Where are our hydrogen-powered cars?

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by jolly, Jul 24, 2009.

  1. jolly

    jolly Guest

    jolly, Jul 24, 2009
    #1
  2. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    Don't want them. Water vapor is a greenhouse gas, after all. And
    imagine the local effects of 1 million cars spewing water vapor during
    rush hour. Ugh in the summer, wheeeeee! at 30 below zero in winter.
    Hydrogen is a non-starter as a fuel- it's expensive to make, dangerous
    to transport, difficult to store in a car in adequate quantities. It's
    an attempt to keep thinking inside the box (e.g., maintaining some form
    of internal combustion engine).

    At the risk of perturbing some folks, the simplest future for individual
    urban transportation is the bicycle. Infrastructure is already in place
    and less expensive to maintain (bicycles causing dramatically little
    wear and tear on roads compared to cars).

    Locally (Minneapolis) the number of people going to work by bike has
    more than doubled in the past two years (from 1.7% to 3.6%, so a little
    more than 100,000 people), increasing particularly when gas hit $4 a
    gallon but interestingly not dropping much after gas prices receded.
    The bike arterials in Minneapolis are seeing traffic counts 25-30%
    higher than for the same periods one year ago.


    The percentage of daily trips done by bike in various cities:

    Copenhagen - 55% [37% in Greater Copenhagen]
    Gronningen, Netherlands - 55%
    Assen, Netherlands - 40%
    Amsterdam, Netherlands - 40%
    Münster, Germany - 40%
    Utrecht, Netherlands - 33%
    Ferrara, Italy - 30%
    Malmö, Sweden - 30%
    Linköping, Sweden - 30%
    Västerås, Sweden - 30%
    Odense, Denmark - 25%
    Basel, Switzerland - 25%
    Osaka, Japan - 25% [est.]
    Bologna, Italy - 25%
    Parma, Italy - 25%
    Oulu, Finland - 20%
    Rotterdam, Netherlands - 20-25%
    Berne, Switzerland - 20%
    Tübingen, Gemany - 20%
    Aarhus, Denmark - 20%
    Tokyo, Japan - 20% [est.]
    York, UK - 18%
    Munich, Germany - 15%
    Davis, USA - 15%
    Cambridge, UK - 15%
    Berlin, Germany - 12%
    Turku, Finland - 11%
    Stockholm, Sweden - 10%
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 24, 2009
    #2
  3. jolly

    James Sweet Guest


    The biggest problem with hydrogen is that it isn't a fuel. There is no
    significant natural source of it, you have to make it, and to do that
    requires more energy than you get by burning it.

    Storing it isn't terribly difficult or dangerous. Yeah it's highly
    flammable, but so is gasoline, and unlike gasoline, hydrogen is lighter
    than air so if it gets out, it rises and dissipates quickly.
     
    James Sweet, Jul 25, 2009
    #3
  4. jolly

    Retiree Guest

    "Water vapor is a greenhouse gas" .... you are kidding that
    water vapor is a problem, right? See this link for
    educational materials for pre-schoolers about the cloud
    cycle. Bottom line is that life would not exist on earth
    without water vapor.

    http://www.first-school.ws/activities/science/drippy.htm
     
    Retiree, Jul 25, 2009
    #4
  5. A bit like saying that because air is involved with greenhouse warming, it's
    also part of the problem.

    The magnititude of the ignorance is quite astounding!

    See this link for
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 25, 2009
    #5
  6. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    Maybe these will help:

    http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/gases.html

    http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/01/29/researchers-study-th
    e-other-greenhouse-gas-water-vapor/

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
    Perhaps you should consider trying to think in a more sophisticated way
    than a preschooler.

    Life also would not exist without oxygen, but too much of that is bad
    for you too. Ditto carbon dioxide, nitrogen, methane, etc.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 25, 2009
    #6
  7. That you seriously believe that the totality of exhausted water vapour might
    even approach 0.1% of total atmospheric content, speaks volumes about your
    grasp of the scale of the issue.

