Hydrogen vehicles discussion
#166
Lexus Test Driver
Originally Posted by Och
Keep badmouthing fossils what you want, but they are not going anywhere. We'll continue burning fossils to generate electricity for your BEV or extracting hydrogen for hydrogen vehicles, and hydrogen is simply a far more viable option than BEV.
#167
Lexus Fanatic
No offense, but did you bother to finish reading my post? Apparantly not.
In fairness, maybe I was still typing it when you read the first part.
#169
Lexus Fanatic
#170
Lexus Fanatic
No you did not. You used far more energy than you would ever get out of the hydrogen you extracted. Try to comprehend this. Hydrogen is NOT energy it is energy storage. This is because the most abundant element is not readily available naturally on planet Earth. In our atmosphere hydrogen accounts for 1 part per million.
No, you misunderstood my post. I actually agree with you on that. School-lab electrolysis of water is obviously not efficient enough for mass-market use. That's why I said that more efficient methods are needed.....but we aren't going to find them if we don't start doing research.
BTW, just for the record, hydrogen fuel-cells themselves were a NASA-derived technology, first used back in the late 1960s, on our Apollo shots to the moon and back....so that shows you how much potential there is if we put our minds to it.
#171
Lexus Test Driver
Originally Posted by Och
Sounds just like producing electricity then.
#173
Lexus Fanatic
#174
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
How can you possibly put that aside? The only reason to move away from diesel fuel is the fact it happens to be horribly polluting. Otherwise it does the job has high energy density and is convenient and fast to refuel. Why would you want to move to another fossil fuel in hydrogen, which it currently is.
so the reason i said put it aside is if it's a non-issue like in the examples above, then do you not believe it's a good fuel for trucks and buses (maybe even trains) where they can do point to point long haul and have a less ubiquitous refueling infrastructure than persona vehicles requires?
#175
Lexus Fanatic
I was saying put it aside because there are non-polluting ways to get hydrogen as you know, by using excess 'renewable' energy for electrolysis. A hydro-electric dam even could produce hydrogen with excess energy being produced, and as you point out, use hydrogen as an energy storage system.
so the reason i said put it aside is if it's a non-issue like in the examples above, then do you not believe it's a good fuel for trucks and buses (maybe even trains) where they can do point to point long haul and have a less ubiquitous refueling infrastructure than persona vehicles requires?
And you keep fixating on passenger cars which isn't the only use here... again, what about trucks, buses, trains, plains, etc?
Prius has an EPA rating of 56 Mirai 66. Is it really worth it to build out an entirely new refining, transport and fueling infrastructure for that gain? Building it will take 100's of billions of dollars, you gonna pay for that?
#176
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Specifically:
Why Is This Pathway Being Considered?
Reforming low-cost natural gas can provide hydrogen today for fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) as well as other applications. Over the long term, DOE expects that hydrogen production from natural gas will be augmented with production from renewable, nuclear, coal (with carbon capture and storage), and other low-carbon, domestic energy resources.
Petroleum use and emissions are lower than for gasoline-powered internal combustion engine vehicles. The only product from an FCEV tailpipe is water vapor but even with the upstream process of producing hydrogen from natural gas as well as delivering and storing it for use in FCEVs, the total greenhouse gas emissions are cut in half and petroleum is reduced over 90% compared to today's gasoline vehicles.
Reforming low-cost natural gas can provide hydrogen today for fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) as well as other applications. Over the long term, DOE expects that hydrogen production from natural gas will be augmented with production from renewable, nuclear, coal (with carbon capture and storage), and other low-carbon, domestic energy resources.
Petroleum use and emissions are lower than for gasoline-powered internal combustion engine vehicles. The only product from an FCEV tailpipe is water vapor but even with the upstream process of producing hydrogen from natural gas as well as delivering and storing it for use in FCEVs, the total greenhouse gas emissions are cut in half and petroleum is reduced over 90% compared to today's gasoline vehicles.
Prius has an EPA rating of 56 Mirai 66. Is it really worth it to build out an entirely new refining, transport and fueling infrastructure for that gain? Building it will take 100's of billions of dollars, you gonna pay for that?
#177
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
also, there's promising ways to capture CO2 from nat gas to hydrogen production like this:
Carbon dioxide sequestration through silicate degradation and carbon mineralisation: promises and uncertainties | npj Materials Degradation (nature.com)
Carbon dioxide sequestration through silicate degradation and carbon mineralisation: promises and uncertainties | npj Materials Degradation (nature.com)
#178
Lexus Fanatic
Natural gas itself is a very clean-burning substance, especially by fossil-fuel standards.....and a network of refill-stations could probably be done, without much trouble, by the gas-utility companies...the same companies that pipe in gas for household appliances and furnace/AC systems. if nothing else, it would increase their business and profits....although, in some cases, as utilities, they are regulated by the State Corporation Commissions.
I'm not sure if it would be the best thing for me, though. I live in an all-electric home, am not used to being around gas, and the few times I am, I tend to be nervous and subconsciously worried about an explosion.
Last edited by mmarshall; 08-14-21 at 02:40 PM.
#179
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
Natural gas itself is a very clean-burning substance, especially by fossil-fuel standards.....and a network of refill-stations could probably be done, without much trouble, by the gas-utility companies...the same companies that pipe in gas for household appliances and furnace/AC systems. if nothing else, it would increase their business and profits....although, in some cases, as utilities, they are regulated by the State Corporation Commissions.
I'm not sure if it would be the best thing for me, though. I live in an all-electric home, am not used to being around gas, and the few times I am, I tend to be nervous and subconsciously worried about an explosion.
I'm not sure if it would be the best thing for me, though. I live in an all-electric home, am not used to being around gas, and the few times I am, I tend to be nervous and subconsciously worried about an explosion.
Natural gas can be used to create hydrogen, but the by product is CO2 which is widely considered as bad for the atmosphere/climate. But if the CO2 can be captured, then using the absolutely VAST known reserves of natural gas many places have to create hydrogen would be compelling.
#180
Lexus Fanatic
I was not implying filling up with CNG at home, but at the nearest gas-company location, as some of their own vehicles do. Aside from me, Jill, Och, and maybe one or two others, there seems to be so much hostility in this thread to hydrogen use for vehicles that perhaps we should also consider some closely-related alternatives such as this.