What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why did Obama kill funding for hydrogen cars? / Meet the next generation ..

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
104,671
Reaction score
50,636
Points
2,330
F4A54HNF5R8MQ53.MEDIUM.gif
 

BuckToothMoron

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
9,753
Reaction score
1,803
Points
290
Water is comprised of 1 atom of hydrogen and 2 atoms of oxygen. You can separate the two and have the basic elements of water which are hydrogen and oxygen. Fuel cells, electrolysis, etc.

Ok, now explain the cost in dollars and energy to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen. Oh, and while you're at it, explain the infrastructure required to distribute the hydrogen around the country after it has been separated from the oxygen.
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
104,671
Reaction score
50,636
Points
2,330
Water is comprised of 1 atom of hydrogen and 2 atoms of oxygen. You can separate the two and have the basic elements of water which are hydrogen and oxygen. Fuel cells, electrolysis, etc.

Ok, now explain the cost in dollars and energy to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen. Oh, and while you're at it, explain the infrastructure required to distribute the hydrogen around the country after it has been separated from the oxygen.
beats me, i just stated how to obtain it.
 

BuckToothMoron

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
9,753
Reaction score
1,803
Points
290

I'm no chemist- but if you require a battery cell to create electrolysis to separate the O from the H, and this H is then used as fuel, wouldn't it make more sense to just use the battery to run the car? If you assume there will be some loss of energy in any conversion, it just seems you are adding an energy wasting step by converting H2O via battery power. You can't create energy, only convert it, and there will always be energy lost thru inefficiency in any conversion, that much I do know.
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
104,671
Reaction score
50,636
Points
2,330

I'm no chemist- but if you require a battery cell to create electrolysis to separate the O from the H, and this H is then used as fuel, wouldn't it make more sense to just use the battery to run the car? If you assume there will be some loss of energy in any conversion, it just seems you are adding an energy wasting step by converting H2O via battery power. You can't create energy, only convert it, and there will always be energy lost thru inefficiency in any conversion, that much I do know.
The energy loss is negligible. The product, pure hydrogen and oxygen is the goal.
 

westwall

WHEN GUNS ARE BANNED ONLY THE RICH WILL HAVE GUNS
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
81,388
Reaction score
38,916
Points
2,290
Location
Nevada
Currently the cost to produce hydrogen fuel is greater than the energy you get out of it. It will probably remain that way for the forseable future. However, if your goal is truly zero emissions then hydrogen gets you closer to that goal than any EV on the planet. And that too will be the case for the forseable future.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
154,900
Reaction score
38,882
Points
2,180

BuckToothMoron

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2016
Messages
9,753
Reaction score
1,803
Points
290
Ok, I've done a bit of research on the whole Hydrogen energy thing, and my conclusion is that it is NOT the mass energy source of the future.

Here is what I read that clinched it for me-

Why a hydrogen economy doesn't make sense
In a recent study, fuel cell expert Ulf Bossel explains that a hydrogen economy is a wasteful economy. The large amount of energy required to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds (water, natural gas, biomass), package the light gas by compression or liquefaction, transfer the energy carrier to the user, plus the energy lost when it is converted to useful electricity with fuel cells, leaves around 25% for practical use — an unacceptable value to run an economy in a sustainable future. Only niche applications like submarines and spacecraft might use hydrogen.


“More energy is needed to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds than can ever be recovered from its use,” Bossel explains to PhysOrg.com. “Therefore, making the new chemical energy carrier form natural gas would not make sense, as it would increase the gas consumption and the emission of CO2. Instead, the dwindling fossil fuel reserves must be replaced by energy from renewable sources.”

While scientists from around the world have been piecing together the technology, Bossel has taken a broader look at how realistic the use of hydrogen for carrying energy would be. His overall energy analysis of a hydrogen economy demonstrates that high energy losses inevitably resulting from the laws of physics mean that a hydrogen economy will never make sense.



Read more at: Why a hydrogen economy doesn't make sense
 
OP
Wyatt earp

Wyatt earp

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
69,375
Reaction score
15,981
Points
2,180
Where do you want to get hydrogen to fuel these cars?
Most are here in California. There are 6 hydrogen stations in the Bay Area, one station in Sacramento, one in Truckee. In Southern California 16 stations in the Los Angeles area, one in Del Mar and one in Santa Barbara.
Not sure of other states.


You really don't read links do you? At present yes a few in California and a few in New York.


But I really want to Know why Obama killed that little bit of funnding and put it in battery technology R&D.


