global warming isn't a big deal well for the other living things it's great just not for us.....we are likely only going to use gas powered cars for about 20 years :/ after that not so much the oil will be used for making plastic and such
@HeadSHOT604 that's a moronic comment, global warming is 10X more of a big deal to other organism other than ourselves. As of now there is a mass extinction going on.
This is not true anymore. One of the Toyota SUV prototypes gets over 400 miles to a tank of hydrogen. I believe it's there gen. 3 model. The price will definitely go down in the future.
@OfficeThug No, because it can be produced from waste cooking oil. It's much better than these things.
Methane can be obtained from biogas.The process of producing caustic soda as a catalyst involves seawater and calcium, which are all widely available.
@an65001 Production of the stuff has reduced food agriculture and is increasing the rate of deforestation worldwide. This is pretty significant both environmentally and economically. The only advantage is that, counting the production, biodiesel produces less CO2 than regular diesel. However, it's only a 50% reduction, and deforestation can ultimately cancel out the gains made in CO2 capture when producing. Hydrogen can be produced from compact and clean sources of electricity, and burns clean.
@OfficeThug But if you were to get into an accident, the results would be horrendous with hydrogen. And once again, waste oil can be used to produce biodiesel. And I want a torque diesel motor pulling me rather than an electric motor. Biodiesel does not emit soot, the black smoke from regular diesel. Only methanol and little caustic soda is used to react it. But the biodiesel is less toxic than table salt and as volatile as diesel!
@an65001 the first line you wrote is a pure lie. look up the properties of hydrogen. an explosion is highly unlikely, not to mention hydrogen burns at a much lower temperature.
@an65001 First off, hydrogen rises very quickly and burns upwards making explosions IMPOSSIBLE, while diesels tend to hug the ground and don't disperse safely. Second off, ALL motors produce torque. Finally, stop reading Biodieselforums IMMEDIATELY. It's bullshit. Alkyl esters are NOT less toxic than table salt, otherwise they would not be labelled as environmentally toxic and dangerous to aquatic ecologies.
@an65001 also, electric motors have a larger useful torque band than any internal combustion engine currently known. so why do you not want an electric motor again?
@an65001 .......no, not only hydrogen. that has nothing to do with a large motor. look up the properties of an electrical motor and then you will understand. look for the graph of rpm and torque of an electric motor versus an internal combustion engine.
@an65001 Methanol is much worse than almost any fossil fuel, except maybe Methane which doubles as a very bad greenhouse gas by itself. In addition, methanol is a carcinogen and is quite toxic, not something you want to spill at the pump. Availability is also dependant on availability of agricultural land, which incidentally isn't all that available.
@OfficeThug Methane can be obtained from biogas. When methanol is reacted with vegetable oil in the presence of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) the reactants lose ALL their chemical properties. Thus biodiesel is less toxic than table salt and as volatile as diesel.
@OfficeThug omg really? gasoline and diesel are also EXTREMELY carcinogenic. where are you going with this? besides, alcohol burning engines burn much cleaner than ordinary gasoline or diesel engines. the last line you wrote is true though.
@FutebolFanatico001 My point is, although biodiesels are better than petrodiesels, they're not good enough of an answer to our problems, especially when they threaten food security and still support global warming to an unacceptable extent. We have far, far cleaner and more renewable sources of energy at our disposal already: Molten salt reactors (like the ones China is rapidly developping) could provide compact and ultra-clean electricity to power a battery-based economy for instance.
@OfficeThug yeah i get it. but the reactors you mentioned are also nuclear powered. i am personally in favor of nuclear, but many people and countries are currently debating its further use in the future. also, nuclear energy is not technically defined as a "renewable" energy source. i don't think it is at least. china is also achieving its 8% economic growth at the expense of the environment. the damage caused is equal to the money they made from the 8% increase. this is y i dont support china.
@FutebolFanatico001 China makes a LOT of bad policy choices, that's for sure, but investing in molten salt reactors isn't one of them. Whether nuclear is renewable or not is a mute argument thanks to E=mc2. Nuclear will always be some millions of times more energy dense than any kinetic, thermal, solar, or chemical renewable. Nuclear's limit right now lies with bad choice of fuel (uranium) and bad reactor designs which drop conversion efficiencies below 1%. Thorium MSRs could get 90%+ efficiency
I just wait for the car that will drive without refill anything. so H2 make E, then E push the car run, and the car pulling the 4 motors on the wheels to covert it back to E and use the E to break down the H2O, then we use solar panel to cover my car and charge up the battery when i'm parking the malls. Ohh and when i make more E than i can use I can just plug my car to my home wall to sale the E back to PG&E. How about that? sound like America Dream?
The right hates Green Tech, because that can't get past having to kill people for it, or destroying our planet to use it, the right is right now here in the U.S. trying to get rid of our laws, that are keeping our environment clean, those nut jobs want to take trillions of gallons of our fresh water in order to put it back under ground with at least 264 different chemical, nuclear materials and other toxic materials so that they can break rocks up for natural gas!
Free energy has been here for a while ,But the Oil companies want these technologies unknown to the masses,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be part of the revolution!
I may sound ignorant by why can't we combine technologies we already have to make a super efficient automobile? In short; a tiny motor running on E85 produces electricity at a high rate which charges the batteries faster or equal to battery output, the batteries power the wheels and accessories of the vehicle. Oh, and why can't that small gas motor that runs on E85 also have one of the interesting hydrogen kits we see all over the internet...making it even more efficient? Whats wrong with that?
Heres the things they don't tell you about hydrogen cars.
-Most of our hydrogen comes from oil, thats why many oil companies love it.
-Hydrogen cars can't store enough hydrogen to equal a gasoline car, most even store less hydrogen per mile the equivalent electric car. About 150 miles on a tank of hydrogen vs 200 miles on the tesla roadster.
-And lastly they start out at a million dollars due to the fact that they use expensive platinum catalyst.
@ibpointless2 Yes most of the hydrogen comes from Oil however their are many other ways to get that hydrogen that are more efficient oil s just a temporary solution.
2. woun't be a problem if we have hydrogen tanks, similair to what they have in california with electric cars
@Lukeschedel hydrogen cars require hydrogen not water. when hydrogen is burned it produces water vapor. They should just go with bio-diesel. It's cheaper to make those types of cars.
k well electric is the way too go if they just make a really solid made efficient electric engine/car and stick with that instead of scrapping it and making a new model every year. Biodeisel is still putting shit into out atmosphere that shouldnt be there but if they suddenly switched all cars from gas to biodeisel i'd be happy
@Lukeschedel well i think we should move the cars into a low energy source slowly. If the public gets pushed into that kind of change too fast, they won't stick with it. They need to start by switching over to bio-diesel first. Then slowly move into another form. Also, electric power plants also produce a lot of carbon emissions. if you google search how hydrogen cars work, you will learn that they produce electricity and steam with no negative impact. This might also get us more fresh water.
@Lukeschedel it's still not any waste. We don't have to let it go out into the atmosphere. It can be contained and then used for other purposes. Since companies are privatizing water (which should be illegal), the water created can be dumped into fresh water sources that are being sucked dry. Or sent to Africa so the people don't have to drink coca cola over water because of it's price. All you have to do is be creative. Limiting possibilities is the work of Companies, not people.
@Lukeschedel It would simply balance out. The hydrogen would presumably come from water sources and then promptly be converted back into water. I'm assuming you're imagining a Venus like situation; don't.
@josiegallows It would "simply" balance out? yah ok buddy wtf are you smokin seriously, If we're just harvesting good drinking water and putting it through a vehicle, out it's exhaust then up into the air in a random place and then have it rain down and somehow re-use this water? We would fucking dry up lakes and cause thunder storms in deserts bro just stick with solar-energy.. WHY NOT?!
@Lukeschedel It's hard to respect your thoughts when I find it impossible to respect how you would speak. That aside, "water sources" can be undrinkable water - excuse me for thinking it should go without saying that we shouldn't put fresh drinking water into hydrogen processing plants. There is enough unclean water to go around, especially waste water that is normally not reclaimed.
