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 Colt Lewis on September 30, 2008 at 8:40am: This is a moot point. The technology for hydrogen fuel cells is here. They are expensive to make. Production costs will go down as time goes to infinity. People are working on thin films so that the amount of material needed for the cell will be reduced.

The problem with hydrogen is where is comes from. The problem with hydrogen is how it is separated from CO. The problem with hydrogen is that it must be compressed. Whether or not Buick made one should make very little difference in tackling these issues.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kenneth Koch on September 30, 2008 at 8:57am: "The problem with hydrogen is that it must be compressed."

This has problem has been solved with carbon fiber fuel tanks.

Permalink Reply by Colt Lewis on September 30, 2008 at 10:39am: Carbon Fiber Fuel Tank's don't compress hydrogen. They only store it, but they also can leak, which causes a big boom.

We need to eliminate the boom, and that is only possible with on board hydrogen production.

But my point is that the fuel cell is not the important part, it is how to properly use the fuel cell that is important.

Where does the hydrogen come from that you put in your vehicle, if you can't answer this question then why are you even talking about hydrogen?

Permalink Reply by Mike Johnston on September 26, 2008 at 2:29pm: I searched the archives of USA Today for the period Jan 1 1999 to Dec 31 1999. There are 7 story's provided using the search terms "hydrogen, Buick". None of them are remotely close to the one you cite.

I next tried "hydrogen, fuel cell". That search returned 3 story's and again none matched yours. Daimler Chrysler and Ford are mentioned using Ballard cells but not even a whisper about GM.

I tried searching "hydrogen car". That turned up one story from the sports section.

Here is a link from the General Motors site which lists their involvement and accomplishments with fuel cell cars (beginning in 1968).

http://www.gm.com/experience/technology/fuel_cells/fc_milestones.jsp

I hope that was helpful :-); ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Thomas Dixon on October 2, 2008 at 2:15pm: Why use hydrogen to power fuels cells when it takes more energy to electrolyze the water than you can get from the hydrogen-?

Answer, if we use the free heat of molten rock to power the generator to produce the hydrogen then the cost of production is zero. Now you have a mobile source of energy not tethered to an electric cable system. Giving you portability which is something we have become very accustom to.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Colt Lewis on October 2, 2008 at 5:10pm: Hydrogen is produced in several different ways. If hydrogen can be produced in the vehicle efficiently, then we have a plan that is safe and efficient. I am working on that as we speak.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Thomas Dixon on October 4, 2008 at 1:45am: Norway and Iceland are tapping the most crud forms of geothermal energy. This is just the tip of the iceberg. We need to go to where the real hot stuff is and in much larger quantities.

So having said that how can we tap this HUGE energy source? The prevailing big push is towards a “hydrogen economy” using fuel cells to run everything. But this too has a draw back, where do we get the hydrogen?

The biggest problem with hydrogen is the energy needed to produce it or free it from the natural hydrogen bonds that exist in nature. After all hydrogen is not a free element. No matter where you go hydrogen will be attached to something else and it requires energy go break this bond. On way to brake this bond is through electrolysis. But it requires more electric energy to electrolyze the water than you get from the free hydrogen so what’s the point? On the surface that would seem logical that using electricity to electrolyze water to get an amount of hydrogen that will produce less energy than the electric energy needed to get the free hydrogen is an exercise in futility. And I could not agree more. That is until I looked at a free and limitless supply of energy.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,

Exploring the Mid-Atlantic Ridge for geothermal energy could be the next great frontier.

Mid-Atlantic Ridge , submerged volcanic mountain range that bisects the Atlantic Ocean along its north-south axis. The range covers the middle third of the ocean basin , running for 15,000 km (9,300 mi) through the North and South Atlantic, It is part of the submerged volcanic mountain range that encircles the earth , measuring some 65,000 km (40,000 mi) long.

http://ve.ou.edu/weaver/mor/mor.htm

We could tap this heat energy to produce electricity to electrolyze water to produce hydrogen. Even of the process had an efficiency rating of 20%, 20% of an infinite energy supply is still infinite.

At the bottom of the ocean near these volcanic events the seawater temperature is at or above boiling and just feet above this the seawater is near freezing. This creates a huge temperature differential, which could be tapped to produce all the electric power we would ever need.

Here are a few examples of Thermo-Electric Generators developed in the 1800’s. Today we have Thermo-Electric Generators that are far more efficient.

Thermo-Electric Generators http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/POWER/thermoelectric/thermoel...

I like the idea of conservation and the use of other forms of energy wherever we can find it, they all will help in the short term but in the long term we need to be thinking in BIG terms.

We need to be far more ingenious in how we tap the real geothermal energy that is out there. We need to go down to where the molten lava is.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Thomas Dixon on October 4, 2008 at 1:58am: Is an infinite source of energy to big a thing to ask for----?

If infinity is where we want to be in the end then why not reach for it now. The prevailing big push is towards a “hydrogen economy” using fuel cells to run everything. But this too has a draw back, where do we get the hydrogen?

The biggest problem with hydrogen is the energy needed to produce it or free it from the natural hydrogen bonds that exist in nature. After all hydrogen is not a free element. No matter where you go hydrogen will be attached to something else and it requires energy go break this bond. On way to brake this bond is through electrolysis. But it requires more electric energy to electrolyze the water than you get from the free hydrogen so what’s the point? On the surface that would seem ill-logical. That is until I looked at a free and limitless supply of energy.,.,.,,.,.,.,.,

Exploring the Mid-Atlantic Ridge for geothermal energy could be the next great frontier.

Mid-Atlantic Ridge , submerged volcanic mountain range that bisects the Atlantic Ocean along its north-south axis. The range covers the middle third of the ocean basin , running for 15,000 km (9,300 mi) through the North and South Atlantic, It is part of the submerged volcanic mountain range that encircles the earth , measuring some 65,000 km (40,000 mi) long.

http://xrl.us/j3wc
http://ve.ou.edu/weaver/mor/mor.htm

We could tap this heat energy to produce electricity to electrolyze water to produce hydrogen. Even of the process had an efficiency rating of 20%, 20% of an infinite energy supply is still infinite.

At the bottom of the ocean near these volcanic events the seawater temperature is at or above boiling and just feet above this the seawater is near freezing. This creates a huge temperature differential, which could be tapped to produce all the electric power we would ever need.

Here are a few examples of Thermo-Electric Generators developed in the 1800’s. Today we have Thermo-Electric Generators that are far more efficient.

Thermo-Electric Generators http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/POWER/thermoelectric/thermoel...

I like the idea of conservation and the use of other forms of energy wherever we can find it, they all will help in the short term but in the long term we need to be thinking in BIG terms.

Wind and solar will play a big role but the real heavy lifter will be geothermal !!!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Thomas Dixon on October 4, 2008 at 2:17am: Thermo-Electric Generators

http://tinyurl.com/4msv8s; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Thomas Dixon on November 10, 2008 at 10:10am: Everyone here is comparing the energy output of hydrogen compared to gasoline or natural gas but really what is the point-? Oil and natural gas are finite and when these resources run out then what is there to compare too-?; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kenneth Koch on November 10, 2008 at 11:46am: Methane, diesel, gasoline can all be "manufactured"; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ed Thompson on November 13, 2008 at 4:56pm: Kenneth,

Good Points. One problem with Hydrogen Fuel Cells is that currently hydrogen on a large scale is produced from natural gas. That is OK by me, but doesn't get around the carbon issue.

One possibility is to have power plants that don't have a predictable power output capability, (wind and solar) to use excess electricity to produce hydrogen by splitting water, and then use hydrogen fuel cells to make power when the wind or solar plant can't. That would round out the power production.; ▶ Reply to This