Why Not Use Hydrogen as the World's Commercial Fuel?

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:19 AM
link   
Is Peak Oil Becoming a Problem?

I kind of hope it is becoming a problem, so we can harness the power of hydrogen (without carbon) instead. An alternative fuel like hydrogen would be so much better for the world. I see it as the future fuel to power most of the world's needs. I'm not talking about solar power here or battery power, that would take-up half the weight of your car! Rule these two out and while you're at it, rule out ethanol or some other food substitute that would just drive the price up of other soft commodities needed for basic food consumption; I think the last thing we need is for food to go even higher in price.

I'm talking about hydrogen (out of the sea), the first element and the most combustible fuel of its kind; a lot more powerful than your standard hydrocarbons like petrol and gasoline. I hear it is around five times more combustible than ordinary petrol.

There are plenty of examples of cars running on hydrogen on the internet; even Bob Lazar the famous Area 51 man built one in his back yard. It can run 700km on a full tank and he uses water from a hose. The Japanese are looking at this technology seriously (and they should because they have to import all of their fuel). They had a concept car on Top Gear that could do 0 to 100 (km/h) in around 4 seconds. In fact, the Japanese should build the complex desalination plants required to separate the two elements and harness hydrogen as a commercial fuel. This profitable enterprise will create plenty of jobs.

All it takes is for there to be a need for this fuel and it being marketed in an established market like the Mercantile Exchange (or if they don't want it, in another exchange). In other words, float it, market it and you will have buyers.

The real benefit of hydrogen as a primary fuel is you would be able to run vehicles night and day, factories and offices would be able to run continuously thus employing more people, governments can still receive taxes and the world's economies would be moving in the way they should - forward. You would not need to punish companies and individuals with counter productive carbon taxes. Governments would receive their revenue from the proactive use of hydrogen to power the economy forward. You only need to tax the end of the process, the finished products or work done and not tax the @#%@%# out of the fuel itself (which stifles growth; just look at what high energy prices are doing). And for any conspiracy theorist out there that thinks that in some way we are indirectly financing terrorism through paying an unfriendly country high prices at the petrol pump. Well there are benefits here too.

As for running out of hydrogen. A non issue really.

The byproduct of hydrogen is water, so you would never need to worry about damaging the environment, and I for one am sick of this issue with hydrocarbons being made into a political issue! Instead of governments wasting their (and our time) debating the greenhouse effect or global warming, we could all look at the next stage of human endeavor and achievement and marvel at it and the (only) commercial fuel of the future.

So why don't we use hydrogen as a primary commercial fuel? The reasons may be the reasons behind a lot of the major problems in the world today.




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by kon1foundas
 


Welcome to ATS but really? Hydrogen??
So you have solved the problem with cold fusion??
Where is all of this Hydrogen going to come from?



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


The sea. H2O. It can easily be extracted and used accordingly. It will end up being the commercial fuel of the world; because there is so much of it and it is a lot more powerful than hydrocarbons (notice the hydro in this term?). Counties with a foothold in the development will have an advantage over the rest. It's just a matter of time. May as well get in there first.
edit on 1-3-2011 by kon1foundas because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
I'm sure this has certainly already been thought of in the same context. In no way am I disputing your idealogical thinking, keep it up!! You might end up revolutionizing everything and making a fortune!!

However,

Hydrogen is simply way too expensive to extract on a large scale and requires the waste of many other materials meaning further problems for the environment i.e. where to dispose of the waste.

Even if there were to exist some cheap way of extracting hydrogen from our waters etc, Governments and Oil Companies would not allow the development. There is simply too much money and power at stake...

I like your thinking, so for that, S&F, keep it up!

Best regards,

Mike



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   
it is old idea... and it will stay that way and U know why...

www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:46 AM
link   


The sea. H2O. It can easily be extracted


No, it can NOT be easily extracted. You need more energy to extract it than you gain from burning it. Where should all the energy come from?



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:49 AM
link   
Yes, why would the oil companies give what they've got up. So take the fight to them. That's what the essence of a capitalist system is (or it use to be). Just compete. It will eventually be the commercial fuel of the world, even if it doesn't take-off for decades.

Part of the process of refining or extracting hydrogen will be costly, but that's what a commodity needs to create value and jobs! The process of investing, spending and making money will not be any different from refining oil. It will add to the value of this important commodity.

Hydrogen can be used in a normal combustion engine like gas, with some modification and it will be like a fuel that has water as the main byproduct. No pollution and no need to listen to any more talk on global warming!

Energy should be used incidentally for work; to keep the economy going full steam ahead, without worrying about harming the environment etc. This way you can have full employment or close to full employment. Energy should be cheap so you can reinforce growth in an economy. Hydrogen will be the way to do this.

Great to be a member.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by kon1foundas
 

NO!
because using hydrogen as a every-day fuel IS STUPID!
It costs more to produce hydrogen than what you get out of it!
Only N-ever A S-traight A-nswer >NASA affords this "luxury" in its rockets...
The solution was long ago discovered but the SATANIC "LEADERS"/CRIMINALS never whant this!
Solar power and efficient transportation of electric curent is the way!
Needless to say , EVERYTHING IS DONE BACKWARDS AND AGAINST ANY DECENCY...
THE WORST WAY IS THE "GOOD WAY" according to our "leaders"...
edit on 1-3-2011 by leaualorin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by kon1foundas
 


I'm really not trying to be mean saying this, but it doesn't seem like you are very well informed on Hydrogen.

