It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by prof7
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?
Originally posted by LS650
If electricity were extremely cheap and plentiful, hydrogen for cars might make a lot of sense. But with today's current technology, I don't see the production of hydrogen being cheap enough to replace oil any time soon.
Originally posted by leaualorin
reply to post by Turq1
problem solved during cold-season :
through insulation and electric heating and cooling during summer !
And believe me , LiFePo4 and LiPo technology have come a looong way in energy density + cycles using!
I have A123 systems LiFePo4 cells that are rated 3,3 V , 2300 mAh , 23 Ah discharge , and a 90% capacity after 1000 charge/discharge cycles !
The same company has 20Ah cells with better ratings even!
Hydrogen is nonsense!
HEMP IS THE NUMBER ONE biomass producer on planet earth: 10 tons per acre in approximately four months. It is a woody plant containing 77% cellulose. Wood produces 60% cellulose. This energy crop can be harvested with equipment readily available. It can be "cubed" by modifying hay cubing equipment. This method condenses the bulk, reducing trucking costs from the field to the pyrolysis reactor. And the biomass cubes are ready for conversion with no further treatment
Originally posted by James1982
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)