[POLL] Would you drive a hydrogen-powered vehicle?

[jkp1187]

Originally Posted by ConnClark

here is a start
Study Says Hydrogen Leakage could Harm Earth's Ozone Layer

I'll look for the more specific one regarding california sized population later.

also note CFCs only damage about 5 to 7 % of the ozone layer

Interesting. Hadn't heard that at all. Worth more investigation. Thanks.

[cfg83]

jkp1187 -

Originally Posted by jkp1187

Interesting. Hadn't heard that at all. Worth more investigation. Thanks.

I agree. I want an update on the research, because it was published six years ago :

...

However, the authors of the report say uncertainty remains about the effects of hydrogen on the atmosphere because scientists still have a limited understanding of the hydrogen cycle. They also note that, unlike the case with CFCs and other atmospheric pollutants like carbon dioxide, the current situation is unique in that society has the opportunity to understand the potential environmental impact well ahead of the growth of a hydrogen economy.

Following is the text of the press release:

(begin text)

California Institute of Technology
June 12, 2003

Hydrogen economy might impact Earth's stratosphere, study shows

According to conventional wisdom, hydrogen-fueled cars are environmentally friendly because they emit only water vapor -- a naturally abundant atmospheric gas. But leakage of the hydrogen gas that can fuel such cars could cause problems for the upper atmosphere, new research shows.

...

CarloSW2

[RobertSmalls]

Originally Posted by hyperyaris

Why would anyone not?? It is almost free energy, no pollutants, incredible mileage, and tons of torque! It outperforms any gasolione engine known to man.

This is exactly the kind of nonsense that you occasionally read in some newspaper whose circulation is lagging. The energy is not free by any means. Producing H2 from CH4 means you have less CH4 available to burn, and producing it from H2O consumes enormous amounts of electricity, which has to come from somewhere.


So you ask, what if we build a wind farm or a solar array to produce that H2? Wouldn't it then be pollution-free and 100% renewable? Well, yes, if compressing and transporting the H2 was also done with renewable energy. But if you can afford a wind farm of that size, you should use it to put fossil fuel fired power plants out of business.

As NeilBlanchard points out, H2 directly competes with batteries as an energy storage medium, and it's far less efficient. The only advantage I see is that you refill the anode rather than recharging it, so you can drive as far as you like without stopping long to refuel. Fast-charging EV batteries would be the death of the HFCV, and even the fuel cell's strongest proponents admit it's a transient technology, rather than the final solution to our transportation energy needs.

[truckncycle]

I don't even like the idea of presurized AIR powered cars let alone hydrogen. I just picture a high pressure tank flying through someones house after an accident.

[NiHaoMike]

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls

This is exactly the kind of nonsense that you occasionally read in some newspaper whose circulation is lagging. The energy is not free by any means. Producing H2 from CH4 means you have less CH4 available to burn, and producing it from H2O consumes enormous amounts of electricity, which has to come from somewhere.

What if you derived the electricity by using a rectifying antenna to capture radio waves? Would you rather use the radio waves to make hydrogen or just let them turn into useless heat in the environment?

[KJSatz]

What if we harnessed the power of urine?

[Funny]

For me, it would depend on the longevity (durability of parts) of the vehicle, the convenience of filling it up, and the availability of service (self or mechanic). I refuse to go to dealerships, they rake the customers over the coals, and the mechanics I know are the salt of the earth. I wouldn't want them being left out in the cold.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls

Fast-charging EV batteries would be the death of the HFCV, and even the fuel cell's strongest proponents admit it's a transient technology, rather than the final solution to our transportation energy needs.

There is something that has puzzled me for as long as I've known about fuel cells, which is why everyone focuses on hydrogen, with all its drawbacks. Is it just that it sounds so high-tech?

It's possible to have fuel cells that run on other things. I've seen articles about cells running on methanol Direct methanol fuel cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and sugar Sugar-powered fuel cells are totally sweet - Ars Technica for instance. Yet virtually all the R&D goes into something that we KNOW has problems that are insoluble with current & foreseeable technology.

[Bicycle Bob]

No hydrogen thread is complete without the ancient disclaimer:
"Hydrogen is the fuel of the future, and it always will be."

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by Bicycle Bob

"Hydrogen is the fuel of the future..."

Sure. Someday we'll manage to build cheap & portable hydrogen fusion reactors...

Just had a wild idea: given the level of scientific & technical ignorance in this country, particularly in political and (some) environmental circles, do you suppose that the hydrogen economy boosters think that's what they're really working on?