AtomicMX Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 This new invention of the Hidrogen Car seems to be not so good idea. I once tried to do this but i get to realize that the process to get the hidrogen fuel, makes more pollution that the gas or diesel theirselfs, so, whats your opinion?
ydoaPs Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 hmm, try electric generators. electolysis, it's slow, but gets the job done. http://www.unitednuclear.com/h2.htm
AtomicMX Posted June 22, 2005 Author Posted June 22, 2005 do you know how electricity is mostly produced???
AtomicMX Posted June 22, 2005 Author Posted June 22, 2005 yes, i actually got the hidrogen in that way, but you use pretty much electricity to make the electrolisys.... and well at least in mexico, the electricity production is made by thermoelectrics that use diesel and other Pet. Derv. and well the pollution is quite high.
YT2095 Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 it`s only a silly idea if you burn hydrocarbon fuels to make the hydrogen, the alternatives are ok though, solar, wind, hydro-electric, maybe even Nuclear at a push
ydoaPs Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 if pressed, you could rig up a bike with some magnets and some wire:)
insane_alien Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 umm what do you mean new invention of the hydrogen car? they have been around for quite some time in one form or another.
AtomicMX Posted June 22, 2005 Author Posted June 22, 2005 i meant, mass production. and YT yes but, mmm in that case the energy generated would be more usefull in an electric car, that producing hidrogen. i just think is not so mmmm ... there are better ways, something like that.
Mokele Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Actually, if hydrogen cars use air rather than canned O2, they might not be the best option after all. One of the annoying tradeoffs in hydrocarbon-burning engines is that if you work at a low temperature, you have high carbon monoxide but low NOx (which eventually becomes nitric acid in the atmosphere, then acid rain), and if you increase the temperatures enough to reduce CO, you get more NOx. I'm wondering if hydrogen engines can run feasibly at temperatures low enough to make the NOx emissions tolerable. Mokele
AtomicMX Posted June 22, 2005 Author Posted June 22, 2005 hmmm yes, solar power, but seem to be more usefull directly in electric car than producing hidrogen. i want you (*) to see that.
flyboy Posted June 23, 2005 Posted June 23, 2005 lets think about how flamable and explosive hydrogen is... if the tank gets a spark then the car goes up in flames
AtomicMX Posted June 23, 2005 Author Posted June 23, 2005 well, kinda hehehe, but thats not tooo important, hidrogen combustion danger, was famous in zepelins, but, well, quite a different structure.
akcapr Posted June 23, 2005 Posted June 23, 2005 im sure the hydrogen tanks will be very strong when the make them. And even if a tank ruptures, hydrogen is so light it may be able to just rise up and fly off. And if it did light it would be more like a flash of fire, not as dangerous as gasoline cuz gasoline is liquid and stays there and burns long. just as thot
YT2095 Posted June 23, 2005 Posted June 23, 2005 i meant' date=' mass production. and YT yes but, mmm in that case the energy generated would be more usefull in an electric car, that producing hidrogen. i just think is not so mmmm ... there are better ways, something like that.[/quote'] well there`s 2 ways of looking at it, if by electric cars you mean the sort that use batteries as their power source then yes, but fuel cell electric cars that use Hydrogen are different, so renewable sources would be better. of cource, the other alternative would be to "Crack" the derv into the raw hydrogen and use that directly too as for the tanks, they are indeed VERY strong! there`s also work being done with metal Hydrides, making it safer AND having the ability to hold more hydrogen per cm^3 than is possible in an ordinary tank
ydoaPs Posted June 24, 2005 Posted June 24, 2005 like yt said, it's not like they put hydrogen in bottles or a gass tank. hydrides are used, well at least for UnitedNuclear.
AtomicMX Posted June 24, 2005 Author Posted June 24, 2005 the thing is that the hit point of (marketing) of this cars, is that they do not pollute, but they do not take the background of the actual production of Hidrogen that pollutes a lot. that would be may main complain.
YT2095 Posted June 24, 2005 Posted June 24, 2005 I agree 100%, it`s ok saying that "my car is clean, the exhaust is pure water" but what was used to charge the batteries would be the reply, and How was that electricity produced? indeed we may go further and ask what process(s) were involved in the battery manufacture and HOW are they to be disposed of? renewable energy sources would be much better IMO, and the fuel cell seems to look quite promising
YT2095 Posted June 24, 2005 Posted June 24, 2005 there`s also Hybrid Petrol/battery cars out there now too, you can switch over from battery if they run out and go petrol (not a bad idea really) and I think they use braking energy to transfer power to a gen that re-charges the batts a little to. and IIRC sometime about now(ish) there`s a deisel addative that increase engine performance by 5%, I think it was cerium oxide (it`s been a while), non the less it doesn`t sound a great increase but every little helps where there`s no financial choice
ydoaPs Posted June 24, 2005 Posted June 24, 2005 http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=12359
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now