Re: [DML] Re: Alternate Fuels..

["Martin Gutkowski" <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

When discussing anything like this, it helps to consider energy conversion efficiencies. Every time you convert energy from one form to another, you do it at less than 100% efficiency. If you wanted to use mains power to get hydrogen by electrolysis then use that hydrogen to drive your can via a fuel cell, you've gone through 5 energy conversions. Whereas running a car on gasoline only goes through 1, even if it is pretty inefficient it's still a better use of resources.

Solar cells are dreadful. Obtaining hydrogen by electrolysis and then compressing it is pretty bad. Commercially available hydrogen usually comes from methane and has carbon dioxide as a by product, even if the car it then propels has only water as an emission.

Also LH2, by volume, has less than a third of the energy of gasoline. Mad, but true. A hydrocarbon fuel really is the most efficient way of storing hydrogen.

I could go on...

Martin
------Original Message------
From: Marc Levy
Sender: dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ReplyTo: dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [DML] Re: Alternate Fuels..
Sent: 1 Mar 2012 22:43

I agree, fuel cell would be better-  but it is a more drastic change to make to an existing car. (or, to design in to a new car with existing technology)  Electric would also be much more reliable, and therefore cheaper to operate in the long run.  But, at this point, I think it would be higher purchase cost (as compared to internal combustion). 

The website I included seems to indicate that some of your information is incorrect..  But, I don't know how reliable it is.  The video posted is worth watching. 

Apparently, the material needed for the high-density hydrogen storage is considered by the government to be a security threat because it is also used in weapons. 

But, at a $10K price tag I would consider it within the range of "economically viable", especially if the fuel cost is essentially zero.  

Just some rough numbers;

Average person drives 1K miles per month
MPG of a fuel efficient car (to be fair) is maybe 28 MPG
That is 35-36 gallons of Gasoline per month, at $5 a gallon that is $178.58

10K/178.50 = 56 months, or about 4 1/2 years..  Which is about how long most people keep a new car.  :)

A few years back, the DMA got to visit the GM Hydrogen Fuel labs in New York.  We got to ride/drive a hydrogen powered Saturn SUV.  In the discussions there, the obvious question of "when can I buy this" came up.  The answer was that the fuel infrastructure does not exist, but "we are working with the fuel companies to fix that".  I asked, "why not sell the vehicle with a home fueling station?".....  crickets.....

With my tin-foil hat on, I think the current energy economy is working hard to do everything in their power to stop something like this.  Hydrogen power (with either fuel cell or Internal Combustion) is a technology they know they cannot make money with.. CNG, they still control, which may be why CNG fuel cells got more attention (Why do you think T. Boone was so hot on it?)  Clearly, anyone can make hydrogen in their own garage-  Maybe even come up with an on-board hydrogen generator so you can just plug the car in to electric and water to refuel it...  If we can make our own fuel, there is no need for the energy (oil/gas) companies any more.   Maybe T. Boone knows this too, which is why he hedged his bets and bought the largest under ground aquifer in Texas!






--- On Thu, 3/1/12, jtrealtywebspannet <jtrealty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: jtrealtywebspannet <jtrealty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [DML] Re: Alternate Fuels..
> To: dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Thursday, March 1, 2012, 4:11 PM
> Unless you can store Hydrogen at very
> high pressures and/or very low temperatures you cannot store
> enough. Burning it in an IC engine is way too inefficient.
> Much better to power a fuel cell but a LOT more expensive.
> There is also the explosive/flammability problems to
> overcome. Right now even at $5 a gallon for gasoline, there
> is no viable economic alternative. If you did do a
> conversion it could take many years to recoup your
> investment. Possibly longer than the life of the car you
> convert. And that is with a much reduced range.
> David Teitelbaum



------------------------------------

To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:
moderators@xxxxxxxxxxx

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnewsYahoo! Groups Links




Sent from my BlackBerry®

------------------------------------

To address comments privately to the moderating team, please address:
moderators@xxxxxxxxxxx

For more info on the list, tech articles, cars for sale see www.dmcnews.com

To search the archives or view files, log in at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnewsYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dmcnews/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    dmcnews-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    dmcnews-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    dmcnews-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/