http://www.canadiandriver.com/2009/09/09/automakers-sign-agreement-on-fuel-cell-vehicles.htm
Glad to see they're moving ahead on this front.
Automakers Sign Agreement for Fuel Cell Cars
- Thread starter paul246
- Start date
- Status
Marketing hype for a boondoggle. To bad we are wasting resources on a technology that pigs will fly first.
A little tritium added to your neighbourhood water supply will help speed up evolution. Where is the zero-emissions energy coming from?
general motors announced today that they have reached the million mile mark in there test fleet of 100 fuel cell vehicles being driven by real people in the real world,they are here and they emit only water vapor, obviously the cost factor could take another decade or so for them to be in common usage.
The cost factor will only go down only if we have have some break throughs like the ones I have been reading about being eminent for batteries since the 50's. Vaporware if I ever saw vaporware.
Solar and wind power and water driven turbines can produce hydrogen. Hydrogen can produce electricity. Its a complete cycle if desired or not. The energy within this circle can be stored in batteries, underground or above ground tanks and used when required. You can even have a hydrogen generator in your garage, producing hydrogen through solar and wind power or off the grid. Excess hydrogen not consumed by your car can be used to heat your water or fuel your electrical generator to run your household. Zero emmissions.
It is not zero emissions. Every energy source produces emissions of some source.
Are you aware of how photovoltaic wafers are produced, or how much steel and concrete goes into making one wind turbine?
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Are you aware of how photovoltaic wafers are produced, or how much steel and concrete goes into making one wind turbine?
Fuel cells were developed during the American Civil War era. Is there really anyone here who thinks it's goona' happen? I've filled em' and I've driven them and no matter how you scale it, at 1MM/fuel cell it cannot work and they foul after 1 year even with 99.9995 purity for the hydrogen. Set your sights elsewhere. All the original hoopla over hydrogen stemmed from the "water from the tailpipe" and the dream of a polution free auto. The cheapest you will ever buy hydrogen will always be 3X the price of un-leaded.
Steel is made by heating iron ore with burning charred coal. Cement is made by heating calcium carbonate, silica, and a touch of iron ore with burning coal dust or natural gas. There's plenty of CO2 given off, but it's less than by burning coal directly for energy. PV cells take large amounts of energy to make, but recently they passed the break even point. I'm not sure what the energy break-even point is for a wind turbine, but its less than its lifespan.
The solutions being subsidized by gubbermints all over are not real solutions. They are make-work projects. Nukes will be the medium term answer, if you accept the dangers of more bomb ingredients, and occasional escapes of radiation that make the news. We have to radically increase efficiency. Then, the alternative energy sources will be more viable.
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Steel is made by heating iron ore with burning charred coal. Cement is made by heating calcium carbonate, silica, and a touch of iron ore with burning coal dust or natural gas. There's plenty of CO2 given off, but it's less than by burning coal directly for energy. PV cells take large amounts of energy to make, but recently they passed the break even point. I'm not sure what the energy break-even point is for a wind turbine, but its less than its lifespan.
The solutions being subsidized by gubbermints all over are not real solutions. They are make-work projects. Nukes will be the medium term answer, if you accept the dangers of more bomb ingredients, and occasional escapes of radiation that make the news. We have to radically increase efficiency. Then, the alternative energy sources will be more viable.
They are, as well as hydroelectric dams, but the payback is way better.
Originally Posted By: bradepb
general motors announced today that they have reached the million mile mark in there test fleet of 100 fuel cell vehicles being driven by real people in the real world,they are here and they emit only water vapor, obviously the cost factor could take another decade or so for them to be in common usage.
-coal to electric 40% incl. transport losses
-electric to hydrogen 80% (electrolysis produces H atoms, which recombine to H2, with heat given off so you can never get 100%)
-hydrogen to 3500 psi compressed hydrogen 80%
-H2 to electric in fuel cell 60%
-electric to motor 80%
Overall efficiency is the product of them all, or 12%.
You can make H2 from natural gas, but cheap supplies will be gone very soon, if we start doing that.
That is all nice, but the point I'm making isn't about the present state, its about future development.
If all we do is throw our hands up in the air and declare it can't be done, it will never get done. But, it will get done. That is human nature. That is what moved us from the stone age , to the bronze age, to the iron age, etc.
I'm equally optimistic that a better method of handling nuclear waste will be found.
It will happen, but not with hydrogen.
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Are you aware of how photovoltaic wafers are produced, or how much steel and concrete goes into making one wind turbine?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
