Hydrogen Cell / Hydrogen Generation

[trikkonceptz]

I am hoping that someone here can shed some light on my concerns and perhaps set my logic straight on this matter.

Long ago, I learned that the Earth has a fixed amount of water in various states; Liquid, gas & solid. With that said, the Earth cannot run out of water, simply continue to change its state.

Now It is also my understanding that Hydrogen fuel cells have water as a by product. Is this because of a complex HHO conversion or are we literally producing water? If we are producing water and this technology flourishes, then I see a problem. Supplying extra water to the Earth. Which could lead to global warming, elevated sea levels and increased humidity.

Ami I completely wrong in thinking this way, or what?

[silverknight]

I think you answered your own question. Water just changes state.

An HHO setup takes distilled water and converts it to H2 and O. The engine burns these gasses with the result being water. The water then exits your cars tail pipe. There is no creation of more water because you started with the same water.

[trikkonceptz]

That is correct for HHO, however what are Hydrogen Cell vehicles? I saw in a commercial that a hydrogen cell car produces water as its by-product, what do you know of those?

[Daox]

A hydrogen fuel cell combines hydrogen and oxygen to make electricity (to drive an electric motor). Its byproduct is also water.

[cfg83]

trikkonceptz -

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz

I am hoping that someone here can shed some light on my concerns and perhaps set my logic straight on this matter.

Long ago, I learned that the Earth has a fixed amount of water in various states; Liquid, gas & solid. With that said, the Earth cannot run out of water, simply continue to change its state.

Now It is also my understanding that Hydrogen fuel cells have water as a by product. Is this because of a complex HHO conversion or are we literally producing water? If we are producing water and this technology flourishes, then I see a problem. Supplying extra water to the Earth. Which could lead to global warming, elevated sea levels and increased humidity.

Ami I completely wrong in thinking this way, or what?

I wouldn't worry about the water in terms of Global Warming because it's not a "greenhouse gas".

The local "microclimate", however is another matter. I do have this running "what if" joke. What if all the cars in Los Angeles were suddenly fuel cell vehicles? My guess is that the humidity would shoot up and maybe we'd have lot's of "June Gloom" foggy dayzzzz, ala San Francisco.

Mayyyyyybeeeeee all the rain in BladeRunner is just a byproduct of fuel cells!!!!!! :



See all that white smoke!?!?!?!? I say that's steam!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CarloSW2

[trikkonceptz]

Originally Posted by Daox

A hydrogen fuel cell combines hydrogen and oxygen to make electricity (to drive an electric motor). Its byproduct is also water.

So you see what I'm getting to, if these are gases combined separately from independant sources and not derived from water then we are producing water, which will offset the balance in nature. Now 1-100 cars not much impact, but lets say all cars over a hundred years, plus any machinery that is converted and this does become the next big problem, because we cannot simply dispose of water ... It is not a green house gas, but it can turn our planet into a tropical rainforest ... LOL

[silverknight]

I see what you are asking. I remember reading that much of the commercial hydrogen is derived from methane/natural gas. This does not seem to be different then any other hydro-carbon so when used in a fuel cell it still combines with oxygen producing water. Oxygen is pulled from the air just like an ICE would burn hydrogen so the equation is the same as petrol but cleaner.

I doesn't seem like too big of a concern though. It seems nature has built in negative feedback loops like if CO2 or water vapor levels get too high then plant life will flourish to take more of it out of the air.

[trikkonceptz]

Originally Posted by silverknight

I doesn't seem like too big of a concern though. It seems nature has built in negative feedback loops like if CO2 or water vapor levels get too high then plant life will flourish to take more of it out of the air.

That would be true of CO2, but nature has no answer for added water, simply elevating sea level. And yes, that would take millenia I'm sure, plus the fact that before it became a problem we would develop some other energy source to destroy our planet.

[silverknight]

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz

That would be true of CO2, but nature has no answer for added water, simply elevating sea level. And yes, that would take millenia I'm sure, plus the fact that before it became a problem we would develop some other energy source to destroy our planet.

Maybe we can take the extra water and send it down into the oil fields as steam to extract more oil. Looks like they are doing that already

[Unheard]

Originally Posted by cfg83

trikkonceptz -
I wouldn't worry about the water in terms of Global Warming because it's not a "greenhouse gas".

