Hydrogen Fuel Cell

The holy grail is to store energy as hydrogen. Hydrogen can store 142 mega joules of energy per kilo gram. Our favorate energy source is gasoline(some hate it) at 46 mega joules per kilo gram. Better yet, If a hydrogen fuel cell is used to power a car it is 60 percent energy effecient versus an internal combustion energy at 16%. The Honda Clarity will travel 100 miles on a kilo gram of hydrogen while a Toyota Prius will tavel 7 miles on a kilo gram of gasoline.Theoretically the ICE is a Rube Goldberd design compared to the fuel cell. However; The hydrogen solution has been just as ellusive as the holy grail.

Here is good link for comparing energy storage densities. You will see that NG is a good energy storage "device".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

PS: The exhaust is water vapor. No pollution from the fuel cell!

Tags: cell, fuel, hydrogen

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Johnston on August 24, 2008 at 8:22am: You can convert any car to hydrogen fuel by installing an on-board reformer and producing your hydrogen on the fly. Sure you use both H2O and a hydrocarbon in the process but since up to 60% of the H2 produced is coming from the water it cuts your CO2 pollution and hydrocarbon fuel requirements by a similar percentage.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by DubleDeuce on August 21, 2008 at 1:07am: You know Ken,

You start of good but just like that Obama guy, you fade FAST.

You are mixing MASS with VOLUME and they ARE NOT the same thing.

Read you OWN link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

There is NO know effective way to transport, store, and dispense hydrogen in a liquid form and gaseous storage pressure limits of 10,000 psi are JUST not practical either.

I sincerely believe that hydrogen as a primary energy carrier will be in the fleet one day, but NOT as a liquid or a pressurized gas. It will come in the form of a chemical separation from water using an aluminum/gallium process and the hydrogen will be made on board and ON DEMAND.

And BTW a modern gasoline fueled ICE will produce 25% efficiency at the flywheel. Sorry if your Rube Goldberg Tata usurps another 9% in poor design.

You speak of hydrogen as if it is ooosing out of the ground. It is NOT. There are no hydrogen pools of gas just waiting to be drilled (ooops, even if there were, dem Dems wouldn't allow it). The CURRENT known technology for extracting hydrogen is NOT an efficient one. It TAKES more energy to separate the hydrogen than the amount of energy you will get back.

Of course, what with the backward thinking of the left, the dream of tap water dripping out of the tailpipe of a car would probably be worth the extra money and ruined environment to be able to say "we did it".

The Deuceman

The Deuceman; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Johnston on August 21, 2008 at 5:14am: Interesting. Actually there ARE pools of hydrogen lying around all over. Fossil fuels are the "ash" of an oxidation/reduction reaction between carbon and hydrogen and water is also the "ash" of the same type of reaction. These two types of ash can be reacted with each other at an elevated temperature, in the presence of a catalyst with the result being hydrogen and carbon monoxide or dioxide gas. We really do have quite a lot of hydrogen available and it does not take as much energy to produce it as you get out of it in the way that you say it. By using both a hydrocarbon and water in the process described above the reaction can be exothermic and self sustaining and it is a great way to store, transport and produce hydrogen fuel.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by DubleDeuce on August 23, 2008 at 7:44pm: <<ctually there ARE pools of hydrogen lying around all over. >>

This is PURE BLASPHANY. There are NO hydrogen pools lying around...PERIOD. Yes, many materials in the earth HAVE components of hydrogen locked in them. And NO, regardless of the technique you use to extract the hydrogen from the "ash" as you call it, you MUST account for it in the total fuel cost. To date, there is NO known method of hydrogen extraction that is either net neutral or even close to economical.

Talking about this "hydrogen fuel" is like watching a magician pull a rabbit out of a hat. It LOOKS impressive but NO ONE can really account for the rabbits' spontaneous appearance unless you suspend reality. And we have been suspending reality for some 50 years now, burning fossil fuels as if there were no end to them. And our national R&D is a joke relative to this problem.

If we are going to speak to the issues (high fuel prices and the NEXT step to take to wean us off of fossil fuels) than lets do so, but all of this pie in the sky BS of WHAT we COULD do and all is not getting us anywhere.

No one can produce hydrogen in an energy efficient manner. No matter WHICH process you invoke.

The Deuceman; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kenneth Koch on August 23, 2008 at 7:54pm: Does that mean that we can never synthisysize a liquid fuel?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by DubleDeuce on August 23, 2008 at 11:51pm: Hello Kenneth,

NO, quite the contrary. We can DO whatever we like all the way up until the lid blows off the kettle. But to do it EFFICIENTLY and effectively and with enough volume to satisfy all the consumers needs.

Coal as a source of liquid (synthesized) fuel was done by the Germans and the Japanese in response to our destroying their conventional fuel production stream. There is a process today to use coal as the feed stock for a liquid fuel. We ain't running out of sources, we are running out of ways to skirt the left wing Pelosi Mob.