None of this would be a problem if over-population was curtailed. Eugenics. WHY NOT?!
@Lukeschedel BAHAHAHA water vapor going into the atmosphere???? What In The Fuck is Wrong with you? HAHAHA ... hey it's called rain / humidity / snow / drizzle... It's already EVERYWHERE You fucking fool!! bahahahaha ...dumbest thing I have ever heard. Period.
hydrogen is not the way to go. Production consumes a lot of energy, cars are hell expensive and there's no infrastructure. With battery powered cars you use an existing infrastructure and the cleaner the grid becomes, the cleaner your drive. Plus, with exchangeable batteries - like the betterplace system - range and battery costs is no longer an issue. With swappable batteries electric cars are eactually cheaper to run than gasoline cars and the performance is just the same - even better.
Out of all of the possible power systems that could be employed to power your car (Gas, Bio fuel, Hydrogen, ect.) the only one that the average suburban household could ever produce completely on their own is electricity via rooftop solar cells; cells that will continue to decrees in price as demand goes up.
But if Big Oil is successful at replacing the now debunked gasoline with ((SHINY CLEAN NEW HYDROGEN)) the nearly free rooftop power systems will never mature and we will have no choice but to continue lining their pockets with our hard earned cash to get that fuel.
If you say this is a moving bomb, then gas tanks at home would have been a non-moving bomb? Come on, when the first car ran on petrol people in that era said that very same thing! - -'
Are you crazy? Your worried about water vapor? WTF?? That is by far the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. What about "RAIN" that caused by water vapor! I can't believe you after all the shit our society has gone through with wars etc over oil and gas your worried about fucking water vapor.
Hydrogen powered cars would be great if we had a cheap way of getting hydrogen, currently we get most from fossil fuels, which makes it no better gasoline. I've heard some alternative methods but they are mostly impractical now because there's no investors who want to take that big of a risk yet.
And for those feeling the immediate need to discuss Al Gore about this: there's need to look for alternative fuels and "ways to get around" as the oil depots are beign depleted and will eventually become scarce.
We can't afford to not work on alternatives for economical reasons as much as environmental.
High five Kenfla2! Did you see how Al Gore humiliated himself at the copenhaggan convention? (yes I know I misspelled that word). He had to repeal his retarded statement about the south pole shrinking. He should get his own kids show called "Al Gores wonderful world of imagination". Then he can just make up things all day without hurting himself.
It's really the manufacturers that need to make the cars available, people will otherwise just buy what feels comfortable and nice, so I don't blame him.
@momcilosavic there's electric and there's hydrogen, electric cars take 16 hours to recharge, hydrogen refuels as fast as gasoline and is cleaner than electric cars
@canadia7x Hydrogen would almost definitely need to be produced using electricity from plants.
Producing the hydrogen isn't really the problem though, we already have extremely energy-dense, clean, and much safer ways of producing electricity that have recently resurfaced (just google LFTR, China already picked them up). The biggest issues right now are related to hydrogen storage. A research group at my university is working on cheap, high hydrogen density solids, but it'll take a while still.
What is the liter per minute consumption rate of hydrogen of these cars???
How much liters per minute of hydrogen do these cars use in normal driving???
The device on my motorcycle produces over 40 liters per minute of hydrogen from water.
The device on my motorcycle also produces over 60 liters per minute of HHO gas. Is this enough hydrogen to run these cars??? Signed Norman Williams XMARINE. No joke!!!
tdwp gm is coming up with cars that will blow you away look at the volt it takes about as much energy as using your microwave and I my self have concepts that will get rid of gas power all together. so watch what you say and no hard feelings ok.
To the people who think that fossil fuel is the right place for cars are simply retarded. Only type zero civilazations use fucking energy made by dead plants and fossil fuel. get with the times you fuckers. We have solar pannals now powering entire buissnesses. The fuel cell will eventually become practical because its technology and we have no choice but to move into the future.
What are the impacts of producing hydrogen fuel cells? And if electrical cars become the growing alternative to fossil fueled vehicles, how will we manage the increased demand for electricity in an already present "power crisis" in many states?
this is bullshit, hydrogen cars are too expensive and will never mass produce, its just a way to keep gas cars a bit longer, to make it seem like we're tryin to move away from gas. GM got rid of a bunch of electric cars in 2003 and crushed em, we've had the technology forever, but money and power means too much to people.
in 1908 many people said that the gasoline engine would NEVER replace the horse and buggy......I am not going to argue here, I just want to say : Sit back and watch.......In a few years these hydrogen cars will be in your neighbor's driveway.....HYDROGEN IS NOT IN THE FUTURE.....IT IS HERE TODAY, AND IT WILL BECOME AFFORDABLE......
Yes Streetraceren........IT amazes the heck out of me how humanity is still the same as we were
100 years ago, and 1,000 years ago.....I had an
uncle who told me back in 1967 that man would
NEVER walk on the moon...He died of cancer in
March of 1968, and never saw it......The very next year I sat with my parents on July 20, 1969 to watch the Eagle land on Tranquility Base......MILLIONS said man would NEVER fly.......Now, we will NEVER have hydrogen cars that are affordable......HOW FUNNY...
YOU have the same genes as the people in 1908 who said that the horse and buggy would NEVER
be replaced by gasoline cars when Henry Ford
started mass-producing them.....I am NOT being disrespectful, it just AMAZES me how human beings love to laugh at new technology......Oh yes,
and the millions of people who said that MAN WOULD NEVER FLY back in the summer of 1903 as the Wright Brothers racked their brains with failures at Kitty Hawk, N. Carolina.......HYDROGEN IS HERE MY FRIENDS.....
and you have the same genes of the people from the 1950's who said that we are all going to in flying cars and how many do you see in the sky today? they can make fuel cell cars they are not pratical!!!
We're slow because all these big company's are doing it on purpose. They don't want 'us' to drive hydrogen cars but they want our grandsons or grandsons grandsons to drive them.
Actually they want people to have hydrogen cars because they're higher maintenance than electric cars and the same gas companies that sell us oil can continue making money off of us by selling us hydrogen.
The big problems with hydrogen cars is that the technology still isn't here yet to make them very viable, the fuel cells don't last long and the process of getting hydrogen is very energy intensive rather have electric cars personally.
eh, this option isn't actually that great, it's dreadfully inefficient, we get most of our Hydrogen from fossil fuels because it's less energy intensive than from water, each cars actual cost is pretty absurd, fuel cells have a short life span.
The better option would be electric cars which are around 5x more efficient energy wise, the technology is here with fully recyclable batteries and up to 300 mile driving range on one charge.
I'll be for hydrogen cars if the technology ever comes up to make them better in every aspect, it's simply not affordable, it's very inefficient because it takes so much energy to make hydrogen when you could just recharge a battery.
We should be using electric cars because the technology is already here, it's simpler, more infrastructure is easily available and it's relatively efficient.
Hydrogen cars will never be green, you have to remember that. People always say, that you can get hydrogen from water, but I'm sorry, do you know how much that costs? So why not just put electricity straight to a car. Unless electricity will almost be free, which is unlikely, hydrogen will be made, like now, chemicaly from fossil fuel which means oild companies will still rule the world!
the best economy is to cut weight, drag, and power. currently the vehicles we operate weigh tons, and should be in the hundreds of pounds. work commuter vehicles can and should get 60 - 75 mpg, plus. the technology has been here for a long time - we just resist the lack of comfort and power. Safety is always a consideration because they would be driving amongst the tanks we currently are driving - we must size down to really be effective in economizing.
