Exciting New Hydrogen Source for Cars

"There you go again."

'American Spirit' does not require 'leadership.' That would be state socialism that requires leadership. Say it in German, it comes across clear as a bell. American spirit might be better served by the 'leadership' getting the hell out of the way. Let a thousand hydrogen flame fronts bloom and quit waiting for the commissars to approve the five-year plan. You're asking what your country can do for you.

That "changeover" "we" made from steam to internal combustion (keeping in mind that car boilers ran on petroleum) was heavily leveraged by a typhoid epidemic. Roadside watering troughs dug for horses were filled in to prevent bad water and malarial mosquitoes. Once water wasn't free, steam cars, which usually ran total loss and never were triple-expanding superpower condensers, were doomed. Like everyone else here, I blame Halliburton.

Combustion inside the cylinder is way more heat efficient than a boiler, and beats a turbine, although either could profit by better use of waste heat. With Lima-style steam recovery and integral shielding, a nuclear-boiler steam car starts to look good. It'd be every bit as safe as 2 million tanks of compressed hydrogen on the e-way at 7 AM. I saw a hydrogen explosion once. I don't ever want to see another one.

The next water-burning miracle is a tank of compressed air turning over a piston block (now running in Mumbai). Cause after all, air is the most common element on the planet, and it's free, and...hmm.

You have not researched this subject very thoroughly have you? How would the federal and state governments, that make more per gallon on gas than anybody, get their taxes if the reformers where in you 'yard,' and what if you don't have a yard? How would one put 2400 PSI hydrogen in a 20 PSI gas line? How can one get more NG, when the current lines are at capacity? Oil companies today must burn off the excess NG at the wellhead ;)

mike

Why does everybody seem to believe we need to spend billions and billions to manufacture and distribute a totally new source of energy? We have in place, in the US a distribution system that can refine and distribute our own, 350 years of know coal reserves, that can be converted to oil relatively inexpensively. The answer of course is the environuts in the US do not want us to us coal, anymore than the want us to use the safest, cleanest lowest cost energy today, nuclear power. If we would start listening to the real environmentalists, instead of the environuts, half of our problems would go away. ;)

What is the difference you ask? Most of us are environmentalists in that we do not want to $#it were we eat and will clean up any mess we make. Environuts on the other hand do not want us to eat so we do not need to deal with the $#it and who will not make anything so we can't make a mess to clean up. ;)

mike

I have to agree, although I don't know if nuclear is the way to go. Back in ~1984, I had the chance to drive a prototype of what was to become GMs EV-1 electric car. As built, it had a range of 200-250 miles and would eat a Corvette of that vintage in the 1/4 mile. (Of course, this killed the range of the batteries, but the performance was phenomenal). I don't recall the drag coefficient, but it was as close to zero as anything I've ever seen. I thought sure that this was the next "new and exciting technology" for the Big 3. The prototype was pretty basic but it was easy to see the direction it could take. It was an amazing piece of technology. By the time the EV-1 was introduced in California, it was a ghost of it's former self. The designers at GM modified the body to what they thought customers would accept, which hurt the aerodynamics. Creature comforts were added that tapped the available power from the batteries. These modifications, along with extra weight for "safety" items and such, brought the range down to ~100 miles. (That number is still not bad for most of the driving public day to day use). Eventually GM called it a failure and crushed all of the EV-1s. It seemed to me that GM sandbagged on development and intentionally hobbled the EV-1. Through the years I never heard much about that car and often wondered why. What I did happen to hear was all negative. Last fall I came across an interesting movie, Who Killed the Electric Car, that filled in a lot of the gaps for me. Although it has a very "California Liberal" slant, it is certainly food for thought.

My brother used to work with the Jesse Helms organization, and there was a guy very high up in that group who had a standard answer to the environmental nuts... "I'll talk to you about pollution when you stop $hiting in my world".

Jeff DeWitt

Why in the world would you believe GM, or any other manufacturer, NOT want to sell an electric car or any car fuel efficient car, that the buying public would want to buy in huge numbers, if they could? ;)

mike

go search who owned the patent for the BATTERIES..

--Shiva--

Well, the hot new one is Caterpillar...is that the punch line? For the first time since Edison was alive, they actually made a breakthrough, while they were looking for something else, of course (just what you'd think--a starter battery that weighed less). The capacity/weight difference is so big that the electric "city car" is now feasible, I mean really, not just as a status symbol. Now if we just had enough generation capacity to run all those chargers every afternoon right after work.

Thats been my question for a long time. The folks who did lease them, loved them and fought to keep them. The majority of people outside of California didn't even know they existed. Once CARB dropped the Zero Emissions regulation, they promptly pulled the cars off lease, crushed them, and locked away the "recipe". It seems really strange. Like I said, the movie is pretty slanted, but GMs actions make it seem that they just didn't want to produce anything but gas/diesel powered vehicles and only produced the EV-1 because they were forced to.

