The hope of Hydrogen

Using fossil fuels to power our lives seems to be a problem. We have world leaders all upset over Global Warming. We have 97% of scientists claiming that WE are the ones at fault over the ensuing catastrophe. While portions of that may be up for debate, the fact that burning fossil fuels creates pollution isn't. To what extent, is almost irrelevant. Is Gasoline a finite resource? Yep. No debate there either. Just how long it will last is the only discussion there.

Hydrogen as an alternative fuel has been looked at for a long time. So how does it work?

Fuel cells are an important enabling technology for the nation's energy portfolio and have the potential to revolutionize the way we power our nation, offering cleaner, more-efficient alternatives to the combustion of gasoline and other fossil fuels. Fuel cells have the potential to replace the internal-combustion engine in vehicles and provide power in stationary and portable power applications because they are energy-efficient, clean, and fuel-flexible.

DOE is working closely with its national laboratories, universities, and industry partners to overcome critical technical barriers to fuel cell commercialization. Current R&D focuses on the development of reliable, low-cost, high-performance fuel cell system components for transportation and buildings applications.

energy.gov...

So why aren't we using it RIGHT NOW? Well, there are a few obstacles to overcome. It's expensive to produce, it uses too much energy to make it, and transportation is difficult and expensive.

Hydrogen can be produced using diverse, domestic resources including fossil fuels, such as natural gas and coal (with carbon sequestration); nuclear; biomass; and other renewable energy technologies, such as wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro-electric power.

The overall challenge to hydrogen production is cost reduction. For cost-competitive transportation, a key driver for energy independence, hydrogen must be comparable to conventional fuels and technologies on a per-mile basis in order to succeed in the commercial marketplace. Learn more about DOE's hydrogen cost goal and the analysis used in projecting the future cost of hydrogen.

energy.gov...

Who is interested in this technology? Who is making efforts to change this from a dream to a reality? I mean, if there are all these problems that exist with hydrogen as a fuel, then making a car that runs on it seems futile.

The once-distant promise of clean, affordable hydrogen-powered cars is starting to become a reality.

Several major automakers, including Toyota, Honda and Hyundai, have started or will soon start selling these cars, which will be more expensive than comparable gasoline models but a lot cheaper than they were just a few years ago.

Executives at Toyota say that the cost of making the critical components of hydrogen vehicles has fallen 95 percent since 2008. That is why the company plans to market its first mass-produced hydrogen car, the Mirai, in the United States next year. Other companies, like General Motors, Ford and Audi, are working on similar cars.

www.nytimes.com...


Using solar, wind, or some other renewable energy to make the conversion is very economical. If the technology continues as it has been progressing, home stations to produce hydrogen may be possible and refueling stations as part of the infrastructure could be equally distributed all over.

The conspiracy in all this? It's massive. And it's right in front of you.

Lets say that tomorrow, a huge breakthrough is made in that you will be able to pump 20 gallons of sea water into a box no bigger than a refrigerator, and with a few small solar panels, convert that into enough hydrogen to power your car for three weeks of driving. While that would be nice, would that have an effect on the economy? If most of the civilized world made the change over a 2 year period, what might happen to the wealth of the world? Saudi Arabia and countries like it that can produce nothing but oil and Gasoline would change overnight from wealthy nations to third world hell holes. The 1% folks who have their wealth tied into oil would be devastated. Chaos would be what we could hope for after things finally settled down. Anarchy would reign.

So while we have lots of people working on the issue of making hydrogen as a personal fuel source more affordable, is there a group equally interested in designing a way we could transition from our current ways? If so, why aren't these groups seen? Would a massive public brainstorming effort help, or even pave the way for a cleaner future?

I sure don't have the answers to all this, but I would love for some way this could become a reality.


This thread was promoted on the ATS Twitter Feed with the following image:

I cant see we would get away from oil that easy.....you must understand that oil provides many things besides fuel.....
The materials like plastics, certain chemicals we need to make other products, and a plethora of other things all require oil.....not to mention lubrications for the machines we will build.......
Regardless, the changeover may be unfeasible due to the immense resources it would use to make it......
We may be stuck with gas for a lot longer than you think......

a reply to: stirling

If you read the entire OP, you see how that's all tied in at the end. But on that note, if we stopped using oil to make gasoline and run our cars, the existing oil we have that we use for those other purposes, would last a lot longer.