Agreed. And putting the fear of one's personal safety, with bad drivers to one side, clean energy is getting scant promotion from the mass media. Will we ever see the day when companies of wind or solar power are considered influential on the Stock Exchange??
emissions are water vapour? if everyone on earth drove that it would be about 4x worse for the green house effect, lol.. H2O is the largest and most powerful green house gas by far! it's funny how carbon dioxide became demonized
If only there were a way for water to come out of the sky, sec it's raining. In general the water in the atmosphere stays in relative equilibrium, however sequestering the huge excessive amount of C02 that took millions of years for plants and geological processes to sequester isn't quite as easy a task
There's lots of good arguments against hydrogen cars, this isn't the best of them
It's actually a very old technology. I believe the fuel cell is actually pretty close to as old if not older than the internal combustion engine. The only problem is that it's so expensive and energy intensive to separate hydrogen from other elements that it's dreadfully inefficient for the fuel alone.
How it works is it uses hydrogen as fuel, a semi permeable membrane and oxygen, when the hydrogen tries to bond with the oxygen it creates a current through the membrane which makes electricity
The only problem is that it currently takes around 4-5 times the energy to separate the bonds in water to get the hydrogen than what you get out of it. It's actually one of the biggest problems with trying to use hydrogen as a fuel. At best it's a storage device atm while using renewables. As a resource it's self that's a different story
The problem is you still require energy to separate the bonds in water to get the energy you need and so far the process requires too much energy to do so.
Unless you're talking about those pressurized water cars, in which case you take more energy to pressurize it then you get out of locomotion, not to mention the weight ratio makes it impractical.
If it's neither please point to me to said cars =P
but anyways, if it's a car that you dump water into and have a current separate water to make hydrogen then you might as well just have a battery cell instead because it takes more energy to separate the water into it's components than you'll get out of it, not to mention the energy it takes to transport the extra weight and the weight of the fuel cells =P Again if it's a different kind of method please point me to it because electric cars just seem better overall. =P
now... the only problem about electric crs is the battery! soon the battery will run out of juice making it "un-rechargable"... unless we create a battery that will have a constant amount of juice in it to make it so it will charge the same amount of power in every charge.... i dont know if the electric car will go far... D:
"unless we create a battery that will have a constant amount of juice in it to make it so it will charge the same amount of power in every charge.... i dont know if the electric car will go far... D:"
Lithium ion batteries do fine besides the same applies to any other alternative like hydrogen cars, fuel cells have a very short life span, then there's the problems of actually getting hydrogen
Since you seem confident that it wouldn't go far, what alternative would you suggest =P
woops... forgot to do my research!! hmmmmm... i really could not think of anything... unless we put sails on are car or go back to the old times with animals (just throwing things out there)
thats true with any process to get energy. theres no such thing as a perfect reaction where all energy is conserved. during any process energy will be lost, so its not saying much that the energy produced by the hydrogen cells is less than the energy used to create the hydrogen fuel.
True, but it's around 5x the energy cost than if you just went straight from a battery. Even that's only around 85% efficient straight from battery. I'm no implying that it's 100% efficient, merely stating that it's more efficient than current alternatives. What's your point?
While you're partially right hydrogen that we have access to is always attached to something, the only way that fuel cells can generate current is from pure hydrogen which takes a lot more energy to separate the bonds than you'll ever get from a fuel cell.
i supposed those hydrogen stations will be more of situated in the deserts area (arizona and texas etc)
Here in Quebec Canada we have like A PLENTY AMOUNT OF WATER EVERYWERE you go so i think those would be in deserted area.
but again they talk about hydrogen stations and you already have an hydrogen generator that produce hydrogen of water... would it be better to call those hydrogen stations... WATER STATIONS ?
Hydrogen fuel cells are difficult to store in the tank because any bump will cause an explosion. And the fuel cells used in cars require platinum for it to work, and those are rare and expensive.
I had to do a fuel debate on this.
And also, I dont think electric is as successful because what do you need for electric cars? Electricity, how do you get it? More Power Plants.
Anyways as I said personally I'd prefer a better Mass transit system, however since it seems we're stuck with the car for a while I'd prefer the electric car for other economic reasons
1) it having so few parts in relation to other cars means more maintinence
2) most batteries are recyclable
3) battery powered cars are around 80% efficient vs an internal combustion engine which is about 25-30%
4) I don't think you can beat around 40-60 cents a gallon equivalent.
Haha, okay so i'm pretty convinced, but just one more limitation i would like to add.
Electric cars arent that compatable with distances because it would get about 40 miles, then from there it wil need a recharge for 4 to 8 hours, i.e. the Chevy Bolt.
1) That would be terrible if it were true, some electric cars have a 300 mile driving range on one charge
2) the first generation EV1's had a 60 mile driving range and were not using the most modern battery technology
3) you do realize hybrid cars are essentially electric cars with an alternative fuel source which takes up more space and weight which cost more energy even those can manage to eek out a 40 mile driving range on battery power.
Personally I think the only real limitation is currently the price since the government subsidizes every other car type rather heavily. You can't even get a tax break for electric cars till 2010 I think. While I don't like the fact we're dumping money in such a fashion I think it'd be better invested in a mass transit infrastructure or improving electric cars.
The average electric car is around 120 miles driving range on one charge and the best per charge is around 300 miles per charge.
Electric cars for all intents and purposes are good for everyone (if you must drive a car) except the car companies because there's so much fewer things to maintenance in comparison to the internal combustion engine which require a large number of parts to fix in the engine alone vs a simple electric motor, a controller and a battery.
In the case of the chevy bolt it's not designed to be a pure electric vehicle, it's designed to rely on another fuel source with another set up to charge the batteries with internally. Such systems favor the companies that make money off of fixing them constantly as they're far more labor intensive than a pure electric car. Cheers.
Btw, you never provided an alternative assuming you had to use cars.
this is scary if u read this this far u will die in 10 days if u dont send to any 15 videos in 2 hours good luck hope u dont die !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Listen up...the future is here...all you have to do it listen to me...if you really want to end oil dependency, this is what you do...buy a velomobile ($6000) and put on an electric motor ($500) and lithium battery ($1000) and you just created an electric car that can travel 100 miles and go 40 mph...and it will keep you out of the rain because velomobiles come with glass enclosure and pedals so you can power it with your feet if you choose to
electric cars is the future...look how complicated that engine looked...do you know how complicated an electric car is?...let me tell you...electric car consists of the 3 components...that's it !!!! motor -- controller -- battery...that's all !!!...compare that to about 1000 components for hyrdogen or gasoline...electric car can be repaired by the person who owns it...electric cars will put auto mechanics out of business
I know this, and it was proven to us in school. These people are not look at BTU.They are looking at cost. BTU is the burn rate of fuel/energy. Gasoline hold the top burn rate (above 2000 degree) for it environmental friendliness. Tree need carbon...Wild fire are more toxic than EPA regulated automobile. Gasoline comes for CRUDE OIL and so is MILLIONS of other Product(by-product).
Look out for the CARBON TAX...it another way to keep the poor man down and in fear of banker laws.
what is the cost of your health?. You will find out the cost when your health is at sacrifice. Some say, if you want to save the environment....kill your self...but that`s a mental sickness.The new energy HYPE is another way to get the money out of the American people pocket. Coal and gas build this nation and today you are witnessing the wealth spreading to socialist country, who hate LIBERTY.
