Hydrogen Engine

[Frank Lee]

[Ryland]

Thanks IAmIan, we were having a perfectly nice conversation about hydrogen and you had to bring science and reality in to the mix, now the only rebuttal to be had is something about how it will work anyway.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by tf4624

This isn't some Race on getting techy.. I will do it later .. but its a very long rant and rave.. to explain it

Correct. It's about physics, and not about ranting and raving. So please save it.

[tf4624]

Originally Posted by IamIan

Thought I would throw out a few things for fun...

Water can be used as a fuel source.

#1> Fusion of the Hydrogen in each water molecule... already posted... no new idea here ... but sustained fusion reaction with a net surplus of energy is something that no one has been able to do yet ... even if they did ... it converts the Hydrogen into Helium in the process ... thus you have that much less Hydrogen on the planet ... and that much less potential water... and that much less tiny bit of mass.

#2> Water turning a water wheel as it flowed down hill via gravity ... this would be laughably tiny amounts of energy storage wh/kg... and storage is the right word to use ... as it if just storing the energy you spent lifting the water in the first place.

#3> Chemical reactions with water ... to be more accurate it is the higher energy state of the other reacting material that is potentially providing energy ... for instance if you put pure sodium into water it gives off hydrogen gas and heat ... the energy for that heat and to separate the hydrogen came from the chemical potential energy of the pure sodium... which is still laughably small amount of energy density... wh/kg... and it still takes more energy to produce the pure sodium than you get back out as heat and chemically stored as hydrogen.

- - - - - - - -

Water / Hydrogen can be used to improve the efficiency of an ICE.

#1> The so called 6 stroke engine ... where water is used to extract some useful energy from the waste heat normally pumped out of the engine via radiator and or exhaust ... application of the concept has proven to have technical difficulties for many years ... not a new idea... if they ever iron out all the issues ... great ... but don't hold your breath.

#2> The Hydrogen has a very fast flame speed ... and it can be used in an engine in order to support more efficient lean burn operations ... we don't see this used because there are better more efficient ways of supporting lean burn ... including things like Honda did in the Gen-I Insight including swirl effects, special spark plugs , etc... the net result is that Honda was able to support lean burn more efficiently without water or hydrogen than it could have with it.... and it didn't require them to have the customer remember to fill up tanks of water or hydrogen to let the lean burn function work.

#3> Hydrogen as a fuel source can operate the ICE itself more efficiently than gasoline can ... however you would first have to get the hydrogen in the first place ... this is just a Hydrogen powered ICE ... given the energy cost to produce the hydrogen and the low efficiencies of ICEs ... it is a efficiency dead end ... you would be further ahead to use the same produced hydrogen in a fuel cell car ... and you would be further ahead of that to use the energy you used to produce the hydrogen to just charge up a BEV.

- - - - - - -

Produce more energy than you put in.

Under some conditions electrolysis is endothermic ... so some of the energy chemically stored in the resulting hydrogen came from ambient heat in the environment... your electrolyzer did not have to 'pay' for all of it ... the problem with this is that the amounts are too tiny ... and the efficiency levels needed to make it work ... just don't exist ... and might never exist... even if you could ( and you can't ) reach 100% efficiency in every step, including room temperature super conductive wires ... etc... the maximum potential is 14 wh per mole of water ... but remember this is not energy stored in the water ... it is converting ambient thermal energy into a different form... even at 100% efficient energy conversions 14 wh per mole with each mole being ~18g is a maximum ( magic ) potential of ~777 Wh / kg ... and gasoline contains ~13,000 wh / kg ... it would still be a tiny ~6% of the potential from the same volume of gasoline.

It works out so that the entire process must be a net of over ~82.3% efficient in order to effectively be extracting energy from the ambient heat of the room ...

The most efficient ICE I know of is just over 50% peak efficiency ... no where near enough to make the above work ... even the Honda FCX Clarity with a state of the art Fuel cells stack only converts ~60% of the energy content of the hydrogen into electricity ... which is still not good enough.

For example ... say we had some magical electrolyzer that operated at ~95% efficiency ( it's magic ) ... and we had some magical fuel cell operating at ~95% efficiency ( it's magic ) ... providing electricity to a ~95% efficient motor controller ... for a ~95% efficient Electric Motor ... and ~99% efficient Transmission... the result would be a net operating efficiency of ~80.6% ... still not good enough ... even with 'magic' components that are way better than what we have today.

- - - - - - -

Now if we took a step away from and just forget about water or hydrogen for that mater ... the idea of operating a heat pump is more plausible ... you can move more thermal energy from point A to point B than you used to move it... this is why heat pumps can be very efficient... but is also a potential way to extract some of the ambient thermal energy.

A COP of 1.0 means for every 1.0 unit of energy put in the heat pump moves 1.0 unit of heat energy from point A to point B.