    They say a little knowledge is dangerous.
    I think in your case, a great deal of ignorance would be more applicable.
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 25, 2009
    #7
  8. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    Ah, another sock puppet weighs in. Just point out to me where I said
    this?
    Learn to read, moron, and learn to think while you are at it. I'll wait.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 26, 2009
    #8
  9. Oh, so now you're denying that hydrogen-power water vapour's an issue ?
    Bit of a change of tune, isn't it ?

    Either it's a climate change issue or it's not.
    Please make your mind up whether you're on ours or your own side of the
    debate.
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 26, 2009
    #9
  10. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    Once again you demonstrate your reading comprehension deficits. Go back
    to the beginning and try again. Maybe you'll actually read what I
    specified as my concerns about hydrogen powered cars this time.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 26, 2009
    #10
  11. I recall water vapour being your concern.

    But apparently, that's no longer the case - right ?
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 26, 2009
    #11
  12. jolly

    Retiree Guest

    The only "water vapor" that is a global issue is that which
    spouts forth from the great teleprompter reader's mouth.
    This water vapor believer probably also believes that the
    solution to global warming is for everyone to properly
    inflate their tires - then "problem solved". Oh to be
    gullible AND uninformed ... life must be blissful.
     
    Retiree, Jul 26, 2009
    #12
  13. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    You're obviously an intentional idiot. Go back and read. My concerns
    were clearly stated. Since then you and the "Retiree" have been trying
    to put words in my mouth and then acting like I said them. I have no
    further time for trolls.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 26, 2009
    #13
  14. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    Well, would you say it's better to be an anonymous asshole who lies
    about what others say? 'Cuz that's you, dude.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 26, 2009
    #14
  15. LOL
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 27, 2009
    #15
  16. I seem to recall someone raising the issue of hyrdogen-powered cars, saying
    (and I quote) - "Don't want them. Water vapor is a greenhouse gas, after
    all."

    Case closed.
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 27, 2009
    #16
  17. jolly

    Tim McNamara Guest

    In your case, brain closed.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jul 27, 2009
    #17
  18. jolly

    Tony Guest


    Now now children, nothing perpetuates an argument more than both people
    being insulting.

    Water vapour is perfectly harmless when in clouds in the atmosphere, in
    fact more likely to cause cooling than heating, however we don't want
    large amounts of it produced at ground level. I am not aware of any
    studies on the potential problem this might incurr, but I can guess that
    fog and ice are not good things.

    I also dissagree that it is easy to store, you can store small amounts
    of it but not useful amounts for any length of time. Due to thermal
    expansion it has to be vented off. In all current H2 powered cars the
    fuel is depleted after about 5-10 days due to venting.
     
    Tony, Jul 27, 2009
    #18
  19. What a twat!


    nothing perpetuates an argument more than both
    And that would be because ..... ?


    I am not aware of
     
    Centre Parting, Jul 27, 2009
    #19
  20. jolly

    Tony Guest

    Centre Parting wrote:

    Because it would change the environment we live in, more quickly and
    faster than we can adapt either our bodies or infrastructure (just like
    global warming), hence we would not want to jump in without proper study.

    The global warming problem has happened because we assumed the
    environment was an infinite sink, or at least that we cannot
    significantly affect it. Which of course cannot be true in either case,
    all it takes is bigger industry and enough consumers. If I was going to
    make a replacement suggestion for transporting energy I would think we
    should have learnt this lesson to not just look past our own noses for
    potential problems.

    The problems with an H2 consumption infrastructure are many, and perhaps
    the humidity worries could be removed with a simple condensing system,
    however greater problems exist in the storage and conversion. For
    example power cells require Platinum and if you were to try to replace
    all cars with current fuels cells, there would not be enough to go around.

    Generally the efficiencies do not look good, with batteries more
    efficient and materials in greater supply (but not infinite either).

    H2 is not currently viable and most trials seem to be winding down until
    there is some breakthrough in storage and conversion technology.
     
    Tony, Jul 27, 2009
    #20
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.