Hydrogen as a fuel from solar radiation.

Status
Not open for further replies.
We know the band gap of TiO2 (white paint pigment amongst other things) to also be able to split water.
 
Every time hydrogen comes up, I am reminded of a Popular Mechanics article I read in the early 70's. They took a AM Gremlin with a V8, converted it as you would convert an engine to propane. They ran it on hydrogen. Worked out real well! Great power, clean burning. Only water vapor out of the tail pipe. Well, a little NOx also. I have often wondered why we waste so much time on high tech goofy stuff like fuel cells and such, when we could just burn hydrogen in a regular I.C.E.

Heck, maybe a multi fuel! Fill with propane or hydrogen, much like we have flex fuel vehicles now. That might be a bit of a stretch that it would work.
 
Aside from logistical concerns about transporting and distributing hydrogen, the real concern is the law of thermodynamics. Propane, natural gas, and crude oil are all actual sources of energy we can find, refine, and distribute, expending less energy to get them than we get from them.

With hydrogen, though, you can't simply drill into the ground and find a deposit and fill up tanks. You have to be able to get it from somewhere (i.e. water) in an efficient, effective, and feasible manner.

As for LPG, I couldn't agree more. I've run many vehicles on that in years past, and it was probably the least problematic of the alternative fuels.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak

As for LPG, I couldn't agree more. I've run many vehicles on that in years past, and it was probably the least problematic of the alternative fuels.



I have never seen a cylinder head on a 100k mile vehicle look as good as my old Ford vans in the 70's that we ran on propane. Absolutely an amazingly clean burning fuel!
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Aside from logistical concerns about transporting and distributing hydrogen, the real concern is the law of thermodynamics. Propane, natural gas, and crude oil are all actual sources of energy we can find, refine, and distribute, expending less energy to get them than we get from them.

With hydrogen, though, you can't simply drill into the ground and find a deposit and fill up tanks. You have to be able to get it from somewhere (i.e. water) in an efficient, effective, and feasible manner.

As for LPG, I couldn't agree more. I've run many vehicles on that in years past, and it was probably the least problematic of the alternative fuels.


Yes, from hydrocarbons. Steam reformation yields 3 miles of hydrogen for one mole of methane, and if done right to make carbon monoxide, then it can get shifted to produce another mole of hydrogen per mole of carbon monoxide.

This yields a pretty high overall efficiency on the basis of heating value in vs out. The question then is if there are efficiencies to be had vs internal combustion of hydrocarbons. Fuel cells are not constrained by Carnot, so the solid state conversion is far more efficient.
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
I have never seen a cylinder head on a 100k mile vehicle look as good as my old Ford vans in the 70's that we ran on propane.

It is pretty amazing for that. With no fuel dilution, I definitely go spoiled, too.

@JHZR2: That's pretty much it. Fuels cells versus using it directly in the engine is a real issue, obviously. From an emissions perspective, using hydrogen alone is great. But I don't like those logistics. Heck, even propane never took off that much, and it's probably the best of alternative fuels, when it comes to shortcomings and limitations and logistics.
 
And now there is a major push to get pickups on thru heavy commercial trucks on NG. A lot of the major truck stop chains are installing LNG and CNG fuel islands for this. I have seen entire trash hauling operations and others using NG only. Won't cut into the long haul commercial trucking scene any time soon, for sure.

I would even give it some consideration in my next pickup, since in the future, it will probably be an option for any pickup and quite a few autos as well. I really hope they broaden the base of NG and propane fired vehicles.

I also liked propane as a motor fuel. It is really too bad that the OEM's just never offered propane as an option in the types of vehicles average consumers buy. They offered it in select work type pickups and such, but those are not the typical pickups that most folks have in their driveways. Sure, any vehicle can theoretically be converted, but the cost is substantially more than if it was offered as a build option to begin with.
 
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
I also liked propane as a motor fuel. It is really too bad that the OEM's just never offered propane as an option in the types of vehicles average consumers buy.

My 1983 midsize LTD had it, but that was a disaster from a consumer's point of view. It had the gutless 2.3L in a rather heavy car. Of course, you know about the work trucks and the vans.

The LTD would have been a much more successful experiment had they fitted it with the 5.0L and a four speed automatic instead of that stupid 2.3L and three speed. What a gutless wonder.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
My 1983 midsize LTD had it, but that was a disaster from a consumer's point of view. It had the gutless 2.3L in a rather heavy car. Of course, you know about the work trucks and the vans.


If only they had "hot vapor cycled" the 2.3, like Smokey did to a Fairlane IIRC...

I was messing around with propane, cooling systems, charge heating etc. in the '90s, and there is some real scope to get some great results on the stuff.

An engineer in Oz (John Bennett) did some amazing stuff with propane, and we communicated a fair bit on ideas.
 
Smokey had far too much time on his hands, to put it mildly.
wink.gif


My propane supplier actually had a dragster on propane a number of years back, and billed it as the world's fastest propane car. There's no question things can be done with respect to performance in propane. You just don't start with a 2.3L in a Ford LTD.
wink.gif


I definitely considered moving my F-150 to it after the rebuild, and I still may do that. I don't haul a lot of stuff, so I can put whatever the heck I want in the back for tanks. That's assuming the price on propane is reasonable. I don't pay much attention lately, but when I do look, it's all over the place, from way less than gas to significantly more.

Diesel has been strange that way, too, lately. Shell wants more for diesel than premium. The Husky/Mohawk a few blocks away wants less than regular. Go figure.
 
He he. Self-serve propane is a no-go up here, unless you're certified, which isn't complex anyhow. I had to help many certified attendants who didn't know what they were doing.

What was that person wearing? Is that Dame Edna's son?
wink.gif
 
Older propane was fill and spill, crack the vent, and fill until the thing sprayed. These days, it's auto, a very coarse thread, the handle locks a teflon coupler, and it fills until it hits a backpressure, and auto cuts...easy as...

I've a soft spot for that car, as we had one when I was a kid...500 miles interstate, on a Friday night after school, parents and us three in the back, sister's wheelchair wouldn't fit in the trunk, so it was jammed down between Dad's driving seat, and my rear seat...8+ hours of pocohontus practice...500 miles back on Sunday night.
 
Remarkable. Things definitely have changed with propane. Well, the last time I filled a propane car would have been early 1995, and that was the fill and spill method. I have no idea what goes on up here now. The taxi industry has abandoned it and my LTD is in the Ford dealership in the sky.
 
PM me an email addy and I'll hook you up with some of the propane work that was being done here in the 90s...

Some really good stuff.
 
Couple years ago I think it was Roush offering F150s with the 5.4L converted to LPI (Liquid Propane Injection) Supposedly offered the same power as gasoline since it was injected as a liquid. Sold through licensed Ford dealers with a full warranty. I really liked them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top