Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You apparently assume we've pushed battery technology nearly or actually as far as it will go. I don't. If the same amount of money put into the R&D of the ICE over the last 125 years (probably trillions) were put into battery technology instead, who knows where the technology would be today. It appears, for instance, that there's a breakthrough in two of the main obstacles to creating practical electric cars: charging times and battery capacity. Even better, it doesn't require any new, exotic materials; it simply requires reconfiguring the surface structure of one of the materials already used.
For better or worse, I expect to see electric cars become a significant portion of our vehicle fleet within our lifetimes. (Or at least within mine, I don't know how old you are.)
As for hydrogen, the only practical way to get it is from fossil fuels. Of course, much of the energy to power electric cars would also come from fossil fuels for the time being. Nonetheless, trying to crack hydrogen from water is incredibly energy-intensive and we'd be better off finding a more direct route to convert that energy into mechanical energy.
Assuming for a moment you crack the code and figure out how to get small batteries that charge up in a minute.
Where do you get the electricity? As I stated if 5% of households used electric cars you'd collapse the electric grid. Especially in the summer, places like California and the east coast are as taxed as can be in terms of energy output?
Also where does all that electricity come from? Most likely Coal and possibly nuclear if the greenies let us build some modern plants. Wind and solar has yet to yield huge amounts of reliable energy.
And there are still cold weather and other issues with electrics no matter how small the batteries. And that is from personal experience. I can also tell you the manufacturers I have worked for find the electrics a technological dead end, no matter what lip service they pay to it in public.
I haven't done any work on the hydrogen cars out there that manufacturers have made a few of, particularly Honda and BMW, but there is a possibility that I will. I think from what I know there is more potential with hydrogen despite the current issues and i think it holds the most useful potential. Ultimately I think the future looks more like biodiesel, algae derivatives, ethanol and petrol.
You apparently assume we've pushed battery technology nearly or actually as far as it will go. I don't. If the same amount of money put into the R&D of the ICE over the last 125 years (probably trillions) were put into battery technology instead, who knows where the technology would be today. It appears, for instance, that there's a breakthrough in two of the main obstacles to creating practical electric cars: charging times and battery capacity. Even better, it doesn't require any new, exotic materials; it simply requires reconfiguring the surface structure of one of the materials already used.
Ultracapacitors are another field that could gain on batteries. They need to make them smaller and cheaper.
As for hydrogen, the only practical way to get it is from fossil fuels. Of course, much of the energy to power electric cars would also come from fossil fuels for the time being. Nonetheless, trying to crack hydrogen from water is incredibly energy-intensive and we'd be better off finding a more direct route to convert that energy into mechanical energy.
Well, people are still researching various ways to get hydrogen, at least water and natural gas, both hydrogen sources, are readily available with existing piping.
Well, people are still researching various ways to get hydrogen, at least water and natural gas, both hydrogen sources, are readily available with existing piping.
Obviously the availability of water is not an issue; however, the energy inputs to get hydrogen out of it certainly are. My concern about natural gas is that while it's relatively plentiful, it's still a finite resource; accordingly, if a lot of it went toward our transportation fleet, what impact would that have on heating costs? Also, if the infrastructure is already basically in place for CNG, what advantage would there be to stripping the hydrogen from it first and then using only the hydrogen as a power source, versus just using the CNG directly?
natural gas has a lot of potential for use in vehicles as well. In Australia it is readily available around the country at fuel stations and many people retrofit their cars for CNG.
natural gas has a lot of potential for use in vehicles as well. In Australia it is readily available around the country at fuel stations and many people retrofit their cars for CNG.
Man, if they could power a vehicle off natural gas, my friend would make so much money as a filling station.
Man, if they could power a vehicle off natural gas, my friend would make so much money as a filling station.
Well, depending on where you are, there are natural gas vehicles. Mainly public buses, but I've seen the Honda natural gas Civics. You fill up at home with a home attachment, unfortunately the fill up speed is slow since homes don't have "industrial" level flowrate.