GOD bless the nation that constitute. Get your mind out of A MERRY CAN.
if ur reading this u cant go back there was a dad who got pissed couse he got layed off so he went home took a knife than went to his 13 year old daughter and slit her neck! if u r reading this and dont forward to 10 vids the 13 year old girl be sitting on the endge of the bed waiting for tha when u wake up who ever takes care of u will find u in the tube full of bloode with ur throat slit and than the 13 year old girl will come to who ever takes care of u so hurry dont be the that unlucky one
no..... a hydrogen powered car runs on hydrogen. Which doesn't occur naturally as much as fossil fuels. This means that we have to make hydrogen in factories. In other words, a hydrogen powered car is another form of a battery powered car since you still need another source of power to produce hydrogen.
a hydrogen car will cost between 30K-80K. and to fill the tank in a hydrogen car would cost about 20$. and the car gets about 74mpg equivalent. and for all those who thing hydrogen is dangerous because they think it explodes easier than gas fact is gas is easier to explode than hydrogen because of the high ignition point. so in fact hydrogen is actually safer than gas. if you still don't believe me think about what they said about gas "your sitting on a bomb", I don't see a difference.
and actually the new hydrogen engine made is actually stronger and more durable than the standard gas engine. They shot it, hit it with a train, threw it into a fire, shot at it some more with an automatic, and it wouldnt explode. I dont think it would be good business to make a car where you sit on a bomb
dundotomo, don't listen to banditandrudy. Just the fuel cell costs about $300,000 to make even with mass production. The 10,000 PSI tank costs bout $50,000 and has to be replaced every 5 years.
harrymook, the source is the grid. You charge the EV with the grid (now the grid could be solar or whatever, that is another subject, we are only talking cars here, not the grid). You put a fuel cell in a car to extend its range because fuel-cell-cars are EVs that use a fuel cell to extend their range. But if the range is 1000+ miles from just the battery charged off the grid then no need for fuel cell in the car. Get it?
harrymook, "This has nothing at all to do with batteries." - a fuel cell car has everything to do with batteries. A fuel cell car is an EV with a generator, if you make better batteries you dont need the generator. There are two different prototies of batteries, eeStore and Nanowire, if either get their cost down then you dont need a generator on an EV. Also, you dont need to store solar power in hydrogen, you could use these new batteries instead.
whats up man its me again. I've been reading everything you've been saying and its very interesting. I've just got one concern with changing over gas engines to hydrogen engines and that is this. Water contributes much more of a greenhouse effect than CO2 does. I know it will become rain, but CO2 eventually goes down too. Do you not think that this has the potential to change the climate as well. Not to mention everywhere in a city would be very humid. What are your thoughts?
harrymook, to head off people like me you should open with, "I am using multi-junction cell panels that are 40% efficient at converting light to electricity and cost about $3/watt." That would have worked on me. I had no idea that panels that good were coming down in price. I bet few people know that. This is as big as the nano-wire batt. and the eeStore batt. - of course if these work you wont need a fuel cell in the car, EV will be fine w/ 1000 mile+ range.
harrymook, currently only satellites use multi-junction cells and these cost a ton. It hard for me to believe they have gotten the cost down to around a grand per m^2.
YAY!!!!!!!! HYDROGEN IN 2020 I CANT BELIEVE I WILL LIVE TO SEE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMYGASH wub wub wub wub
reyshakquit 5 months ago
global warming isn't a big deal well for the other living things it's great just not for us.....we are likely only going to use gas powered cars for about 20 years :/ after that not so much the oil will be used for making plastic and such
HeadSHOT604 8 months ago
@HeadSHOT604 that's a moronic comment, global warming is 10X more of a big deal to other organism other than ourselves. As of now there is a mass extinction going on.
SuperSylar1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is not true anymore. One of the Toyota SUV prototypes gets over 400 miles to a tank of hydrogen. I believe it's there gen. 3 model. The price will definitely go down in the future.
canadia7x 8 months ago
Comment removed
canadia7x 8 months ago
Biodiesel is best because it's safe (It doesn't explode) and good for the environment.
an65001 10 months ago
@an65001 It's actually worse for the environment.
OfficeThug 8 months ago
@OfficeThug No, because it can be produced from waste cooking oil. It's much better than these things.
Methane can be obtained from biogas.The process of producing caustic soda as a catalyst involves seawater and calcium, which are all widely available.
an65001 8 months ago
@an65001 Production of the stuff has reduced food agriculture and is increasing the rate of deforestation worldwide. This is pretty significant both environmentally and economically. The only advantage is that, counting the production, biodiesel produces less CO2 than regular diesel. However, it's only a 50% reduction, and deforestation can ultimately cancel out the gains made in CO2 capture when producing. Hydrogen can be produced from compact and clean sources of electricity, and burns clean.
OfficeThug 8 months ago
@OfficeThug But if you were to get into an accident, the results would be horrendous with hydrogen. And once again, waste oil can be used to produce biodiesel. And I want a torque diesel motor pulling me rather than an electric motor. Biodiesel does not emit soot, the black smoke from regular diesel. Only methanol and little caustic soda is used to react it. But the biodiesel is less toxic than table salt and as volatile as diesel!
an65001 8 months ago
@an65001 the first line you wrote is a pure lie. look up the properties of hydrogen. an explosion is highly unlikely, not to mention hydrogen burns at a much lower temperature.
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@an65001 First off, hydrogen rises very quickly and burns upwards making explosions IMPOSSIBLE, while diesels tend to hug the ground and don't disperse safely. Second off, ALL motors produce torque. Finally, stop reading Biodieselforums IMMEDIATELY. It's bullshit. Alkyl esters are NOT less toxic than table salt, otherwise they would not be labelled as environmentally toxic and dangerous to aquatic ecologies.
OfficeThug 7 months ago
@an65001 also, electric motors have a larger useful torque band than any internal combustion engine currently known. so why do you not want an electric motor again?
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@FutebolFanatico001 Really!? Well then only Hydrogen can power such a large motor.
an65001 7 months ago
@an65001 .......no, not only hydrogen. that has nothing to do with a large motor. look up the properties of an electrical motor and then you will understand. look for the graph of rpm and torque of an electric motor versus an internal combustion engine.
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@FutebolFanatico001 Be useful and give me the link to Windows Whistler 2419 instead.
an65001 7 months ago
@an65001 wat the hell is windows whistler 2419? i dont like your attitude...
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@OfficeThug well, technically you aren't burning the hydrogen, but i get it
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@OfficeThug Alcohol for Methanol is much more than available!
an65001 8 months ago
@an65001 Methanol is much worse than almost any fossil fuel, except maybe Methane which doubles as a very bad greenhouse gas by itself. In addition, methanol is a carcinogen and is quite toxic, not something you want to spill at the pump. Availability is also dependant on availability of agricultural land, which incidentally isn't all that available.
OfficeThug 8 months ago
@OfficeThug When chemically reacted, biodiesel is less toxic than table salt and as volatile as diesel. Learn something about reactions first.
an65001 8 months ago
@an65001 I wasn't talking about biodiesels, I was talking about methanol. Last I heard biodiesels are alkyl esters, not alcohols.
OfficeThug 7 months ago
@OfficeThug Methane can be obtained from biogas. When methanol is reacted with vegetable oil in the presence of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) the reactants lose ALL their chemical properties. Thus biodiesel is less toxic than table salt and as volatile as diesel.
an65001 8 months ago
@OfficeThug omg really? gasoline and diesel are also EXTREMELY carcinogenic. where are you going with this? besides, alcohol burning engines burn much cleaner than ordinary gasoline or diesel engines. the last line you wrote is true though.
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@FutebolFanatico001 My point is, although biodiesels are better than petrodiesels, they're not good enough of an answer to our problems, especially when they threaten food security and still support global warming to an unacceptable extent. We have far, far cleaner and more renewable sources of energy at our disposal already: Molten salt reactors (like the ones China is rapidly developping) could provide compact and ultra-clean electricity to power a battery-based economy for instance.
OfficeThug 7 months ago
@OfficeThug yeah i get it. but the reactors you mentioned are also nuclear powered. i am personally in favor of nuclear, but many people and countries are currently debating its further use in the future. also, nuclear energy is not technically defined as a "renewable" energy source. i don't think it is at least. china is also achieving its 8% economic growth at the expense of the environment. the damage caused is equal to the money they made from the 8% increase. this is y i dont support china.
