be made in canadas climatic conditions. there is no doubt whatever the units are more than effective and chep to operate in arid climates. thanks for the second of at least one hundred replies which had a level of thought put into thier creation and posting. yours truly bnr

hi everyone,

here is the pessimistic point of view. that hydrogen is just a dodge, a smoke screen.

big oil killed off the electric car, because they could not control the delivery of energy. electricity does not match up with their business model. that model is bulk extraction, delivery of small amounts at high prices, at locations they control.

they proposed hydrogen to POSTPONE electric cars. big oil wants to extract as much wealth as possible from what is supposedly a dwindling resoarce.

electric cars are really the answer. cost to consumer is 1/10 of equivelant enegry from burning fossil fuels in your gas tank.

example: if i wanted to pump 1,000 gallons of water 200 feet up hill, the gas required to push the water up hill, is one gallon. look up the formulas yourself. i found the formulas in the book on sale besides the cashregister at most ACE hardware stores. it has weights and measures, conversion factors, things like that. cost about $14 US>

the amount of electricity to push the same 1,000 gallons up 200 feet is 1 kilowat. where i live, that is between 14 cents and 34 cents, depending upon usage. it is far more effiecient to use energy from a high energy source, than from a low energy source, even with transmission losses.

fuel cells do have a place in the energy cycle though. with home methane digesters, running the methane thru a fuel cell, will produce electricity. static set up, not for propulsion. so, i am waiting for fuel cells in cars, just so i can get one from the wrecking yard, to provide power at home. the state of the art fuel cell for home electricity is down to $400 per kilowatt purchase price. it is almost competative, pricewise.

we already have a hydrogen fuel society. every form of hydrocarbon fuel, burns only the hydrogen. the burnable part of natural gas is CH4. the burnable part of methane is CH4. in all of the other gas fuels, it is only the hydrogen which is burning.

Just a note Natural gas IS Methane.

As said, Hydrogen power is a stalling tactic, a "pie in the sky" to divert attention. It takes too much energy to make H for the energy released, storage requires extreme cold, high pressures or metal hydrides all of which are bulky and/or heavy to get the same range and speeds as gasoline powered cars. Sweden is building a Hydrogen Highway using solar powered refuelling stations, problems are: How many cars can be refuelled per day before the road has to be lined with stations? If you want to go away from the HH you can't, so there is little incentive to buy H powered cars.

An External Coumbustion car could be built to use any liquid or gaseous fuel and could be made to easily convert from one fuel to another, even H. However to be efficient it would have to be a hybrid with a plug-in electric car. Use a clean and efficient steam engine to generate electricity to keep the batteries charged on an electric vehicle. E-mail beesidemeusa@yahoo.co.uk and ask about steam-electric hybrids for some good ideas.

Who is responsible for getting H powered cars rolling? The market. Not government, not auto makers, not fuel companies. When people want them they will be made. I don't want an Electric Vehicle that leaves me with dead batteries holding an extension cord. I can carry a can of fuel by walking. I don't want an EV that can get me to work and back, but runs dead if I need AC or heat or headlights before I get home, that costs more than a regular car and if I want to go on vacation or a long trip requires me to own a second car or rent one. The same applies to H powered cars of any type as applies to EVs, they are impractical and expensive.

How's everyone doing...? Well so far it will be a great things having electrical cars down the road. This also will be accomplished by the use of good recharge dynamos for such car on board like a generators to recharge the batteries and probably an extra one for traveling purposes as for AC and Radios/CD players etc. Down the road it will be saving a big chunk amount of dollars in gas prices. Actually I am brainstorming on how we can be able to adapt an engine block or transform them into an electrical moto engine using the common gas engine mechanical advantages and by the use of big strongs solenoids imitate the reciprocal motion of the pistons. Who Know's ? Also, the most I have my head thinking on it, is the advantages of the 'Wankel' engine due it's mechanical advantages properties. Since this is a rotary engine motion this same principle it can be suit to make this engine concept run on electrical input instead of gas. Don't bring it to the bank yet I'm just brainstorming so far but, hey... Who Know's ? Probably at some point down the road some industrial will make it a reality and no more sky hi gas prices, history ...! Allset you all have a nice one and keep it cool..!!

Respectfuly;

MC

WHOA!! The cost of obtaining hydrogen is so expensive that it is not feasible for commercial use. It is not something we can dig out of the garden. It might be the most prolific element in the universe, but it is rare here... unless we disassociate it from other compounds... which requires energy... and more than we would gain from it.

Now if someone could provide an efficient way to unlink the H₂ from the hydrocarbons then he might have something which might work.

Bill

Hydrogen is a difficult to handle flammable in cryogenic liquid form, a thin (low energy per volume) gas at room temperature. It consist of a single proton and a single electron. The single proton can and does gets into the crystalline structure of the can it is in, physically distorting its shape. If you ever saw a cast iron boiler ever thrown out after decades hard use, you know what I am talking about. It is gross distortion of the metal.

In the 50s and 60s there was a scientific race between the west and the Soviets in particle physics. This side elected to do the low temperature cooling with helium. They went for the quicker and cheaper hydrogen. All those brains and good engineers spent many years fixing the troubles hydrogen caused on seals, and anything else it could distort on precision instruments like linear accelerator, to no avail.

Additionally, you cannot smell it, and it burns with an invisible flame. Do you want to blow up your home from a slight gas leak? Or will you let a hung over mechanic work on it, then entrusting your valuable behind to the quality work done?

Additionally, IT IS NOT A FUEL in the sense as natural gas, diesel or coal is. It is a manmade product just like the battery. You use energy to make it, and you are lucky if you regain 60% when burnt.

Additionally, Frequently it is made by cracking hydrocarbons. The carbon is not used, after all it is a bad guy.But it has 50% of the fuel's energy content. The cracker is fueled by 10%. So lets see: 60% of 50% of 90% is 27% efficiency. In other words we have thrown away 2/3 of the fuel value before using a single drop of it. What kind of nutcase dreams it up, and what kind of snake oil salesman sells it!?!

Contrast it to a note a pakistani wrote - very sensibly - why dont we use natural gas more widely? A little known fact is that about 25% of that gas that comes up with oil from the ground is just burned away (as in Nigeria) or pumped back into the ground (as in Alaska). It is deemed not worth to collect and transport long distance. But, instead of having gigantic flares, it would be better to use locally in homes, kitchens industry and transportation. At least there it would do some good.

I make a prediction. At the rate battery technology is improving, in a decade or two the whole hydrogen boondoggle will be relegated to such dinosaurs, like steam driven airplane.