Obviously the availability of water is not an issue; however, the energy inputs to get hydrogen out of it certainly are. My concern about natural gas is that while it's relatively plentiful, it's still a finite resource; accordingly, if a lot of it went toward our transportation fleet, what impact would that have on heating costs? Also, if the infrastructure is already basically in place for CNG, what advantage would there be to stripping the hydrogen from it first and then using only the hydrogen as a power source, versus just using the CNG directly?
This heavily depends on how the hydrogen is obtained. There are all kinds of researchers working on various ways.
As far as natural gas, well, you can run hydrogen based fuel cells this way for power generation, which is what is on the market. It enables low exhaust emission and reduced noise level compared to combustion engine burning natural gas. Some companies already have these installed. PureCell Overview
This heavily depends on how the hydrogen is obtained. There are all kinds of researchers working on various ways.
XXXXXXXXXX (http://news.uns.purdue.edu/Clips/2007/May/070518.WoodallCNN.html - broken link)
However it's obtained, there's no way around the laws of physics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by f_m
As far as natural gas, well, you can run hydrogen based fuel cells this way for power generation, which is what is on the market. It enables low exhaust emission and reduced noise level compared to combustion engine burning natural gas. Some companies already have these installed. PureCell Overview
That's great, but what happens to all the carbon that gets stripped from the CNG to get to the hydrogen? Is that a pollution-free process? If not, is there a net reduction in pollution of isolating the hydrogen versus just burning the CNG?
XXXXXXXXXX (http://news.uns.purdue.edu/Clips/2007/May/070518.WoodallCNN.html - broken link)
However it's obtained, there's no way around the laws of physics.
And the process shown takes advantage of chemistry. Did you read it? Pure aluminum always forms aluminum oxide when exposed to oxygen containing atmospheres (virtually any unprocessed aluminum product has this layer on it, it's actually the layer that protects aluminum from general corrosion). In this case, if the aluminum compound is immersed only in a water atmosphere, the aluminum will leech the oxygen from the water forcing the hydrogen free, because the trick in this process is that gallium prevents the aluminum oxide coating from forming on only the exposed surfaces which would stop the process once the exposed aluminum is converted. The cost here is the aluminum, but it is available and can be recycled.
There is a difference between this and what you believe to be the energy required. The aluminum exists already and doesn't have to be created, just converted between aluminum oxide and aluminum/gallium compound. It's like the difference between digging up coal and burning it for energy. If you had to manufacture the coal and then burn it, it would be more costly, but since the coal is "found" material in the ground, that saves on energy requirements.
Interestingly enough, I found out the patent for this is assigned to IBM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
That's great, but what happens to all the carbon that gets stripped from the CNG to get to the hydrogen? Is that a pollution-free process? If not, is there a net reduction in pollution of isolating the hydrogen versus just burning the CNG?
I don't know all the details of the process, but based on this Dept of Energy report, the conversion process can produce CO not CO2, and CO is not considered a greenhouse gas. It does seem to mention carbon dioxide in one place, but not in the chemical equation. This is most likely due to incomplete chemical reaction, where some of the reaction might generate CO2 instead of CO due to improper reaction rate or material quantities. In any case, the process can be a closed loop system if the wastes have to be refined for some reason.
One of the benefits, as pointed out in the report, is that the fuel cell is more efficient than burning of gas. I mean, most all internal engine combustion processes are not very efficient at all. A car engine get about 20% or less of the actual energy content of the gas to the wheels of the car. Internal combustion engine such as in a car can max out at around ~30% efficiency. Both fuel cells and electric motors, which have few to no moving parts are a lot more efficient. The government has been working on fuel cells for decades, they already know this. It's mainly cost that's an issue.
Nissan expects their electric car to sell for around $15k.
Nissan rolls out electric car at new headquarters - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090802/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_nissan - broken link)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
