View Single Post
Old 03-13-2016, 02:39 PM   #13 (permalink)
RustyLugNut
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
I understand perfectly what you wrote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedDevil View Post
There are two ways to look at hydrogen; as a competitor against electric cars and against conventional cars.

It may be possible to store a higher energy content of hydrogen than electricity for the same weight. But where the electricity can be used directly to power a relatively light motor, the hydrogen needs either a fuel cell in addition to that or an engine to conventionally produce motion; that seems to outweigh the system.
The end result is at best comparable. But hydrogen is nowhere near as cheap as electricity yet.

Compared to gas cars the weight, limited range, cost and complexity are prohibitive; only if the environmental argument carries more weight than that will it ever compete. The argument would need to be funded substantially. I doubt any economy could sustain its widespread use any time soon, even if it wants to.

As I explained in my previous post, the gas network can NOT be used to transport hydrogen unless it is freed of its current application and amended substantially.

Here I am discussing just cons of hydrogen, while I would rather have a more balanced story. You tip me off balance as you seem to hold an onesided story too, triggering me with statements I cannot support like the gas network.
I bet you'd rather see me write that hydrogen is the ideal power source.

Well, it is! But its application has some problems. They may well be solved one day, but they need all be recognized and dealt with. Stating that will happen is not the same as actually making it happen.

What nags me most is the competing with electric aspect.
I cannot escape the thought that traditional auto makers deliberately set up hydrogen fuel projects not because they believe it is the power source for future cars but because it challenges the main threat for the conventional car industry; pure electric cars.
By scooping up subsidies labled for green tech they dilute the funds flowing towards electric car developers. And they trouble the view over what technology is to supersede current gas cars.
Divide and conquer.

If hydrogen car development never reaches the stage where a substantial amount of cars effectively use it all the effort has gone for naught, and we might still be driving mostly gas powered cars where electric would have played a bigger part if the hydrogen distraction would not be there.

In that light hydrogen may be the clean energy solution that indirectly creates more pollution than anyone could have envisioned.
Please look up my posts on the Rasa and others. You still envision hydrogen competing against electricity. It is not. It is competing against batteries. If you do not understand that salient concept, we will speak in circles.

And I understand fully that hydrogen is expensive at the moment and will be for the foreseeable future. But, my caveat has always been the primary power source. Nuclear is the only solution for an industrial world. Multiple energy carriers will be needed to transport this energy. Batteries have their limits. Hydrogen can be transformed into other than pure gas. To be exact, it can be formed into the analogs of the very hydrocarbons we use right now. Thus, we can use nuclear energy in the everyday without a huge shift in infrastructure. Can you do that with electric batteries alone? Not a chance.
  Reply With Quote