You really don't have a clue as regards the scheme of things, do you?

Sorry that I buzzed over your head...

JT

I think that it's a real workable interim solution. Unfortunately, we have not built a new nuclear plant for over twenty-five years with the result that existing plants are nearing the end of their intended lifespan.

Alternative energy sources other than traditional carbon based fuels are almost a non factor.

I would use the cookie cutter type program as used in France and is well proven.

I would recommend the role that Tesla Motors might play as they have a roadster (to go on sale this fall) that goes 0-60 in four seconds and has a 250 mile range on a single charge. In the works is a four door sedan for 2010 production. I believe that ground braking is very close for the plant which will be located in New Mexico.

Sooner or later, it will come to pass that hydrocarbon fuels will go the way of the dinosaur far before the crude runs out...

JT

It's a very simple (as usual) case of follow the money.

JT

____________________________

Well, I knew you can't push hydrogen through cast iron pipe. I knew why steam cars went out of use. And I've seen a hydrogen mistake up close and personal. But see, that's just experience. Sorry I'm not smart enough to share your mystic vision on this. Apparently if the government convenes a committee, they'll change physics. ________________________ Yep, I'm clueless on the scheme thing. You'll have to keep filling us in. Who's hiding the water engine this week--the Illuminati, or the Club of Rome? And yet, a new, improved government program is going to save us all. That buzz you hear is your tinfoil hat.

A hydrogen flame war. Just what Oppenheimer predicted.

Air, like crude oil, is 'free.' Compressing air, or is getting crude to your gas tank, costs money however.

I'll bet if 'they' ever build a car to run to on compressed air, the price for compressed air will go up. Perhaps they can build a compressed air powered, air compressor, as long as air is free ;)

mike

Much too simple.

Point out where I mentioned ANYTHING about hydrogen. You cain't even keep track of threading.

JT

I am working on methane production as we speak. Aint nobody nohow noway gonna burn this off at the wellhead. Converting to hydrogen should be easy with the right cheesecloth filter

"Mike Hunter" wrote:

Yikes! Ask yourself one question.... Did your ancestors come over here because of the opportunities here, or because it sucked over there? And if it sucked 'over there' , was that because the government (whatever style it is/was) was oppressive, greedy, and manipulative? Could it have been because the power players in business had either bought the control in that country, or had taken over the country just to control it? The main reason this country has had a wonderful 200+ year run of success is because there was a whole continent of raw materials to exploit. As these raw materials become more scarce, the price to play goes up and other continents raw materials seem more lucrative. Blaming one company seems short sighted. All the political scrambling that is going on worldwide is pretty normal, in the world of power and dominance. Those that have the power want to keep it... Be that political power, or raw material power. The whole 'one world order' deal is so the power brokers can keep their chair at the table. They just want one table, is all. We read a lot here and other places about how po'd we all are about what is going on here (I'll leave here as the USA for now)... PO'd? Nahhh... Irritated maybe. Most of the people po'd here are po'd at something they had a part in creating themselves. You think for one minute that one party would drop their stick in an effort to get a common goal achieved if there was not a vote, or a dollar attached to it? Wait until the raw materials really run low, and we have to pay top dollar for it. Then you'll see what PO'd is all about. The soft belly'd Americans whine and bitch about carbon dioxide just like they're told to just to push a plan. Wait until radical inflation hits them and a loaf of bread cost's a million dollars and they need a wheelbarrow to carry the cash to buy it. Far fetched? Go back and read the history books. It's happened already, and can happen again. We're so damned lucky/fortunate/blessed/whatever to be in a place where we can bitch in the open and not worry about it too much. We are also damned fortunate to be in a position to 'play' with big ugly rusty toys, and be smug about it. Some of what has been written in this thread could have gotten you executed in some countries. Lighten up, fix up your Studebaker, drive the crap out of it, and have fun. Get pissed off at those that try to take that away from us. Now THAT is the American spirit. Jeff

I guess we can assume you do not live on the Gulf coast, or have even flown over the Gulf, if you believe they are not burning off NG because the transmission lines are at capacity.

The sad part is the feds will not allow the oil companies to extract alcohol from the NG to use as a gas additive. The reason is the environuts want a 'renewable' source, like the corn used to extract the alcohol. ;)

mike

Effective Friday, June 15, Tesla Motors is increasing the base price of the Tesla Roadster from $92,000 to $98,000. We encourage you to submit your reservation on or before Friday, June 15, to secure your Tesla Roadster at the $92,000 price.

And what would the break-even point be for most of us? Too much calculation for my brain after a day at the office.

Bob