COP * 3.413 = EER

a EER of 20 = COP of ~5.8 ... or for every 1 unit of energy used by the EER 20 Heat Pump ~5.8 units of heat energy are moved from point A to point B.

with two such heat pumps one cooling a surface and the other heating it... you can create a temperature difference ... this temperature difference could then be used to power a heat engine like a Sterling ... or a thermo electric solid state module.

In order to net ambient energy extraction the heat engine or thermo-electric device at the center of the temperature difference must operate at an efficiency above inverse of the COP ... so using a ~5.8 COP heat pump would require using more than a ~17.24% efficient heat engine or thermo-electric device ... which is still no small / or easy thing ... but is at least I think more plausible.

Might be best to exploit natural temperature difference as well such as those bellow ground being at a different temperature than above ground for most of the year ... in the winter it is warmer , in the summer it is cooler... the largest temperature difference for the least energy input , makes it work best.

Of course ... sense the source of most ambient heat is sun light ... it would be much simpler and far more efficient to just convert the sun light into electrical energy , and forget about heat extracting energy second hand from ambient heat.

NICE copy Past.. on this one.. Maybe you need to clear your mind on this subject and no hijack the post with other things.. as thi is about hydrogen NOT direct heat energy. And the honda FX is built for less efficiencey.. a car running on pure hydrogen and Oxygen can make over 3000 mpg by the way. So the efficiency of the engine isnt the issue its all the bull crap additives like lead in gas and the fact you squirt liquid into the engine instead of vapor is the issu with cars today.. The oil companies and car companies work together to NOT make it possible.. as its been possible to get 200MPG out of a car from gas since the first car came out. dont blind your self from ones own ignorance

One last thing.. this topic isnt suppose to be a debate about Hydrogen..

[Frank Lee]

Yes- it's about hydrogen engines.

Whatta bout em?

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by tf4624

This isn't some Race on getting techy.. I will do it later .. but its a very long rant and rave.. to explain it

Why not race to 'techy' ? ... I love 'techy' ... I am however a techy person ... so I continue to encourage you ... if you have the 'techy' ... bring it ... the techy is quantifiable ... it can 100% support your claims ... or crush you.

So if you have the 'techy' ... I still say ... bring it ... if you don't got it ...

Originally Posted by tf4624

NICE copy Past.. on this one.. Maybe you need to clear your mind on this subject and no hijack the post with other things..

Go back and read more carefully... you seem to have misunderstood or mis-translated what I posted... it is no hi-jack.

bold added bellow for emphasis.

Originally Posted by tf4624

as thi is about hydrogen NOT direct heat energy.

One last thing.. this topic isnt suppose to be a debate about Hydrogen..

Which is it?

Originally Posted by tf4624

And the honda FX is built for less efficiencey..

If you know of a fuel cell or any ICE that operates at better than the ~60% efficiency of that fuel cell ... please provide a link / reference.

If you have an example of a real world ICE or Fuel cell that has been proven to operate at over ~60 % efficiency ... please by all means post a link or reference ... if you have nothing better than ~60% efficiency ... than that is the best you got.

Originally Posted by tf4624

a car running on pure hydrogen and Oxygen can make over 3000 mpg by the way.

I guess it depends on what you want to call a car ... The PAC-Car-II runs on Hydrogen and got the gasoline energy equivalent of over 12,000 MPG... but look at what kind of car it takes to get that.

Originally Posted by tf4624

So the efficiency of the engine isnt the issue

you will use W amount of energy to overcome Aerodynamic losses ... and X amount of energy to overcome rolling resistance losses ... and Y amount of energy to go up hills ... and Z amount of energy to accelerate.

For a given vehicle these energy consumptions can be quantified... W+X+Y+Z

Once these opposing forces are quantified ... and the fuel source has been quantified ... the efficiency of the engine puts real world limits on the MPG.

A Hydrogen ICE hasn't changed anything else about the vehicle ... only the fuel the engine runs on ... sense we know a gallon ( measure of volume ) of hydrogen has less energy content that the 13kwh/gallon that gasoline has ... the only way for it to overcome this lower energy content is with a higher energy efficiency of energy usage.

Originally Posted by tf4624

as its been possible to get 200MPG out of a car from gas since the first car came out.

As I posted above about the Pac-Car-II it is possible to get over 12,000 MPG ... but it isn't as easy as some people have been told... and those who do understand how things work.. know what it takes to get over 12,000 MPG.

By all means bring the techy ... if you got it ... because ... I'm thinking you don't.

Originally Posted by tf4624

dont blind your self from ones own ignorance

Ignorance means being uninformed ... until you bring the 'techy' ... none of us can be informed about your 'techy' ... so I still say ... if you have the 'techy' ... I encourage you ... bring it.

Until you bring your 'techy' ... no one can ever know what your 'techy' is.

So it you got 'techy' ... bring it.


So far you are presenting a case with no 'techy' at all ... if you got 'techy' ... bring it.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by Ryland

Thanks IAmIan, we were having a perfectly nice conversation about hydrogen and you had to bring science and reality in to the mix, now the only rebuttal to be had is something about how it will work anyway.

