Eureka - Purdue scientists turn water into hydrogen on the cheap - Page 4 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #31 of 36 (permalink) Old 05-23-2007, 05:11 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Bruce R.'s Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 14,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by old300D
The reason this is now pointless is you don't understand my arguments. Just because it can be done doesn't mean it makes sense, either economically or enviromentally. I have demonstrated that H2 is currently more polluting than using the petroleum sources directly. There is absolutely no current plans to produce hydrogen from renewable sources, as making H2 from water is the absolutely most inefficient way to do it. So it will be made from coal and methane at tremendous energy loss and pollution. Nothing clean about it. In addition, the cost of a brand-new infrastructure is a total tax give-away. This country already has an excellent liquid fuel distribution network and the means to use it for renwables. The fact that we are not moving that way indicates the government is not acting in the most fiscally responsibile manner, and is in fact serving the petroleum industry who stands to gain the most.
I have to tell you, some of that sounds kind of strange coming from a tree hugging democrat.........
I still have to go back to what I said before, petro fuels are the least used fuels used to make aluminum in this country. You blow right past it as if it was never stated and continue to tout oil, coal, and METHANE? Where in the heck is a METHANE powered electic plant? Never heard of a power plant run only with methane. Heard of them being STARTED with natural gas but NOT run with it.
Oh and by the way I do understand your arguments, and I dismiss them the same way you have dismissed mine...

"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
Vladimir Putin

"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94


"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas
Bruce R. is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 36 (permalink) Old 05-23-2007, 06:15 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce R.
I have to tell you, some of that sounds kind of strange coming from a tree hugging democrat.........
I still have to go back to what I said before, petro fuels are the least used fuels used to make aluminum in this country. You blow right past it as if it was never stated and continue to tout oil, coal, and METHANE? Where in the heck is a METHANE powered electic plant? Never heard of a power plant run only with methane. Heard of them being STARTED with natural gas but NOT run with it.
Oh and by the way I do understand your arguments, and I dismiss them the same way you have dismissed mine...
You would know what I'm talking about if you'd referred to the references I posted. I include petroluem fuels as all fuels derived from fossil sources, this includes methane (natural gas), coal and oil. Go ahead and see what the carbon footprint is to make raw aluminum. And how much aluminum you need to make hydrogen from water. It will be much more than using those petroleum resources directly.

Also, if you read what I posted, you would know that the large majority of H2 is made from methane. Not water - water is the LOWEST ENERGY state of H2. It takes more energy to get H2 from water than any other source. If you leave it up to the petroleum industry, guess how they will make it. That's right, petroleum.

You haven't understood my argument up to this point, so how can you have dismissed it? You need to be able to tell how my arguments fail in order to dismiss them.

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #33 of 36 (permalink) Old 05-23-2007, 07:32 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Interesting discussion. The present state of the art does not favor using Hydrogen as a fuel for personal transportation. It may make sense for public/municipal use such in busses long before it makes sense for private citizens to use in their cars. This is mainly because of the intial cost, safety and infrastructure challenges associated with distribution and containment of Hydrogen.

The weak link in the logic and case presented by old300D is that it assumes there will be no change in the present status of Hydrogen distribution, storage and generation technologies. I think that is not likely given the efforts being spent. In fact there are very promising approaches being developed. They may likely be several years off, as are the challenges of using PEM fuel cells in cold weather, or after months of sitting idle in either cold or hot climates.

But, with gasoline at $5.00/gallon many other solutions will become more attractive. In the end I will be very surprised to find anything to replace the convenience, and essentially stranglehold on our energy needs, of oil. I believe you will see the energy monopoly of the big oil companies break down and slowly be replaced by more appropriate, application specific (including customer specific) and therefore varied, energy sources.

Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #34 of 36 (permalink) Old 05-24-2007, 09:31 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
old300D's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2003
Vehicle: '83 240D
Location: Denver
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I hope you are right Jim, but I suspect the oil companies will continue to keep their oily fingers on the scales to promote wasteful solutions. The real "weak link" is the actual usefulness of a hydrogen infrastructure. Currently it is extremely pollution intensive to make H2. To actually use it for transportation requires technological breakthroughs in many areas - carbon sequestration, fuel cells (they've been working on these for over 150 years), and storge methods -- there is more hydrogen in a gallon of gasoline than in a gallon of liquid hydrogen, and gasoline doesn't boil off. None of it can compare to other, more practical transportation solutions:

Electricity, from renewables or coal, can be used more efficiently in electric cars.

Biofuels in internal combustion engines are more energy dense and have much fewer safety issues.

Fuel cells can be developed to use any liquid fuel, not just hydrogen, eliminating all the storage and transportation issues of hydrogen gas. If aluminum is used to generate hydrogen on demand, the energy and pollution associated with aluminum mining and smelting must add in, making it far less attractive.

I don't see a single case where H2 makes sense to move a vehicle. Maybe someone can point one out, hopefully with a scientific basis and sans insults.

OBK #35

old300D is offline  
post #35 of 36 (permalink) Old 05-24-2007, 09:38 AM
~BANNED~
 
deathrattle's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Vehicle: 1992 W126 300 SE
Location: Head in the clouds
Posts: 11,045
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
^^^^^

Well this early attempt wasn't so great!

deathrattle is offline  
post #36 of 36 (permalink) Old 05-24-2007, 03:41 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by old300D
I hope you are right Jim, but I suspect the oil companies will continue to keep their oily fingers on the scales to promote wasteful solutions. The real "weak link" is the actual usefulness of a hydrogen infrastructure. Currently it is extremely pollution intensive to make H2. To actually use it for transportation requires technological breakthroughs in many areas - carbon sequestration, fuel cells (they've been working on these for over 150 years), and storge methods -- there is more hydrogen in a gallon of gasoline than in a gallon of liquid hydrogen, and gasoline doesn't boil off. None of it can compare to other, more practical transportation solutions:

Electricity, from renewables or coal, can be used more efficiently in electric cars.

Biofuels in internal combustion engines are more energy dense and have much fewer safety issues.

Fuel cells can be developed to use any liquid fuel, not just hydrogen, eliminating all the storage and transportation issues of hydrogen gas. If aluminum is used to generate hydrogen on demand, the energy and pollution associated with aluminum mining and smelting must add in, making it far less attractive.

I don't see a single case where H2 makes sense to move a vehicle. Maybe someone can point one out, hopefully with a scientific basis and sans insults.
The only scheme I have worked on or become familiar with by any means that shows promise involving Hydrogen involves the equivalent of a Hydrogen based "battery" that is "recharged" and uses nothing but electricity from the grid to recharge. In this application the efficiency of the recharging operation is not going to be as high as the power generation and conversion to torque, but it doesn't need to to compete with internal combustion engines when you add in the total cost of the gasoline and Diesel fuel distribution system, as well as the higher efficiency of the utility gas turbines that will burn the fuel instead of the smaller cars and busses.

Give this problem some time and higher gasoline prices. There are lots of solutions being developed and there is not much the big oil companies can do to tamp them all down if that is what they are doing right now. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Alito shot the Pope - according to the Purdue newspaper error firstmb Off-Topic 4 01-13-2006 05:28 PM
    Water sloshing & turn signal stalks Bald Bill W210 E-Class 2 11-11-2004 02:53 PM
    Almost got stranded in Eureka! UniquelySanFrancisco W163 M-Class 5 01-03-2004 09:50 PM
    OT: Honey, did you remember to turn off the water pipes in the garage? Russ-DC R170 SLK-Class 5 05-21-2003 06:54 PM
    Water in the front fenders turn signal housing - drivers side (more) Roadster R170 SLK-Class 1 12-29-2002 09:14 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome