View Single Post
Old 12-05-2009, 08:00 PM   #334 (permalink)
Nerys
Grrr :-)
 
Nerys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Levittown PA
Posts: 800

Cherokee - '88 Jeep Cherokee
90 day: 19.44 mpg (US)

Ryo-Ohki - '94 Geo Metro Xfi
90 day: 50.15 mpg (US)

Vger 2 - '00 Plymouth Grand Voyager SE

Ninja - '89 Geo Tracker
90 day: 30.27 mpg (US)
Thanks: 12
Thanked 31 Times in 25 Posts
So one pound of hydrogen. They injected at VERY LOW pressure what 10-15 seconds worth (yes mythbusters) barely a teeny tiny microscopic fraction of the whole 1 pound. what would you guess? 1 or 2 gallons of uncompressed hydrogen at most and I think even THAT is quite a bit high.

now that car ran 100% on that little bit of hydrogen gas.

Now I am treading into unfamiliar territory here but I had always been under the impression that Gas consumption is DIRECTLY proportional to RPM.

an engine at 1000 rpm will use HALF the fuel of the same engine at 2000 RPM ??

I can go 47 miles on 1 gallon of gas in 47 minutes. Gasoline is roughly 6 pounds per gallon (it varies quite a bit I just discovered) which means I use .127 pounds of fuel per minute AT 60 MPH.

what we really need to know is the RATE at which the gas was coming out of that cylinder. I would bet next weeks pay check it was VERY VERY LOW (Jamie is not stupid I don't think he is going to open the flood gates and blow his face off :-)

The numbers posted would imply that his tank COULD NOT EXPEL the hydrogen fast enough to run that car. not only did it at LOW volume but he "revved" it a few times and it ran just fine. (yes My first reaction was WOH wait what the hell YOU JUST RAN A REGULAR GASOLINE ENGINE ON HYDROGEN GAS can we go BACK to that please :-)

this tells me by "gut check" that it takes a LOT LESS hydrogen to run a can than the numbers posted a few posts ago seem to indicate. which means this BTU to BTU comparison is not applicable. Clearly since observed results fly in the face of them.

and they were using a car that probably got 15 mpg not 47.

"But even at 13 cents you can still see that its a losing proposition."

well not quite. This is only true if the numbers posted are correct. I could be totally off on this but the observed actual events (ie mythbusters car) seem to say those numbers are impossible and way way too high.

Even at full tilt how long would it take to empty that tank if they opened the valve all the way up?

one of the first flaws I noted is gasoline is a LIQUID while Hydrogen is a GAS

this means no BTU are consumes converting from liquid to gas which MUST happen for the gasoline to combust and provide power. this step is completely skipped with hydrogen since its already a gas.
  Reply With Quote