Just not work the way some people think ... or would like it to.

[tf4624]

Which is it?
If you know of a fuel cell or any ICE that operates at better than the ~60% efficiency of that fuel cell ... please provide a link / reference.

If you have an example of a real world ICE or Fuel cell that has been proven to operate at over ~60 % efficiency ... please by all means post a link or reference ... if you have nothing better than ~60% efficiency ... than that is the best you got.

Yes for Example there is a fuel cell that runs 300 percent.. but I wont reveal my sources quite yet

I guess it depends on what you want to call a car ... The PAC-Car-II runs on Hydrogen and got the gasoline energy equivalent of over 12,000 MPG... but look at what kind of car it takes to get that.



you will use W amount of energy to overcome Aerodynamic losses ... and X amount of energy to overcome rolling resistance losses ... and Y amount of energy to go up hills ... and Z amount of energy to accelerate.

For a given vehicle these energy consumptions can be quantified... W+X+Y+Z

Once these opposing forces are quantified ... and the fuel source has been quantified ... the efficiency of the engine puts real world limits on the MPG.

A Hydrogen ICE hasn't changed anything else about the vehicle ... only the fuel the engine runs on ... sense we know a gallon ( measure of volume ) of hydrogen has less energy content that the 13kwh/gallon that gasoline has ... the only way for it to overcome this lower energy content is with a higher energy efficiency of energy usage.



As I posted above about the Pac-Car-II it is possible to get over 12,000 MPG ... but it isn't as easy as some people have been told... and those who do understand how things work.. know what it takes to get over 12,000 MPG.

By all means bring the techy ... if you got it ... because ... I'm thinking you don't.

Im not about to tell you everything, thats not how it works..

Ignorance means being uninformed ... until you bring the 'techy' ... none of us can be informed about your 'techy' ... so I still say ... if you have the 'techy' ... I encourage you ... bring it.

From your previous posts you act as if you know it all and won't accept other things other then what you have in your head.

So far you are presenting a case with no 'techy' at all ... if you got 'techy' ... bring it

Presenting? your the one presenting things... my presentation is the idea which would eventually be followed by the answers you seek.. but I won't be posting them anytime soon cause it seems to me you rather argue then gain knowledge from someone else on this technology.

[Frank Lee]

Ahhhh... ancient Chinese secret, like Tide?

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by tf4624

Yes for Example there is a fuel cell that runs 300 percent.. but I wont reveal my sources quite yet

Interesting... so you are claiming to produce over unity with a fuel cell?
Where does your 'techy' show that additional 200% come from? ... or are you creating energy from nothing?

Sorry to be blunt ... but, your 'word' for it , isn't good enough ... Just like any scientific work ... the data must be peer reviewed and repeatable.

If you want to disagree with the proven scientific world ... you have to provide peer reviewed , repeatable proof of your own.

Originally Posted by tf4624

Im not about to tell you everything, thats not how it works..

Of course that is 100% exactly how it works.

In science the work must be explained in detail ... that detail given to a independent 3rd party for review ... and the results must be repeatable.

In business to make money from and idea you have to use / implement the idea ... the most effective way to prevent the competition from stealing your idea once you start implementing it and using it ... is with intellectual protections laws , such as patents .... etc... which also require you to disclose what it is that you are doing, in detail.

In our own personal lives ... I have reasons to think the answer is A ... if you want to claim the answer is B ... people will disagree with ... unless you can provide a strong enough case to support your B answer.

Nice or not ... it all comes down to this ... your word for it isn't good enough ... if you have the 'techy' ... bring it.

Originally Posted by tf4624

From your previous posts you act as if you know it all and won't accept other things other then what you have in your head.

you have misunderstood or mis-translated.

My first post was to offer a variety of options which I think would be plausible... if anyone needed further 'techy' , about any of those I am happy to give it to them.

I also already said ... I don't know your 'techy' ... so I definitely do not know it all ... I have been trying to encourage you to ... bring the 'techy'.

I can't know what your claims are based on until you tell me.

If you want me or anyone to accept what you are telling them ... you have to correctly explain it ... you have to ... bring the 'techy'.

Originally Posted by tf4624

Presenting? your the one presenting things... my presentation is the idea which would eventually be followed by the answers you seek.. but I won't be posting them anytime soon cause it seems to me you rather argue then gain knowledge from someone else on this technology.

Correct I presented several known methods in which water or hydrogen either one could be used in beneficial ways to MPG.

If you refuse to provide any 'techy' ... and if you refuse to explain your claims ... than that refusal is 100% on you.

just to remind you ... you already posted that you would bring the 'techy' ... are you going back on your word now?

Even if you have no 'techy' yourself... because you do not understand enough to know what is going on ... you should still have some peer reviewed , repeatable data / observation that you based your opinions on.

But until you provide some of that to us ... all you have is a opinion ... from a random poster on the internet.

If you got the 'techy' ... bring it.