FutebolFanatico001 7 months ago
@FutebolFanatico001 China makes a LOT of bad policy choices, that's for sure, but investing in molten salt reactors isn't one of them. Whether nuclear is renewable or not is a mute argument thanks to E=mc2. Nuclear will always be some millions of times more energy dense than any kinetic, thermal, solar, or chemical renewable. Nuclear's limit right now lies with bad choice of fuel (uranium) and bad reactor designs which drop conversion efficiencies below 1%. Thorium MSRs could get 90%+ efficiency
OfficeThug 7 months ago
co sa asy..
stubbersboy 10 months ago
Co sa asy....
stubbersboy 10 months ago
I just wait for the car that will drive without refill anything. so H2 make E, then E push the car run, and the car pulling the 4 motors on the wheels to covert it back to E and use the E to break down the H2O, then we use solar panel to cover my car and charge up the battery when i'm parking the malls. Ohh and when i make more E than i can use I can just plug my car to my home wall to sale the E back to PG&E. How about that? sound like America Dream?
jnnycliff 10 months ago 3
The right hates Green Tech, because that can't get past having to kill people for it, or destroying our planet to use it, the right is right now here in the U.S. trying to get rid of our laws, that are keeping our environment clean, those nut jobs want to take trillions of gallons of our fresh water in order to put it back under ground with at least 264 different chemical, nuclear materials and other toxic materials so that they can break rocks up for natural gas!
proverb311031 11 months ago 2
get r done!
player1234guy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is NOTHING new... Check out Jack Nicholson talking about Hydrogen cars in The 70s...............
laurajdahl 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Free energy has been here for a while ,But the Oil companies want these technologies unknown to the masses,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Be part of the revolution!
dharmastipulate 1 year ago
I may sound ignorant by why can't we combine technologies we already have to make a super efficient automobile? In short; a tiny motor running on E85 produces electricity at a high rate which charges the batteries faster or equal to battery output, the batteries power the wheels and accessories of the vehicle. Oh, and why can't that small gas motor that runs on E85 also have one of the interesting hydrogen kits we see all over the internet...making it even more efficient? Whats wrong with that?
Ryantravisaol 1 year ago
Heres the things they don't tell you about hydrogen cars.
-Most of our hydrogen comes from oil, thats why many oil companies love it.
-Hydrogen cars can't store enough hydrogen to equal a gasoline car, most even store less hydrogen per mile the equivalent electric car. About 150 miles on a tank of hydrogen vs 200 miles on the tesla roadster.
-And lastly they start out at a million dollars due to the fact that they use expensive platinum catalyst.
Hydrogen is a false dream.
ibpointless2 1 year ago
@ibpointless2 who told you hydrogen comes from oil? really..
abhinav7333 1 year ago
@ibpointless2 Yes most of the hydrogen comes from Oil however their are many other ways to get that hydrogen that are more efficient oil s just a temporary solution.
2. woun't be a problem if we have hydrogen tanks, similair to what they have in california with electric cars
3. this price will likely go down.
applefrog111 1 year ago
Comment removed
canadia7x 8 months ago
Take a look at ITM Power
BankWood69 1 year ago
Take a look at ITM Power
BankWood69 1 year ago
Comment removed
Lukeschedel 1 year ago
@Lukeschedel hydrogen cars require hydrogen not water. when hydrogen is burned it produces water vapor. They should just go with bio-diesel. It's cheaper to make those types of cars.
Apocalypse487 1 year ago
k well electric is the way too go if they just make a really solid made efficient electric engine/car and stick with that instead of scrapping it and making a new model every year. Biodeisel is still putting shit into out atmosphere that shouldnt be there but if they suddenly switched all cars from gas to biodeisel i'd be happy
Lukeschedel 1 year ago
@Lukeschedel well i think we should move the cars into a low energy source slowly. If the public gets pushed into that kind of change too fast, they won't stick with it. They need to start by switching over to bio-diesel first. Then slowly move into another form. Also, electric power plants also produce a lot of carbon emissions. if you google search how hydrogen cars work, you will learn that they produce electricity and steam with no negative impact. This might also get us more fresh water.
Apocalypse487 1 year ago
Comment removed
Lukeschedel 1 year ago
@Lukeschedel it's still not any waste. We don't have to let it go out into the atmosphere. It can be contained and then used for other purposes. Since companies are privatizing water (which should be illegal), the water created can be dumped into fresh water sources that are being sucked dry. Or sent to Africa so the people don't have to drink coca cola over water because of it's price. All you have to do is be creative. Limiting possibilities is the work of Companies, not people.
Apocalypse487 1 year ago
@Lukeschedel It would simply balance out. The hydrogen would presumably come from water sources and then promptly be converted back into water. I'm assuming you're imagining a Venus like situation; don't.
josiegallows 1 year ago
@josiegallows It would "simply" balance out? yah ok buddy wtf are you smokin seriously, If we're just harvesting good drinking water and putting it through a vehicle, out it's exhaust then up into the air in a random place and then have it rain down and somehow re-use this water? We would fucking dry up lakes and cause thunder storms in deserts bro just stick with solar-energy.. WHY NOT?!
Lukeschedel 1 year ago
@Lukeschedel It's hard to respect your thoughts when I find it impossible to respect how you would speak. That aside, "water sources" can be undrinkable water - excuse me for thinking it should go without saying that we shouldn't put fresh drinking water into hydrogen processing plants. There is enough unclean water to go around, especially waste water that is normally not reclaimed.
None of this would be a problem if over-population was curtailed. Eugenics. WHY NOT?!
josiegallows 1 year ago
Comment removed
Lukeschedel 1 year ago
@Lukeschedel BAHAHAHA water vapor going into the atmosphere???? What In The Fuck is Wrong with you? HAHAHA ... hey it's called rain / humidity / snow / drizzle... It's already EVERYWHERE You fucking fool!! bahahahaha ...dumbest thing I have ever heard. Period.
WhitePowerPatriot88 10 months ago
Comment removed
Lukeschedel 10 months ago
this might not help save your money, but it will help save our planet.. so its not a stupid idea
MarijunanaG 1 year ago
hydrogen is not the way to go. Production consumes a lot of energy, cars are hell expensive and there's no infrastructure. With battery powered cars you use an existing infrastructure and the cleaner the grid becomes, the cleaner your drive. Plus, with exchangeable batteries - like the betterplace system - range and battery costs is no longer an issue. With swappable batteries electric cars are eactually cheaper to run than gasoline cars and the performance is just the same - even better.
ultimazer1 1 year ago
a kind of crap
salrun07 1 year ago
Out of all of the possible power systems that could be employed to power your car (Gas, Bio fuel, Hydrogen, ect.) the only one that the average suburban household could ever produce completely on their own is electricity via rooftop solar cells; cells that will continue to decrees in price as demand goes up.
GSpotter63 1 year ago
But if Big Oil is successful at replacing the now debunked gasoline with ((SHINY CLEAN NEW HYDROGEN)) the nearly free rooftop power systems will never mature and we will have no choice but to continue lining their pockets with our hard earned cash to get that fuel.
GSpotter63 1 year ago
This wont save you money. That's why it's a stupid idea.
hockeyhatesgooglnow 1 year ago
If you say this is a moving bomb, then gas tanks at home would have been a non-moving bomb? Come on, when the first car ran on petrol people in that era said that very same thing! - -'
kiNGLYtUbe 1 year ago
I love hydrogen, for a better air to breathe...
kiNGLYtUbe 1 year ago
I am working on building a plastic burning car that creates toxic fumes.
hawkermustang 1 year ago
Yes I am wondering. Eco-friendly?. Think twice.
The emissions of these hydrogen powered cars is water vapor.
How much water vapor thousands or even millions of cars produce?.Consider this in a city.
What is the effect of this amount of water vapor to the environment?
If this technology becomes truth, let see what the future time says.
answ90 1 year ago
Are you crazy? Your worried about water vapor? WTF?? That is by far the most idiotic thing I've ever heard. What about "RAIN" that caused by water vapor! I can't believe you after all the shit our society has gone through with wars etc over oil and gas your worried about fucking water vapor.
McQuaidm 1 year ago 27
@McQuaidm Who the hell said they were ever worried about water vapor?!?
MrBedrock82 1 year ago
Hydrogen powered cars would be great if we had a cheap way of getting hydrogen, currently we get most from fossil fuels, which makes it no better gasoline. I've heard some alternative methods but they are mostly impractical now because there's no investors who want to take that big of a risk yet.
rgaud8 1 year ago
These would be a moving bomb, really dangerous.
XKfeildX 2 years ago
@XKfeildX isn't fuel dangerous?
DiogoE6 1 year ago
best thing it you make your own hydrogen out of water
bensbargains 2 years ago
This is great! ;D
And for those feeling the immediate need to discuss Al Gore about this: there's need to look for alternative fuels and "ways to get around" as the oil depots are beign depleted and will eventually become scarce.
We can't afford to not work on alternatives for economical reasons as much as environmental.
Swamoez0rs 2 years ago
High five Kenfla2! Did you see how Al Gore humiliated himself at the copenhaggan convention? (yes I know I misspelled that word). He had to repeal his retarded statement about the south pole shrinking. He should get his own kids show called "Al Gores wonderful world of imagination". Then he can just make up things all day without hurting himself.
Doggy589 2 years ago
if that son of a bitch is woriing about this world why is he driving a gasss guslear
georgel19841 2 years ago
Why don't you ask Al Gore why is he flying on jet airline if he is so worry about this world.
kenfla2 2 years ago
kenfla2 ,please stay with your MILEY CYRUS
georgel19841 2 years ago
Dude, what? Where the hell did Miley Cyrus come from. I'm 39 years old, i don't have time for little girls
kenfla2 2 years ago
@kenfla2 sure, why dont you just walk from america to japan .....
AngretLord 2 years ago
It's really the manufacturers that need to make the cars available, people will otherwise just buy what feels comfortable and nice, so I don't blame him.
1PercentRDA 2 years ago
Electric cars are better.... solar power fields+electric car=EPIC WIN!!!
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
Yeah, but Electric cars are going slower plus they don't go that long!
momcilosavic 2 years ago 6
@momcilosavic You fail on both accounts...
watch?v=DzImGvY7e1Y
Watch it
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@TheReasonWhyGuy Propaganda works, question what you're told...
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
@momcilosavic there's electric and there's hydrogen, electric cars take 16 hours to recharge, hydrogen refuels as fast as gasoline and is cleaner than electric cars
DVAFP 1 year ago
@momcilosavic
lol what, who fed you that BS? xD
rock3tcat 1 year ago
@momcilosavic dont make up shit do your research you redneck
moneyjr1122 11 months ago
@momcilosavic not to mention that EVs require electricity that is mostly produced from coal-fired power plants
canadia7x 9 months ago
@canadia7x Hydrogen would almost definitely need to be produced using electricity from plants.
Producing the hydrogen isn't really the problem though, we already have extremely energy-dense, clean, and much safer ways of producing electricity that have recently resurfaced (just google LFTR, China already picked them up). The biggest issues right now are related to hydrogen storage. A research group at my university is working on cheap, high hydrogen density solids, but it'll take a while still.
OfficeThug 8 months ago
thats kool
w1nd12 2 years ago
What is the liter per minute consumption rate of hydrogen of these cars???
How much liters per minute of hydrogen do these cars use in normal driving???
The device on my motorcycle produces over 40 liters per minute of hydrogen from water.
The device on my motorcycle also produces over 60 liters per minute of HHO gas. Is this enough hydrogen to run these cars??? Signed Norman Williams XMARINE. No joke!!!
Jupiterironman 2 years ago
united states sucks, with a 1/3 part of the china population, they can contaminate more than few continents, lol ^^.
Rant on me or whateva, is the true
XDjDarKX 2 years ago
tdwp gm is coming up with cars that will blow you away look at the volt it takes about as much energy as using your microwave and I my self have concepts that will get rid of gas power all together. so watch what you say and no hard feelings ok.
:)
animetodamaximum 2 years ago
To the people who think that fossil fuel is the right place for cars are simply retarded. Only type zero civilazations use fucking energy made by dead plants and fossil fuel. get with the times you fuckers. We have solar pannals now powering entire buissnesses. The fuel cell will eventually become practical because its technology and we have no choice but to move into the future.
Pornstarasian 2 years ago
What are the impacts of producing hydrogen fuel cells? And if electrical cars become the growing alternative to fossil fueled vehicles, how will we manage the increased demand for electricity in an already present "power crisis" in many states?
Chicorider77 2 years ago
why dont people start using horse drawn carriages again
inFAMOUS409 2 years ago
this is bullshit, hydrogen cars are too expensive and will never mass produce, its just a way to keep gas cars a bit longer, to make it seem like we're tryin to move away from gas. GM got rid of a bunch of electric cars in 2003 and crushed em, we've had the technology forever, but money and power means too much to people.
TDWPOwns12 2 years ago
I BEG TO DIFFER, THIS IS NOT BULLSHIT.........
When Henry Ford started mass-producing cars
in 1908 many people said that the gasoline engine would NEVER replace the horse and buggy......I am not going to argue here, I just want to say : Sit back and watch.......In a few years these hydrogen cars will be in your neighbor's driveway.....HYDROGEN IS NOT IN THE FUTURE.....IT IS HERE TODAY, AND IT WILL BECOME AFFORDABLE......
sierracuban 2 years ago
the only reason car companies produce Hydrogen cars is because they're paid to do so. It will be dead in the water in the next 10 years.
7926645 2 years ago
fuck you!
captcaveman4201 2 years ago
the hydrogen fuel cell car will never work as a production car
peterbob101 2 years ago
Trust me it will and already does on a trie out
streetraceren 2 years ago
Yes Streetraceren........IT amazes the heck out of me how humanity is still the same as we were
100 years ago, and 1,000 years ago.....I had an
uncle who told me back in 1967 that man would
NEVER walk on the moon...He died of cancer in
March of 1968, and never saw it......The very next year I sat with my parents on July 20, 1969 to watch the Eagle land on Tranquility Base......MILLIONS said man would NEVER fly.......Now, we will NEVER have hydrogen cars that are affordable......HOW FUNNY...
sierracuban 2 years ago
YOU have the same genes as the people in 1908 who said that the horse and buggy would NEVER
be replaced by gasoline cars when Henry Ford
started mass-producing them.....I am NOT being disrespectful, it just AMAZES me how human beings love to laugh at new technology......Oh yes,
and the millions of people who said that MAN WOULD NEVER FLY back in the summer of 1903 as the Wright Brothers racked their brains with failures at Kitty Hawk, N. Carolina.......HYDROGEN IS HERE MY FRIENDS.....
sierracuban 2 years ago
and you have the same genes of the people from the 1950's who said that we are all going to in flying cars and how many do you see in the sky today? they can make fuel cell cars they are not pratical!!!
peterbob101 2 years ago
We're slow because all these big company's are doing it on purpose. They don't want 'us' to drive hydrogen cars but they want our grandsons or grandsons grandsons to drive them.
MrGrandDragon 2 years ago
Actually they want people to have hydrogen cars because they're higher maintenance than electric cars and the same gas companies that sell us oil can continue making money off of us by selling us hydrogen.
The big problems with hydrogen cars is that the technology still isn't here yet to make them very viable, the fuel cells don't last long and the process of getting hydrogen is very energy intensive rather have electric cars personally.
garith21 2 years ago 3
Why are we so slow at making better things? when we know that we can. We should do things like this now.
Mr1991kid 2 years ago 2
eh, this option isn't actually that great, it's dreadfully inefficient, we get most of our Hydrogen from fossil fuels because it's less energy intensive than from water, each cars actual cost is pretty absurd, fuel cells have a short life span.
The better option would be electric cars which are around 5x more efficient energy wise, the technology is here with fully recyclable batteries and up to 300 mile driving range on one charge.
garith21 2 years ago
I'll be for hydrogen cars if the technology ever comes up to make them better in every aspect, it's simply not affordable, it's very inefficient because it takes so much energy to make hydrogen when you could just recharge a battery.
