Go Back   Science Forums
View Single Post
Old 05-27-2005   #6 (permalink)
CraigD's Avatar
CraigD
Creating


Location:
Silver Spring, MD, USA
 
CraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond repute
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Hydrogen as a fuel redux

Engineering details aside, my doubts about the feasibility of most schemes to widely use H as a fuel go beyond favoring low temperature/pressure production methods over high.

I’m more concerned that the most popular technology for the consumer-end – proton exchange membrane fuel cells – can’t, based on reasonable assumptions, be more widely used, at anything approaching an acceptable cost. Since a material required for their manufacturing – platinum - is actually scarce, an increase in manufacturing volume would likely increase, not decrease, their cost. The next most popular technology, alkaline fuel cells, avoids prohibitive manufacturing costs, but require prohibitively expensive H and O purity.

There is, of course, an obvious and well developed method of getting work from ordinary, low-purity H and O – combustion. While inelegant compared to fuel cells, and, while very clean compared to other combustibles, not zero-emission (most of the exhaust is H2O, but unless the supplied H and O is uncontaminated, combustion byproducts similar to gasoline combustion are produced), burning H is immediately feasible. Distributed H can be used both for combustion, and in fuel cells, so combustion doesn’t negatively effect the use and advancement of fuel cells, only fills in the large nitch where they’re not economically viable.

I’m nearly at a loss to explain why H combustion has, since the late 1970s, practically disappeared from popular literature. It’s as if the major proponents of H – Ford and GM, for example – want to fail due to economic infeasibility.

IMHO, proponents of a shift from oil to H should steer clear not only of centralized H production (including nuclear), but of fuel cell consumption. Low cost should be the order of the day, avoidance of expensive materials the mantra. My modest proposal is:
1) Generate electricity via solar thermal means (example: http://www.enviromission.com.au/index1.htm )
2) Generate H at the point of dispense with reverse alkaline fuel cells (no example exists to my knowledge, but similar to http://www.ovonic.com/PDFs/fuel_cell...04_toronto.pdf )
3) Consume the generated H by combustion. (a hobbyist can do this)
Reply With Quote
 
» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Who's the sexiest man alive? Johnny Depp or Robert Pattinson?
Johnny Depp - 27.27%
3 Votes
Robert Pattinson - 0%
0 Votes
Someone else (please specify) - 45.45%
5 Votes
I'm too macho to think a guy is sexy - 27.27%
3 Votes
Total Votes: 11
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:55 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network