Not to mention that other things exist that could do a better job, like plastics replaced by hemp.
www.hemp.com...

a reply to: network dude

Im not sayin its impossible...just that its a hard road that we would travel, and inertia is our problem.....
Everything is based upon oil in one way or another.....

a reply to: network dude

That would be great if we start using hydrogen from renewable resources but would Big Oil allow this to happen?

As long as we avoid is hydrogen made from fossil fuels. Here's an example

Hydrogen can be made cheaply from natural gas through a process called “steam reformation,” which separates the carbon from the hydrogen

www.forbes.com...

a reply to: network dude

Petrochemicals will continue to be a problem as long as the dollar is linked to the petrochemicals...

purp..

My thread yesterday stating the car driven by Middle Tennessee State University students across America last year needs to be built for the common man.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

That car wins awards and was built by Nissan of N. America over 20 years ago. It is TIME!!! I suspect it is more about controlling the masses as opposed to controlling pollution as to the reasons this has not been in mass production. My credentials are I am a professional Environmental Scientist by trade.

originally posted by: network dude
Using solar, wind, or some other renewable energy to make the conversion is very economical.

This isn't true. Any source of power can be used to 'make' hydrogen and renewable's aren't the most economical.

The conspiracy in all this? It's massive. And it's right in front of you.

Oh Boy...here we go!

Lets say that tomorrow, a huge breakthrough is made in that you will be able to pump 20 gallons of sea water into a box no bigger than a refrigerator, and with a few small solar panels, convert that into enough hydrogen to power your car for three weeks of driving. While that would be nice, would that have an effect on the economy?

This 'scenario' is so far from reality even considering it is a laugh. People might want to read something that explains the amount of energy required to 'make' hydrogen...instead of dreaming up a most silly thought experiment.
phys.org...

Lots of countries in the world DON'T have massive Oil reserves and would LOVE to build a hydrogen economy! Why haven't those people done it? Are they being held back by the Saudis and the 1%'ers? Some of the lowest Oil reserve countries are some of the richest, like Japan. Apparently the are all being controlled and refusing to implement a hydrogen economy via some conspiracy!

OR

Making hydrogen is energy intensive and not worth doing so far.


Read the actual physics and how much energy it takes to make hydrogen. Then decide for yourself...as always. Is there a grand conspiracy to hold the world back from using hydrogen, or is it simply unrealistic with current technology?

And for those that say there is suppressed technology available I say...well...nothing...because you can't prove there is 'secret' tech being hidden.

So...what do we do about all of the industries that rely on oil for things other than combustion?
2nd.

originally posted by: peck420
So...what do we do about all of the industries that rely on oil for things other than combustion?
2nd.

We just will use less oil, and coal also, for energy is all we do. We will need less and therefore those who have established whole kingdoms (Saudi's come to mind) will have a problem. It is a raping of the land and i am against the CO2 hoax if you see my threads.

a reply to: noeltrotsky


I've tried to point out the inefficiency of hydrogen before and it falls on deaf ears.
not to mention all of the other problems involved

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: network dude
Using solar, wind, or some other renewable energy to make the conversion is very economical.

Making hydrogen is energy intensive and not worth doing so far.


Read the actual physics and how much energy it takes to make hydrogen. Then decide for yourself...as always. Is there a grand conspiracy to hold the world back from using hydrogen, or is it simply unrealistic with current technology?

And for those that say there is suppressed technology available I say...well...nothing...because you can't prove there is 'secret' tech being hidden.

This has been shown to be a fallacy recently. If we use the power of the Sun to derive any power above and beyond what you would be able to recapture from the process of separating the H2 from the O, we can solve the "too much energy to produce it" issues. MTSU proves it with their projects associated to the H2 car in my prvious thread yesterday that I have pasted that source into this thread.

What other problems Hoosierdaddy?.. You seemed logical on my thread.

originally posted by: Justoneman
We just will use less oil, and coal also, for energy is all we do. We will need less and therefore those who have established whole kingdoms (Saudi's come to mind) will have a problem. It is a raping of the land and i am against the CO2 hoax if you see my threads.

If only it worked that way...

