Replacing oil: boron or hydrogen?

[Eclipse]

Hi all,

I was amazed to learn that boron has been considered as a means of storing energy to burn in car engines. Apparently when 'charged' it is really easy to store. It also bypasses the chicken-and-egg problem of local hydrogen garages not having enough customers to sell to, while drivers might be nervous about not having enough hydrogen suppliers. Having just one boron recharger in the USA, it is claimed, would mean people could have a few 'tanks' of boron stored at home, and just mail the stuff to the recharger. It's so inert and easy to store the paper suggested people could store boron in the garage for winter, and then that would run the car and power the house if winter storms knock out the electricity.

But, in some circles, hydrogen proponents seem to be making a comeback.

What is your preferred means of weaning off oil?

[SlavicWolf]

Nuclear energy.

[swansont]

Any links to explain how boron works as an energy storage medium?

[petrushka.googol]

Possibilities :

Nanotechnology used to create more efficient solar cells that could be condensed into a "Drive" like a RAM Card on a computer motherboard and recharged periodically. Maybe thermal sensors could be integrated into the chassis of the vehicle that "trap" solar energy. You could create a "Skin" for a car that like "melanin"

could trap solar energy without the need for extra solar panels (which are clumsy). That would also stimulate the car painting companies to produce more heat sensitive emulsions for cars that would also "trap" energy. Wonder whether auto companies could implement these ideas?

Creating regenerative braking energy cells that trap the energy of braking and redirect it to the transmission. This already exists but needs to be made more efficient.

Creation of geothermal filling stations. Better means are needed to capture the earths temperature and convert the heat energy into electricity which could be used to charge rechargeable power packs that power vehicles.

These are just some ideas.

They do not involve creation of toxins and pollutants or dangerous nuclides and involve energy that comes at no extra cost.

So they are good for the developing and developed world alike.

Edited February 4, 2014 by petrushka.googol

[John Cuthber]

Nuclear energy.

+ car crash

= plainly bad idea.

 

Yes, I realise that any decently useful energy density is a potential bomb if it goes wrong, no matter what the storage medium.

But you are talking about the difference between a petrol bomb and an atom bomb.

Did you think that through?

 

My current personal preference is for either methanol, derived from nuclear power or biofuel of some sort.

Both, I realise, have problems that still need sorting out.

[swansont]

Possibilities :

 

Nanotechnology used to create more efficient solar cells that could be condensed into a "Drive" like a RAM Card on a computer motherboard and recharged periodically. Maybe thermal sensors could be integrated into the chassis of the vehicle that "trap" solar energy. You could create a "Skin" for a car that like "melanin"

could trap solar energy without the need for extra solar panels (which are clumsy). That would also stimulate the car painting companies to produce more heat sensitive emulsions for cars that would also "trap" energy. Wonder whether auto companies could implement these ideas?

 

A gallon of gas is about 33.5 kWh, with gas being about 15% efficient in an internal combustion engine. Let's generously say you can get 60 mpg on the road, so you burn 1 gallon per hour at 60 mph. For 50% efficient solar cells, you'd need about 10 kW input (10 kWh per hour). The best you can hope for — the sun directly overhead and no clouds or other extra losses, is about 1 kW/m², so you'd need 10 m² of panels under ideal conditions. So driving-as-you-go on solar is not going to work. The best you can do is augment your battery to extend your range a little bit.

 

 

Creation of geothermal filling stations. Better means are needed to capture the earths temperature and convert the heat energy into electricity which could be used to charge rechargeable power packs that power vehicles.

 

Geothermal is very limited in extent.

[Enthalpy]

Neither can I imagine how boron could vastly exceed other metals like lithium. And one should check the price of boron. I've a very bad feeling about this suggestion.

Geothermal is very limited in extent.

 

Methods that only harvest existing hot water are limited, but there are other ones. Wherever deep rocks are hot, that is everywhere with cost modulations, one can inject water and obtain hot water to produce electricity and heat homes. This is used in Southern Germany, 3000km from the next geyser.

 

The economics must be checked on individual basis, but other aspects are very favourable: available everywhere and when needed, small footprint... It's free of the drawbacks associated spontaneously with renewables.