It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Would you drive this hydrogen powered car?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   
This car is pretty small but they say it could be on the streets soon. I think these little cars are cool and this might be a good idea.




Safety might be an issue.

This was interesting also:


The car's overall design – although not that of components such as the motors and fuel cell – will be open source. That means it will be freely available for any person or company to use, as long as they make public any modifications to the technology.


There's also a more stylish hydogen powered car called FCX Xlarity. You could check it out here.
automobiles.honda.com...




posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Sure I will drive it.

As long as it's free.

Well no, I might pay 50$ for that.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
I might drive it through the neighborhood as a novelty item, but until all the real cars are off the main roads, that thing is a death trap.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   
id be afraid that the hydrogen would explode......and that i wouldnt fit in the car



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   
what are they giong to do about those of us that need trucks? I do alot of side work, have horses, pets, outdoor equipment etc.

Guess i better buy a spare Dodge Truck while there still are some for the day mine goes down!

I know i cant haul a ton of hay in anything the gov wants us to buy



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
I might drive it through the neighborhood as a novelty item, but until all the real cars are off the main roads, that thing is a death trap.


Yeah, you are right about that.

Only way to be completely safe is to build heavier and better armored vehicles!

Like the Chevy Panzer.... HOT!

0.3MPG

I'll sacrifice some fuel economy for my assured safety!

Hey Junior! Get your A$$ over to the middle east and DIE for my OIL, I gotta drive to the liquor store!




"On a long enough time line, the survival rate of everyone drops to zero."
-Tyler Durden


"How scared of death do you have to be, to sacrifice your own future for your present comfort, and peace of mind?"
-Me


ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIE
id be afraid that the hydrogen would explode......and that i wouldnt fit in the car


Gasoline is, By weight, one half Hydrogen.

That's why it is called a "Hydro-Carbon" Cause it's got HYDROGEN in it.

That is where the majority of the heat energy comes from, the Hydrogen-Oxygen reaction.

Hydrogen does NOT explode... it burns, that is all.

IF you were to have a leak in the Hydrogen tank, you would get a Large flame shooting SKYWARDS.

No explosion possible unless you use dynamite.

-Edrick

[edit on 17-6-2009 by Edrick]

[edit on 17-6-2009 by Edrick]



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


HYDROGEN FUEL CELL -it is just another word for glorified gas tank if you read and listened to the add .pull up and fill up on HYDROGEN by the pound , i guess we know what the so called next farce is all about ,the gas replacement. because the falisy behind this is that it produces HYDROGEN in the FUEL CELL but only if you fill up on HYDROGEN at the gas station.what a joke . maybe big business needs to get a brain cell as they seem to think that we cannot read write or think for ourselves and only their lies are the truth we need to hear .hogwash hollow may have the solution after all 2 pigs and a methane collector and the cost is cheap when it s finished to the butcher we go and dinner is now being served.
considering that they have had tech for years that makes them out to be liars maybe it is time we went back to the horse and carriage runs on grass and oats does not pollute and its waste by product is totally recyclable . just think on it we just now solved the energy crisis problem and it never cost us anything except that the government gets no tax and the polluting oil giants are out of business ,drop drop fizz fizz oh what a relief it is .
hole you all enjoy the jest have a good day all.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by picrat
 


Interesting thoughts...

But Hydrogen can be produced by putting an electric charge through water.

Just slap a solar panel on your roof, get a tank, a compressor, and a electrolizer, and you will never need to pay for gas AGAIN.

IT is a good system, I endorse it!

-Edrick



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


your right there as they call it brown gas ,there is only one problem with it i live north of the 49 th and it gets mighty cold up here in the winter 40 to 50 below some days and it is a little bit hard to stop the water from freezing' spring summer fall are fine but the winter is murder as here in Ontario you can



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


I would only drive a hydrogen-fueled car if they can show me, they manufacture hydrogen without burning a drop of fossil fuel!


The common way to manufacture hydrogen is by electrolysis and that uses electricity. Electricity which still mostly came from fossil fuels according to global statistics.

If such is the case, then this is nothing but a hype, same with electric cars. You can argue of course that they may have put hybrid regenerative technologies - you could do the same to fossil-fuel cars at a less impact to the environment ironically speaking


There's a significant loss (waste) of energy by converting water to hydrogen by electricity, and if you used fossil fuel to make electricity to convert hydrogen, why not use fossil fuel directly? You minimize losses, and reduce air pollution in absolute terms, it's a no-brainer.