It just means that we will extract as much as we are currently extracting, then process it for the components we want...then? Dump the rest on the ground? Put it back in the hole?

The simple task of disposing of that portion, that we would no longer require, would and a lovely, highly energy intensive step...when the whole purpose is to reduce energy intensity, not increase it.

There is a ton of unanswered questions, that will require firm and finite answers, long before we start to seriously reduce our oil dependency.

a reply to: peck420

Well that was the point of my thread that it HAS been proven for 20 + years so far since the prototype by Nissan. It is so simple the Ag majors built other alternative cars till they could afford the device to split the water. NASA company wanted 1$ million for it, now they ask MTSU to pay 10$ K..

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: network dude
Using solar, wind, or some other renewable energy to make the conversion is very economical.

Making hydrogen is energy intensive and not worth doing so far.


Read the actual physics and how much energy it takes to make hydrogen. Then decide for yourself...as always. Is there a grand conspiracy to hold the world back from using hydrogen, or is it simply unrealistic with current technology?

And for those that say there is suppressed technology available I say...well...nothing...because you can't prove there is 'secret' tech being hidden.

This has been shown to be a fallacy recently. If we use the power of the Sun to derive any power above and beyond what you would be able to recapture from the process of separating the H2 from the O, we can solve the "too much energy to produce it" issues. MTSU proves it with their projects associated to the H2 car in my prvious thread yesterday that I have pasted that source into this thread.

Ah...no...it isn't a fallacy. The process of 'making' and 'using' hydrogen create inefficiencies compared to just using the 'power from the Sun' directly.

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: peck420

Well that was the point of my thread that it HAS been proven for 20 + years so far since the prototype by Nissan. It is so simple the Ag majors built other alternative cars till they could afford the device to split the water. NASA company wanted 1$ million for it, now they ask MTSU to pay 10$ K..

Great, it has been proven that a car can run on hydrogen...break out the parade!

What needs to be proven is how we will supplement all the other industries, that rely on the same oil industry, when the oil industry can no longer subsidize the production/processing of their products with fuel sales.

You think food is expensive now? What do you think will happen when fertilizer prices skyrocket?

Pharmaceuticals? Same.

Computers?...

The list goes on and on.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: network dude
Using solar, wind, or some other renewable energy to make the conversion is very economical.

Making hydrogen is energy intensive and not worth doing so far.


Read the actual physics and how much energy it takes to make hydrogen. Then decide for yourself...as always. Is there a grand conspiracy to hold the world back from using hydrogen, or is it simply unrealistic with current technology?

And for those that say there is suppressed technology available I say...well...nothing...because you can't prove there is 'secret' tech being hidden.

This has been shown to be a fallacy recently. If we use the power of the Sun to derive any power above and beyond what you would be able to recapture from the process of separating the H2 from the O, we can solve the "too much energy to produce it" issues. MTSU proves it with their projects associated to the H2 car in my prvious thread yesterday that I have pasted that source into this thread.

Ah...no...it isn't a fallacy. The process of 'making' and 'using' hydrogen create inefficiencies compared to just using the 'power from the Sun' directly.

So let me get this straight. MTSU is doing it now winning 1st place in every event they have been entered but you still think there are inherent issues?

The Sun is relentless, and solar panels project to operate at 50% efficiency of their capacity out of the box after 100 years.

a reply to: Justoneman


lots of problems to address.
conversion costs
Loss of tax income from fuel sales
The skyrocketing price of all other petroleum based product.

This idea will work for municipalities like police and taxi services though. They would need only one refueling point. That would be a better place to start.

originally posted by: Justoneman
My thread yesterday stating the car driven by Middle Tennessee State University students across America last year needs to be built for the common man.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

That car wins awards and was built by Nissan of N. America over 20 years ago. It is TIME!!! I suspect it is more about controlling the masses as opposed to controlling pollution as to the reasons this has not been in mass production. My credentials are I am a professional Environmental Scientist by trade.

This is the stuff that drives me crazy! [pun intended]

Nissan of Japan, a country spending billions on Oil year after year, is somehow suppressing technology that it's allegedly had for 20 years already. They could have propped up a few solar panels and saved themselves billions and billions but some conspiracy has stopped them.

A - the tech isn't there or they would use it.
B - no evidence of conspiracy anywhere.