.
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
104,671
Reaction score
50,636
Points
2,330
Currently the cost to produce hydrogen fuel is greater than the energy you get out of it. It will probably remain that way for the forseable future. However, if your goal is truly zero emissions then hydrogen gets you closer to that goal than any EV on the planet. And that too will be the case for the forseable future.
Yep, and and just like with fossil fuels, having production facilities all over the place, the cost would be spread over the total infrastructure. Of course, I don't think it will ever happen. Hydrogen is for esoteric vehicles like space vehicles traveling in the solar system. I think, just based on workability, electric power may take precedence in the future providing tech keeps up.
 

westwall

WHEN GUNS ARE BANNED ONLY THE RICH WILL HAVE GUNS
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
81,388
Reaction score
38,916
Points
2,290
Location
Nevada
Ok, I've done a bit of research on the whole Hydrogen energy thing, and my conclusion is that it is NOT the mass energy source of the future.

Here is what I read that clinched it for me-

Why a hydrogen economy doesn't make sense
In a recent study, fuel cell expert Ulf Bossel explains that a hydrogen economy is a wasteful economy. The large amount of energy required to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds (water, natural gas, biomass), package the light gas by compression or liquefaction, transfer the energy carrier to the user, plus the energy lost when it is converted to useful electricity with fuel cells, leaves around 25% for practical use — an unacceptable value to run an economy in a sustainable future. Only niche applications like submarines and spacecraft might use hydrogen.


“More energy is needed to isolate hydrogen from natural compounds than can ever be recovered from its use,” Bossel explains to PhysOrg.com. “Therefore, making the new chemical energy carrier form natural gas would not make sense, as it would increase the gas consumption and the emission of CO2. Instead, the dwindling fossil fuel reserves must be replaced by energy from renewable sources.”

While scientists from around the world have been piecing together the technology, Bossel has taken a broader look at how realistic the use of hydrogen for carrying energy would be. His overall energy analysis of a hydrogen economy demonstrates that high energy losses inevitably resulting from the laws of physics mean that a hydrogen economy will never make sense.



Read more at: Why a hydrogen economy doesn't make sense






Which is pretty much what I said above.
 

westwall

WHEN GUNS ARE BANNED ONLY THE RICH WILL HAVE GUNS
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
81,388
Reaction score
38,916
Points
2,290
Location
Nevada
Currently the cost to produce hydrogen fuel is greater than the energy you get out of it. It will probably remain that way for the forseable future. However, if your goal is truly zero emissions then hydrogen gets you closer to that goal than any EV on the planet. And that too will be the case for the forseable future.
Yep, and and just like with fossil fuels, having production facilities all over the place, the cost would be spread over the total infrastructure. Of course, I don't think it will ever happen. Hydrogen is for esoteric vehicles like space vehicles traveling in the solar system. I think, just based on workability, electric power may take precedence in the future providing tech keeps up.







Economy of scale doesn't work in this instance. The simple reality is it is very expensive to separate H from H2O. It just is. It requires a tremendous amount of electricity to accomplish. The reverse is true of fossil fuels. They are the only energy source, save hydroelectric, that produce more energy than it takes to obtain them. That's why it is going to be so damned difficult to replace them.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
79,363
Reaction score
22,666
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
Water is comprised of 1 atom of hydrogen and 2 atoms of oxygen. You can separate the two and have the basic elements of water which are hydrogen and oxygen. Fuel cells, electrolysis, etc.

Water is comprised of 1 atom of hydrogen and 2 atoms of oxygen

Two hydrogens, one oxygen.

You can separate the two and have the basic elements of water which are hydrogen and oxygen.

But why would you do that? How is that better than charging a battery?
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
79,363
Reaction score
22,666
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago

I'm no chemist- but if you require a battery cell to create electrolysis to separate the O from the H, and this H is then used as fuel, wouldn't it make more sense to just use the battery to run the car? If you assume there will be some loss of energy in any conversion, it just seems you are adding an energy wasting step by converting H2O via battery power. You can't create energy, only convert it, and there will always be energy lost thru inefficiency in any conversion, that much I do know.
The energy loss is negligible. The product, pure hydrogen and oxygen is the goal.

The energy loss is negligible.

No it isn't. And then you have to compress, store and transport it.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
79,363
Reaction score
22,666
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
Where do you want to get hydrogen to fuel these cars?
Most are here in California. There are 6 hydrogen stations in the Bay Area, one station in Sacramento, one in Truckee. In Southern California 16 stations in the Los Angeles area, one in Del Mar and one in Santa Barbara.
Not sure of other states.


You really don't read links do you? At present yes a few in California and a few in New York.


But I really want to Know why Obama killed that little bit of funnding and put it in battery technology R&D.


.

But I really want to Know why Obama killed that little bit of funding


The "hydrogen economy" is a stupid idea. If Obama killed it, good for him.
What are you achieving with hydrogen that you can't get with gasoline or natural gas?
 

LoneLaugher

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
61,306
Reaction score
9,452
Points
2,040
Location
Inside Mac's Head
I never knew Obama killed funding for hydrogen R&D and instead of funded ancient 180 year old electric battery cars..why did he do that? Follow the money I guess another Bell vs telsa game...A/C vs D/C



Meanwhile the Japanese is taking over ..


http://www.popularmechanics.com/car...867/hydrogen-cars-toyota-murai-honda-clarity/



Meet the Next Generation of the Hydrogen Car
Driving Toyota's and Honda's next-gen fuel-cells.