We should be using electric cars because the technology is already here, it's simpler, more infrastructure is easily available and it's relatively efficient.
garith21 2 years ago
Agreed, its like the everlasting light bulb, that never made it on to the market, after being sabotaged by bulb producers..
regimentsof 2 years ago
Hydrogen cars will never be green, you have to remember that. People always say, that you can get hydrogen from water, but I'm sorry, do you know how much that costs? So why not just put electricity straight to a car. Unless electricity will almost be free, which is unlikely, hydrogen will be made, like now, chemicaly from fossil fuel which means oild companies will still rule the world!
Vitretad 2 years ago
the best economy is to cut weight, drag, and power. currently the vehicles we operate weigh tons, and should be in the hundreds of pounds. work commuter vehicles can and should get 60 - 75 mpg, plus. the technology has been here for a long time - we just resist the lack of comfort and power. Safety is always a consideration because they would be driving amongst the tanks we currently are driving - we must size down to really be effective in economizing.
rickdarshan 2 years ago
Agreed. And putting the fear of one's personal safety, with bad drivers to one side, clean energy is getting scant promotion from the mass media. Will we ever see the day when companies of wind or solar power are considered influential on the Stock Exchange??
ieau42 2 years ago
Daaaaaaamn...
Vendettathegreat 2 years ago
emissions are water vapour? if everyone on earth drove that it would be about 4x worse for the green house effect, lol.. H2O is the largest and most powerful green house gas by far! it's funny how carbon dioxide became demonized
devious222 2 years ago
If only there were a way for water to come out of the sky, sec it's raining. In general the water in the atmosphere stays in relative equilibrium, however sequestering the huge excessive amount of C02 that took millions of years for plants and geological processes to sequester isn't quite as easy a task
There's lots of good arguments against hydrogen cars, this isn't the best of them
garith21 2 years ago
i want an actual hydrogen car that i can fill up with a bottles of water
Timb0tr0n 2 years ago
Thanks Garith,you make it clear to understand
starlight85 2 years ago
wow,is it a new technology things,I wonder how they can use hydrogen to run the car,how hydrogen work as fuel..
starlight85 2 years ago
It's actually a very old technology. I believe the fuel cell is actually pretty close to as old if not older than the internal combustion engine. The only problem is that it's so expensive and energy intensive to separate hydrogen from other elements that it's dreadfully inefficient for the fuel alone.
How it works is it uses hydrogen as fuel, a semi permeable membrane and oxygen, when the hydrogen tries to bond with the oxygen it creates a current through the membrane which makes electricity
garith21 2 years ago
Hidrogen cars or water cars???
There are car that work by putting HIDROGEN in the car and the car does the rest
But there are cars that Have an Hidrogen generator and then uses the normal process.
This means that (green) future cars can be moved by putting water on the tank OR putting directly the Hidrogen in the Tank.
PS: Hidrogen comes from water, the hidrogen generator uses energy to separate water from hidrogen.
Sorry my english
maravalhassilva 2 years ago
The only problem is that it currently takes around 4-5 times the energy to separate the bonds in water to get the hydrogen than what you get out of it. It's actually one of the biggest problems with trying to use hydrogen as a fuel. At best it's a storage device atm while using renewables. As a resource it's self that's a different story
garith21 2 years ago
But hidrogen stations aren't needed if "Water cars" are the future because you can get water in everyplace................
maravalhassilva 2 years ago
The problem is you still require energy to separate the bonds in water to get the energy you need and so far the process requires too much energy to do so.
Unless you're talking about those pressurized water cars, in which case you take more energy to pressurize it then you get out of locomotion, not to mention the weight ratio makes it impractical.
If it's neither please point to me to said cars =P
garith21 2 years ago
but anyways, if it's a car that you dump water into and have a current separate water to make hydrogen then you might as well just have a battery cell instead because it takes more energy to separate the water into it's components than you'll get out of it, not to mention the energy it takes to transport the extra weight and the weight of the fuel cells =P Again if it's a different kind of method please point me to it because electric cars just seem better overall. =P
garith21 2 years ago
now... the only problem about electric crs is the battery! soon the battery will run out of juice making it "un-rechargable"... unless we create a battery that will have a constant amount of juice in it to make it so it will charge the same amount of power in every charge.... i dont know if the electric car will go far... D:
soupman3000 2 years ago
"unless we create a battery that will have a constant amount of juice in it to make it so it will charge the same amount of power in every charge.... i dont know if the electric car will go far... D:"
Lithium ion batteries do fine besides the same applies to any other alternative like hydrogen cars, fuel cells have a very short life span, then there's the problems of actually getting hydrogen
Since you seem confident that it wouldn't go far, what alternative would you suggest =P
garith21 2 years ago
woops... forgot to do my research!! hmmmmm... i really could not think of anything... unless we put sails on are car or go back to the old times with animals (just throwing things out there)
soupman3000 2 years ago
thats true with any process to get energy. theres no such thing as a perfect reaction where all energy is conserved. during any process energy will be lost, so its not saying much that the energy produced by the hydrogen cells is less than the energy used to create the hydrogen fuel.
xSkippydx 2 years ago
True, but it's around 5x the energy cost than if you just went straight from a battery. Even that's only around 85% efficient straight from battery. I'm no implying that it's 100% efficient, merely stating that it's more efficient than current alternatives. What's your point?
garith21 2 years ago
HAHAHA!
stupid people
90% of the universe is made of from hydrogen.
So you say that water can be found anywhere and hyrogen stations not needed?
jerks.
CoReeYe 2 years ago
While you're partially right hydrogen that we have access to is always attached to something, the only way that fuel cells can generate current is from pure hydrogen which takes a lot more energy to separate the bonds than you'll ever get from a fuel cell.
garith21 2 years ago
i supposed those hydrogen stations will be more of situated in the deserts area (arizona and texas etc)
Here in Quebec Canada we have like A PLENTY AMOUNT OF WATER EVERYWERE you go so i think those would be in deserted area.
but again they talk about hydrogen stations and you already have an hydrogen generator that produce hydrogen of water... would it be better to call those hydrogen stations... WATER STATIONS ?
HonKyTanKMaN 2 years ago
I think you mean hydrogen from water. The former is a component of the latter, not the other way around.
Ermundos 2 years ago
Hydrogen fuel cells are difficult to store in the tank because any bump will cause an explosion. And the fuel cells used in cars require platinum for it to work, and those are rare and expensive.
I had to do a fuel debate on this.
And also, I dont think electric is as successful because what do you need for electric cars? Electricity, how do you get it? More Power Plants.
I wish there would be a milk engine x]
kevsioco 2 years ago
If we need cars I think the best option is the electric car.
1) the infrastructure for the most part is there
2) it doesn't suffer the exchange problems of other fuels
3) it's easier to make power plants or renewable sources for charging a battery than it is to get a car to run on renewables.
A better choice is mass transit, but as far as options go I think the electric car is the best option as far as cars go.
garith21 2 years ago
Wouldn't more power plants thus lead to more pollution?
kevsioco 2 years ago
1) That depends on the type of powerplants, Solar farms and geothermal are great power plants that do not produce pollution
2) even if you got 100% of your energy from coal plants it still ends up being less pollution than an internal combustion engine
3) I'm only stating that it's (in my opinion) our best alternative for cars given the current options
4) there are quite a few eco friendly people that recharge their cars with their own solar power
garith21 2 years ago
Anyways as I said personally I'd prefer a better Mass transit system, however since it seems we're stuck with the car for a while I'd prefer the electric car for other economic reasons
1) it having so few parts in relation to other cars means more maintinence
2) most batteries are recyclable
3) battery powered cars are around 80% efficient vs an internal combustion engine which is about 25-30%
4) I don't think you can beat around 40-60 cents a gallon equivalent.
garith21 2 years ago
Haha, okay so i'm pretty convinced, but just one more limitation i would like to add.