You got it So So wrong with that statement

Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas!

In a very rough approximation the following trace gases contribute to the greenhouse effect:
60% water vapor
20% carbon dioxide (CO2)
The rest (~20%) is caused by ozone (O3), nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), and several other species.

water vapor form hydrogen fuel cells is more detrimental to the world than burning (petrol) gas the upside is that you can build condensers to trap the water into the exhaust

I cant really answer the first question because i dont know. I know HHO is not a problem , you take water split it burn it then it recombines to form water again. i will have to get on google.

[trikkonceptz]

It's an interesting question, and sorta campaigns for electriv vehicles;

The silent drive by killers ... LOL

WHat I still do not understand is this; Every other industry has seen developmental booms, from the microchip to the automobile, yet we still drag our feet with batteries. What are we not suppose to know about batteries that makes their advancement so slow, other than the cleanest method of propulsion out there?

[cfg83]

Unheard -

Originally Posted by Unheard

You got it So So wrong with that statement

...

Whoops, you're absolutely right :

Greenhouse gas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The most important greenhouse gases are:

* water vapor, which causes about 36–70% of the greenhouse effect on Earth. (Note clouds typically affect climate differently from other forms of atmospheric water.)
* carbon dioxide, which causes 9–26%
* methane, which causes 4–9%
* ozone, which causes 3–7%

Note that this is a combination of the strength of the greenhouse effect of the gas and its abundance. For example, methane is a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2—about 25 times more heat absorptive, but is present in much smaller concentrations.

Question: If you got the hydrogen from water in the ocean, then could you call that "closed loop"?

Question: What is the current world-wide automobile/CO2 production versus a "100% replacement" with fuel cell cars?

CarloSW2

[trikkonceptz]

Originally Posted by cfg83

Question: If you got the hydrogen from water in the ocean, then could you call that "closed loop"?
CarloSW2

If you derive Hydrogen from water of any kind, even polluted water, then all is well. The balance is not upset. However my theory claims that if we CREATE water from combining hydrogen and Oxygen separately, then we begin to throw off the natural balance...

I'm sure Arnold didn't think of this when he tried backing hydrogen cell vehicles in California.

[silverknight]

Originally Posted by trikkonceptz

If you derive Hydrogen from water of any kind, even polluted water, then all is well. The balance is not upset. However my theory claims that if we CREATE water from combining hydrogen and Oxygen separately, then we begin to throw off the natural balance...

I'm sure Arnold didn't think of this when he tried backing hydrogen cell vehicles in California.

I think we are pretty safe because of the hydrogen side. Hydrogen is not really found naturally. It is an energy carrier and has to be generated by another process like electrolysis or steam methane reforming.

[trikkonceptz]

Originally Posted by silverknight

I think we are pretty safe because of the hydrogen side. Hydrogen is not really found naturally. It is an energy carrier and has to be generated by another process like electrolysis or steam methane reforming.

That's why I say we are not safe ... because it is not derived from water of any kind, but from methane or other sources, thus adding water to the system.

[silverknight]

Depends on the methane. Are you using methane from cows? They make it from water and feed. Are you using methane from natural gas? You are in the same boat as oil.

We just need to make electrolysis more efficient and make generating electricity more efficient. Nuclear is by far the cheapest and cleanest way to make the most electricity. Maybe Mexico or Canada will let us build one or two on their land.

[trikkonceptz]

Don't get me started on nuclear power, I thought it would be possible to compress a reactor to the size of a Rubic's Cube in order to power a vehicle that you could pass the power supply down from generation to generation ..

Ahhh to dream

Oh and how to protect it .. simple, make it out of the black box material on planes ... LOL

[silverknight]

Id buy a micro-nuke

[Unheard]

I still have not found an answer to the original question but i have been thinking about this.

Even though water is a bigger green house gas its not as clear cut as that when it comes to global 'warming'. Some of you may be aware of something called global dimming. The effect was first really noticed in the US after 911 when all the flights were grounded.

There is a good documentary on it i watched a few years ago, i recommend
anyone thats interested in global warming watch it




If you go by some of that theory more water vapor that enters the air could produce more clouds to reflect light back into space it could just even things out if other pollutants are reduced its really impossible to hypothesize. It shows that its not as clear cut one might think.

[MPaulHolmes]

Nice video. Very interesting! I had never heard of global dimming.