A simple chemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen generates energy, which can be used to power a car, producing only water, not exhaust fumes." That was George W. Bush in 2003, proposing $1.2 billion to research fuel-cell automobiles. Six years later, President Obama killed that funding





Meanwhile, over in Japan, Toyota and Honda have been at work, spending millions in R&D to make the new hydrogen-powered Mirai and Clarity. It's more reasonable than it sounds. Fuel-cell cars are as appealing now as they were during Bush's first term. It's still the only way to get zero-emissions driving with gasoline convenience—pull up to the pump, wait five minutes, and be on your way. But with less than 40 public hydrogen pumps in the United States, the only Mirai and Clarity customers will be coastal and in big cities. At least for now. We drove the Mirai in Los Angeles and the Clarity in New York, two places promising to build more hydrogen stations in the next two years, to assess both cars' present-day drivability.

HONDA CLARITY
gallery-1498485400-toyota2.jpg

Honda
The sensible crossover-hatchback roofline, the upright driving posture, seating for five adults. It all makes you think: Your Uber is now arriving. Yes, a driver could press the Clarity's Sport mode button and have fun with the on ramps. The steering and especially the brakes feel as natural as any of Honda's excellent OPEC-powered models. But at 4,000-plus pounds and with a zero-to-60 we'd estimate near double digits, you don't get gasoline thrills.

The Clarity comes in one trim option that's loaded with tech like lane-departure warning and automatic braking. Wrapped in suede made from recycled plastic, the digital dash has a ball that shrinks and expands, coaching you toward efficient driving. As long as performance isn't a priority, all that adds up to a hell of a lot of civility for the price, which is a loss-leader low. You can't buy a Clarity—Honda says MSRP would hit near $60,000. You lease it for about $3,000 down and $369 a month. Along with the car, Honda gives you a $15,000 credit card to spend on hydrogen fill-ups. And 21 days of petroleum-car rentals for longer trips. And Californians get a $5,000 rebate. And an HOV sticker. Pick up a few weekend driving shifts and going fuel-cell is cheaper than an iPhone upgrade.—Alexander George

Base price: $369 per month (lease only)

Range: 366 miles

The rear hydrogen tanks are covered in carbon fiber and aluminum to protect against punctures.

TOYOTA MIRAI
gallery-1498485772-toyota1.jpg

Toyota Murai
Driving north out of Los Angeles, I notice the battery gauge tick down a few bars and experience the familiar twinge of range anxiety. Then, the battery display pulls a stunt I've never seen in an electric car, climbing back up to near full. The car charged itself. So cool.

What really happened is that the Mirai's fuel cells sent over some electricity to top off the nickel-metal-hydride battery that powers the 153-hp drive motor. Range concerns alleviated, I gun the little Toyota toward an off ramp, its fuel cells ramping up with a sound that's like someone mowing a lawn two blocks over. Acceleration is reminiscent of a small diesel with excellent torque, good fun once you know how to use it. But the Mirai is a modest setup. Toyota is already demonstrating the high-power possibilities with a heavy-duty truck. The twin fuel cells in that sucker make 670 horsepower and 1,325 lb-ft of torque. Imagine that in a Camry.

gallery-1498485890-toyota-top.jpg

The fuel cell is under the hood, and the 245-volt battery sits beneath the seats, for a low center of gravity.

A few dozen miles later, I look in the rearview mirror to see . . . another Mirai. Is that a glimpse into the future? Fuel cells obviously work. But the question is the same now as it was a decade ago, before the EV takeover—whether something just over the horizon might work even better.—Ezra Dyer

Base price: $57,500

Range: 312 miles





.

The Japanese are.
 

konradv

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
32,902
Reaction score
7,995
Points
1,130
Location
Baltimore
If hydrogen cars are the future, the private sector will fund the research.
Fusion power is the future, but don't expect the private sector to be able to fund it. The libertarian mantra doesn't always hold water. ITER - the way to new energy
Fusion is good for cities but how exactly are you going to build a fusion power source for your car? You truly are a broken record dude.
And you have no imagination. Fusion power would be able to generate whatever fuel is most efficient with the most logical being the hydrogen left over after tritium and deuterium are harvested for the fusion reactor.
 

konradv

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
32,902
Reaction score
7,995
Points
1,130
Location
Baltimore
Water is comprised of 1 atom of hydrogen and 2 atoms of oxygen. You can separate the two and have the basic elements of water which are hydrogen and oxygen. Fuel cells, electrolysis, etc.
Ok, now explain the cost in dollars and energy to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen. Oh, and while you're at it, explain the infrastructure required to distribute the hydrogen around the country after it has been separated from the oxygen.
The cost would be minimal given a fusion power system. The delivery is just an infrastructure problem. We get electricity, natural gas and oil around. Why not hydrogen?
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$225.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top