It takes electricity to extract hydrogen from water. The amount of energy from the extracted hydrogen is LESS than the electrical energy required to free it from Oxygen. Meaning a loss of energy.

With oil, yes it takes energy to drill and pump oil. But the amount of energy from a given amount of oil is GREATER than the amount of energy required to get at it.

For every 1 barrel of oil used to power the drill/pump, it will produce 2 barrles. I'm just making ratio up as I'm not sure what the real amount is, but regardless more oil is produced than used.

EDIT: Damn someone posted pretty much the same thing while I was typing my post!
edit on 1-3-2011 by James1982 because: (no reason given)
edit on 1-3-2011 by James1982 because: To add "reply to" sorry about the mix-up leaualorin!



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by kon1foundas
The process of investing, spending and making money will not be any different from refining oil.


That is where you are 100% wrong. As has been said like 5 times already, hydrogen takes more energy produce, than it puts out. Oil is the opposite. Which is why we use oil. You just don't seem to get this.

This, for once, is not an issue of big oil's greed. This is an issue of economics. Producing hydrogen is causes us to loose energy, not produce it. Hydrogen is basically like a rechargeable battery. It's a way to transfer energy, no produce it.

I'd suggest reading up a little more on the production of hydrogen, and you'll understand why it's not being used. It's not a way to produce energy like fossil fuels are, it's just a way to take electricity that already exists and turn it into a fuel. A hydrogen car would be able to carry more energy on board pound-for-pound than an electric car with a battery, but just like the electric car, hydrogen just consumes power, not creates it.
edit on 1-3-2011 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


SORRY!
I tend to be "quicky" when I see SUCH ABBERATION...
Oh , and by the way :
SOME BETTER AERODINAMICS WOULD MEAN A LOT TO FUEL CONSUMPTION!
Look at an airfoil /airplane wing , or VELOMOBILES , APTERA or SCHLLOR PILLBUG FROM 1937 !
Esentially the TEARDROP SHAPE IS THE BEST AERODINAMIC SHAPE!




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by leaualorin
reply to post by James1982
 


SORRY!
I tend to be "quicky" when I see SUCH ABBERATION...
Oh , and by the way :
SOME BETTER AERODINAMICS WOULD MEAN A LOT TO FUEL CONSUMPTION!
Look at an airfoil /airplane wing , or VELOMOBILES , APTERA or SCHLLOR PILLBUG FROM 1937 !
Esentially the TEARDROP SHAPE IS THE BEST AERODINAMIC SHAPE!



No no! You misunderstood! My apologies!

I was replying to the original post, not yours! I agree with what you said. I just forgot to quote the OP.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Here's a video of Bob Lazar (yes, the Area 51 and S4 man) and his hydrogen car. This is how he did it.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:07 AM
link   
If only it was that easy...

Do you really think we would be in this position if there was an easier option? I agree we need to find an alternative, sooner rather than later but I'm sure the right scientists are working on the right substances. Well i hope they are anyway.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by kon1foundas

Here's a video of Bob Lazar (yes, the Area 51 and S4 man) and his hydrogen car. This is how he did it.

www.youtube.com...


Are you ignoring what everyone is telling you?

Nobody doubts hydrogen can power a car. The problem is, it takes more energy to produce the hydrogen than it will put back out. I don't know how many other ways to say this.

To produce large amounts of hydrogen takes a lot of electricity. Where does that electricity come from?

Hydrogen does not "create" power like fossil fuels do. It just changes energy from one medium to another. Please read everyone's post in this thread, and do some research!



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:17 AM
link   
"Are you ignoring what everyone is telling you?"

So you've thought of all possibilities? How about wind power along the ocean or ocean current power?

So everyone is some on this site. I see.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by kon1foundas


"Are you ignoring what everyone is telling you?"

So you've thought of all possibilities? How about wind power along the ocean or ocean current power?

So everyone is some on this site. I see.


Your still not getting it...

OK, wind power and wave power. Both produce energy, yes?

Now this seems to be the tricky part for you: If you produced electricity via wind or wave power to extract hydrogen from water, the energy in the hydrogen you just made would be LESS than the amount of energy the wind farm or wave power generator produced. Does that make sense?

It doesn't matter WHERE the electricity comes from to produce hydrogen. The amount of energy present in the final product (the hydrogen) will be LESS than the amount of energy that you just used to produce that hydrogen.

Using wind farms, solar, or wave power to produce hydrogen, which then fuels cars would work this is very true! This would be a much cleaner way to power our vehicles.

BUT, and this is the important part. If you had an electric car, and took that energy you produced via wind, solar, waves, you would have more energy, because producing hydrogen does nothing but change 100 "units" of electrical energy into less than 100 "units" of hydrogen energy.

It's not the answer to the energy crisis, because it's removing energy from the equation, not adding it.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Where does that electricity come from?


Electricity comes out of wall sockets in vast amounts.

SCNR ;-)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Aint gonna happen..

Peak oil is a myth cooked up to make you pay more.

This planet is awash with oil...and the distribution network is already there.

Hydrogen costs a lot to produce and is a nightmare to store and distribute.

Now if you could come up with something that breaks down water that can be fitted to your car then you might have something to break the oil cartel...if they don't break your neck and steal your invention that is.

Cosmic...



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by prof7

Where does that electricity come from?


Electricity comes out of wall sockets in vast amounts.

SCNR ;-)


LOL I think you just solved the problem with using Hydrogen!! You should let kon1foundas know about this revelation!





top topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join