Electric cars arent that compatable with distances because it would get about 40 miles, then from there it wil need a recharge for 4 to 8 hours, i.e. the Chevy Bolt.
kevsioco 2 years ago
1) That would be terrible if it were true, some electric cars have a 300 mile driving range on one charge
2) the first generation EV1's had a 60 mile driving range and were not using the most modern battery technology
3) you do realize hybrid cars are essentially electric cars with an alternative fuel source which takes up more space and weight which cost more energy even those can manage to eek out a 40 mile driving range on battery power.
garith21 2 years ago
Personally I think the only real limitation is currently the price since the government subsidizes every other car type rather heavily. You can't even get a tax break for electric cars till 2010 I think. While I don't like the fact we're dumping money in such a fashion I think it'd be better invested in a mass transit infrastructure or improving electric cars.
The average electric car is around 120 miles driving range on one charge and the best per charge is around 300 miles per charge.
garith21 2 years ago
Electric cars for all intents and purposes are good for everyone (if you must drive a car) except the car companies because there's so much fewer things to maintenance in comparison to the internal combustion engine which require a large number of parts to fix in the engine alone vs a simple electric motor, a controller and a battery.
garith21 2 years ago
In the case of the chevy bolt it's not designed to be a pure electric vehicle, it's designed to rely on another fuel source with another set up to charge the batteries with internally. Such systems favor the companies that make money off of fixing them constantly as they're far more labor intensive than a pure electric car. Cheers.
Btw, you never provided an alternative assuming you had to use cars.
garith21 2 years ago
the fuel cell car will never work as a production car.
peterbob101 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this is scary if u read this this far u will die in 10 days if u dont send to any 15 videos in 2 hours good luck hope u dont die !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
iluvnickjonas20 2 years ago
Listen up...the future is here...all you have to do it listen to me...if you really want to end oil dependency, this is what you do...buy a velomobile ($6000) and put on an electric motor ($500) and lithium battery ($1000) and you just created an electric car that can travel 100 miles and go 40 mph...and it will keep you out of the rain because velomobiles come with glass enclosure and pedals so you can power it with your feet if you choose to
cypher955 2 years ago
electric cars is the future...look how complicated that engine looked...do you know how complicated an electric car is?...let me tell you...electric car consists of the 3 components...that's it !!!! motor -- controller -- battery...that's all !!!...compare that to about 1000 components for hyrdogen or gasoline...electric car can be repaired by the person who owns it...electric cars will put auto mechanics out of business
cypher955 2 years ago
what about the transmission?
chinchillawrangler 2 years ago
PURE BULLSHIT.
SteveXnycperformance 2 years ago
Electric motors is the only way to go, hydrogene genere heat and care are much more complicated and will cost much more for maintnance.
Alexvideoclip 2 years ago
I know this, and it was proven to us in school. These people are not look at BTU.They are looking at cost. BTU is the burn rate of fuel/energy. Gasoline hold the top burn rate (above 2000 degree) for it environmental friendliness. Tree need carbon...Wild fire are more toxic than EPA regulated automobile. Gasoline comes for CRUDE OIL and so is MILLIONS of other Product(by-product).
Look out for the CARBON TAX...it another way to keep the poor man down and in fear of banker laws.
SteveXnycperformance 2 years ago
what is the cost of your health?. You will find out the cost when your health is at sacrifice. Some say, if you want to save the environment....kill your self...but that`s a mental sickness.The new energy HYPE is another way to get the money out of the American people pocket. Coal and gas build this nation and today you are witnessing the wealth spreading to socialist country, who hate LIBERTY.
GOD bless the nation that constitute. Get your mind out of A MERRY CAN.
SteveXnycperformance 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
if ur reading this u cant go back there was a dad who got pissed couse he got layed off so he went home took a knife than went to his 13 year old daughter and slit her neck! if u r reading this and dont forward to 10 vids the 13 year old girl be sitting on the endge of the bed waiting for tha when u wake up who ever takes care of u will find u in the tube full of bloode with ur throat slit and than the 13 year old girl will come to who ever takes care of u so hurry dont be the that unlucky one
ohanagurl08 2 years ago
1. Take a deep breath
2. Think about the one you love
3. Press ''F10'' 5 time
4. Send it to 5 video on youtube
5. Look at your background
bdbartle 2 years ago
STILL GOT MY JUGGALO THEAM
grim0008 2 years ago
ehh fuck money
cajceto 2 years ago
Remember when Iceland wanted to convert to a hydrogen economy? What ever happened to that?
princesbub11 2 years ago
Ok, I have a noob question. Is a hydrogen powered car sort of like perpetual energy?
Chiefontheditty 2 years ago
no..... a hydrogen powered car runs on hydrogen. Which doesn't occur naturally as much as fossil fuels. This means that we have to make hydrogen in factories. In other words, a hydrogen powered car is another form of a battery powered car since you still need another source of power to produce hydrogen.
linxdeal 2 years ago
Comment removed
CloneofMyselfL337 2 years ago
check out youtube DDRoyal
DDRoyalmike 2 years ago
The Year 2020 is still far away to have a fleet of these cars around
warmerup 2 years ago
Guys, anybody knows the price of regular hydrogen car, or what is the difference in price between hydrogen and ...i don't know...diesel engine car.
dundotomo 2 years ago
a hydrogen car will cost between 30K-80K. and to fill the tank in a hydrogen car would cost about 20$. and the car gets about 74mpg equivalent. and for all those who thing hydrogen is dangerous because they think it explodes easier than gas fact is gas is easier to explode than hydrogen because of the high ignition point. so in fact hydrogen is actually safer than gas. if you still don't believe me think about what they said about gas "your sitting on a bomb", I don't see a difference.
banditandrudy 2 years ago
and actually the new hydrogen engine made is actually stronger and more durable than the standard gas engine. They shot it, hit it with a train, threw it into a fire, shot at it some more with an automatic, and it wouldnt explode. I dont think it would be good business to make a car where you sit on a bomb
DrRevolutions 2 years ago
dundotomo, don't listen to banditandrudy. Just the fuel cell costs about $300,000 to make even with mass production. The 10,000 PSI tank costs bout $50,000 and has to be replaced every 5 years.
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, the source is the grid. You charge the EV with the grid (now the grid could be solar or whatever, that is another subject, we are only talking cars here, not the grid). You put a fuel cell in a car to extend its range because fuel-cell-cars are EVs that use a fuel cell to extend their range. But if the range is 1000+ miles from just the battery charged off the grid then no need for fuel cell in the car. Get it?
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, "This has nothing at all to do with batteries." - a fuel cell car has everything to do with batteries. A fuel cell car is an EV with a generator, if you make better batteries you dont need the generator. There are two different prototies of batteries, eeStore and Nanowire, if either get their cost down then you dont need a generator on an EV. Also, you dont need to store solar power in hydrogen, you could use these new batteries instead.
ndyt 2 years ago
whats up man its me again. I've been reading everything you've been saying and its very interesting. I've just got one concern with changing over gas engines to hydrogen engines and that is this. Water contributes much more of a greenhouse effect than CO2 does. I know it will become rain, but CO2 eventually goes down too. Do you not think that this has the potential to change the climate as well. Not to mention everywhere in a city would be very humid. What are your thoughts?
collieh1 2 years ago
harrymook, to head off people like me you should open with, "I am using multi-junction cell panels that are 40% efficient at converting light to electricity and cost about $3/watt." That would have worked on me. I had no idea that panels that good were coming down in price. I bet few people know that. This is as big as the nano-wire batt. and the eeStore batt. - of course if these work you wont need a fuel cell in the car, EV will be fine w/ 1000 mile+ range.
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, Ge cost about $1200 per kg, are you using that in your costs?
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, currently only satellites use multi-junction cells and these cost a ton. It hard for me to believe they have gotten the cost down to around a grand per m^2.
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, Are you using: "$3 per watt to install and producing electricity at a cost of 8 to 10 cents per kilowatt-hour"
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, 380 W/m2 is a little high, even in the SW you are lucky to get 190. In the rest of the USA you are lucky to get 70.
ndyt 2 years ago
harrymook, how many watts/m^2 are you using in your calc?
ndyt 2 years ago