The EASIEST way to crack hydrogen from its bound up state with other matter is by electrolysis of water. But THAT process is HEAVILY burdened with energy loss in the process. If you HAVE the energy to use to crack the hydrogen, WHY waste so much of it in the process when the yield from the hydrogen will be so low? Just go ahead and use the electricity straight away.

If you are interested, I gave a brief (ha ha) blog on my vision for the middle future on the fuel type we might be using. It is a hydrogen powered ICE OTTO cycle (internal combustion engine) and the fuel is "hydrogen on demand" separated from an aluminum/gallium block by dropping water on the aluminum much like a miners lamp did years ago to make acetylene.

The fuel catalyst was manufactured in Iceland with the help of that island nations complete dependence on glacier fed hydroelectric dams and open geo-thermal vents making steam to drive generators to make electricity. This is a COMPLETELY renewable resource and the process is totally green save for the carbon footprint to get the large volume of bauxite shipped to the island.

This, in my estimation, is a win win win situation. The fuel "storage" is done in the aluminum block. The energy used to make it is 100% pure sustainable and renewable, and the carbon footprint of the vehicle using the fuel is totally 100% water vapor. What's not to like about THAT?

And the neat thing is, NO new infrastructures are needed for this technology. ALL of the major components are in place and currently operating. We just have too get up and get going. Here is the site to get started with.

http://www.physorg.com/news98556080.html

The Deuceman; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Johnston on August 24, 2008 at 8:19am: Those schemes seem to ignore the fact that we would be using quite a bit of aluminum in the process and aluminum isn't exactly cheap. Also, once we all switched to aluminum as a fuel catalyst I doubt the prices would stay where they are today. We would go from big oil to big aluminum. No real change just enslaved to a new master.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Johnston on August 21, 2008 at 11:02am: hydrogen from water is the only real solution that makes sense long term, forever really.It is just a matter of finding the most efficient way to release hydrogen from water.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by DubleDeuce on August 23, 2008 at 8:00pm: Hello Jack,

You might want to get a copy of a book called The Clean Power Revolution by Troy Helming. In it he lays out a general pathway that is close to the PickensPlan.
Although he is financially strapped, verbally speaking, he makes Pickens look like a piker. While Pickens is talking in the Billions of dollars, Helming is into the multiples of Trillions of dollars. But that is the nature of the beast that we are tied to, energy production.

In his book he makes primary mention of converting off peak wind turbine production into hydrogen. The hydrogen is collected and piped (using existing CH4 pipelines) to various locations for reconversion to whatever source is currently in the eye of the environmentalist.

But his scenario calls for much expenditure to build out the grid infrastructure and a maniacal obsession to the wind turbine. But the book is NOT the rantings of a kook, quite the contrary. It is well thought out and well fleshed out as to equipment needed, time frames, financial investments, and underlying costs not normally included in such grandious plans.

His call to arms is essentially that of Pickens, and his ideas for funding are more left wing in that he thinks the federal government should do much of it but to his credit, he realized that the issue is SQUARELY in the hands of the people. I would not be surprised to hear that he and TBP are kicking back some java at an IHOP this very minute. His ideas are very compelling and TBP's could do a lot worse listening to other "experts" in this field.

The Deuceman; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by DubleDeuce on August 23, 2008 at 8:36pm: Yes Pat, the tunnel you speak of is VERY real and widening all the time. We MUST be careful though of those who think in terms of self promotion for profit (think cold fusion years ago) As Merle Haggard says in a song Rainbow Stew

<<...When the world wide war is over and done,
And the dream of peace comes true.
We'll all be drinkin' free bubble-ubb,
Eatin' that rainbow stew.
When they find out how to burn water,
And the gasoline car is gone.
When an airplane flies without any fuel,
And the satellite heats our home.
One of these days when the air clears up,
And the sun comes shinin' through.
We'll all be drinkin' free bubble-ubb,
An' eatin' that rainbow stew...

What was ONCE a fools dream is NOW within our grasp but not ready for prime time. Be wary of those who tell you differently.

<<It just blows up so darn good!>>

You do have a way of coloring your words.

The Deuceman; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mike Johnston on August 24, 2008 at 8:15am: You can burn water in an ozone atmosphere. If the atmosphere was 70% nitrogen and 20% ozone you could burn water like gasoline.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mathew Andresen on August 21, 2008 at 12:18pm: The honda FCX is road ready and being tested. It drives just like any other car. So apparently the engeneers at Honda have figured out a way to handle the hydrogen storage.

Also see see stuff like this research at MIT
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen-0731.html
which would greatly reduce the costs of hydrogen production

or this
http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/blog2/index.php/fuel-cells/australia...

which would greatly reduce the costs of fuel cells.

I think we should support both hydrogen, and battery tech, and then see which one wins,.; ▶ Reply to This