Of course it's a much different story if most our electricity came from clean, renewable sources, I won't argue against such technology, except that they are still too primitive after all these years!



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 03:40 AM
link   
I just love the look of the new ECO cars
I would drive any car that doesnt have a massive footprint on the planet even if if it did look weird.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 


"There's a significant loss (waste) of energy by converting water to hydrogen by electricity"

Not really... losses for electrolysis can be reduced to less than 10% of input (lots less) with pulsed electrical frequency.

We have solar panels that are getting upwards of 40% efficiency at solar to electrical conversion.

And there are electrochemical compressors (hydrogen) in the works (late prototype phase) that are not only remarkably efficient, but have absolutely no moveing parts.

Altogether, you are looking at roughly 20%+-5% efficiency of converting solar energy to hydrogen.

And at 200-400 watts per square meter (sun ward side) that could take care of earths total car fuel needs.

Granted, implementation would be tricky... but I have a plan.

Make some GIANT solar and wind farms in the deserts of the world, and transmit the power (electrical transmission) through the grid to Gas stations with onsite Electrolysis hydrogen generators.

Keeps the current infrastructure (without TOTALLY reinventing it) and replaces fossil fuels with renewables.

Win-Win.

-Edrick



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


I think I also forgot to mention, that there's also losses with converting fossil fuel energy to electricity!

Anyway, I agree with your plan, sounds good! That's what I'm talking about that makes 'green car technology' green, otherwise, we're just wasting money on all the hype!



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Yes i would drive one.
I dont really have anything else to add except that i cannot post a one line comment without loosing another 20 points.
So umm yes ilike it i would drive it. I hope it doesnt cost alot.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 


You make some good points but I don't think they are too primative. I think these things don't need to be 100% in order for us to begin a transition.

I think that has held back progress in this area. These cars could have been on the road years ago. Overtime they would become more efficient as technology increases.

The argument that we can't drive these cars until they are 100% efficient is a red herring. It allows oil companies and politicians to say we will spend more money on research and these cars could be on the road 20 years from now. We don't have to wait that long and many of these cars should have been on the road years ago.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Nice topic!


Every time i see car running on hydrogen make me smile


but have u ever see the chevrolet one ? a real fuel cell?
Chevrolet.com


[edit on 17-6-2009 by Dolby_X]



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


As long as the car doesn't pump out water vapor and heat up the planet, yes I will.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


As long as the car doesn't pump out water vapor and heat up the planet, yes I will.


Rather water vapor than greenhouse gasses.

_________________________________________________________

In reply to everyone else:

Hydrogen is the most abundant resource in the universe! However it is not the most abundant resource on earth. Sure we need to get away from fossil fuels, but I'm not sure if hydrogen is the way to go (unless it is included in a fusion). Hydrogen is some really really volatile stuff, and more explosive than gasoline. Biofuel would take away from the food supply until additional crops are grown to make up for the loss, leaving more wilderness destroyed (not very green). I say electric is the way to go for now. Sure we burn fossil fuels to make the electricity but i would rather the pollution of a power plant, than a million cars and a power plant. Plus our knowledge of more effective less destructive ways of generating electricity are expanding very day. Plus electric motors are becoming more powerful and effective. A few years ago you could barely get an electric car to go 45 mph, now they have electric super cars. Plus our knowledge of electric generation will continue to expand forever. Hydrogen Combustion will remain relatively unchanged.

[edit on 17-6-2009 by DaMod]



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
It would depend on how derivable it is to me. If its very fast and gets good gas mileage then yes I would drive it.

In one of my car magazines they posted an article about the new honda hyrbid vs the first CRX that came out in the 80's. The old CRX actually got better gas mileage then the new hyrbid that is almost 20 years newer. All of this crap is just marketing hype.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


Water vapor IS a green house gas. And a lot worse than CO2.

It's water, and water holds lots of heat and does bad. Just go to a tropical jungle and you'll get what I mean.

Unfortunately virtually all alternative energies STILL create bad environmental damage. Electric produces battery wastes and acids, windmills cut down forests and lowers the beauty of the land, dams change water flow and disrupts the natural order of things in forests and valleys, nuclear does bad on wastes, garbage does good, but a lot of methane might escape, solar is limited until we can increase the amount of reaction to light (adding more light, contrary to belief, does not equate to more energy).

The only sources of clean energy that are currently known would be helium nuclear power (which has no wastes), and than beaming down this energy into massive collectors on Earth that use it to produce fusion, or just beam it down to massive collectors and power the Earth.

[edit on 17-6-2009 by Gorman91]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join