Teh Ricer Civic!

So i was thinking...

22 posts in this topic

The only byproduct of Hydrogen fuel cell engines is water vapor right? Well with all the recent advances in hydrogen production, wouldnt it make sense to move towards Hydrogen rather than E85 or BioDiesel... The only reason i say this is cause...

1) If everyone in large cities used hydrogen fuel cell engines, The water vapor produced from the cars and the relative lack of traditional emissions would create a sort of counter greenhouse effect. The increased water vapor in the area would reflect more light back into space, cooling the local area and of course providing more rainfall... instead of trapping in heat and causing crappy air quality. Now in places like the south.... where its already humid, this might sorta suck. lol.

And thats my 1 point plan for success.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Screw fuel cells... Leave those for the soccer moms.

I want a hydrogen ICE...

(I know right? Really contributed to you thread... Sorry :P)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Water vapor, just like the fuel cell.

I'd love to see us get to the point where hydrogen ICEs are viable in great number, but E-85 already has the the infrastructure advantage here. Also, the mods to a car required by E-85 are much less extensive and expensive.

E-85 is better for the short-term and can have a near-immediate effect. I still want hydrogen ICEs ASAP.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why invest so much in fuel cells instead of ICEs? Is anyone else doing it besides BMW? Seems more simple since you can take an existing engine and modify it, rather than a ground up design.

Both would be nice, I certainly doesn't want to loose ICEs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only BMW has "seen the light".

Everyone else is too addited to the notion of the fuel cell being the "magic bullet"

Hopefully reality will set in and other manufacturers will follow BMW's lead on this.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well in theory, if these cars are releasing enough water vapor to have an effect on the enviroment, wouldnt that make an area more humid? :P

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My an air conditioner, a dehumidifier, and an umbrella. problem solved.

Edited by Dodgefan
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advantages of a Fuel Cell over a Hydrogen ICE:

- less weight

- fewer or no moving parts

- more controlled environment gives more complete burn

- more compact packaging allows for lower CG

Problem with Hydrogen, either way, is that it is an energy storage method.

That power has to come from somewhere. Our governments have their heads happily in the sand about this issue right now.

That's why I can't wait to get myself a Volt, or failing that, some other electric or hydrogen car. The sooner the early adopters like me start drawing the power off the electricity grid, the sooner the government will realize that we need more power plants, something on the order of twice as much electricity as we produce now. The sooner this happens, the better prepared we will be when oil demands suddenly go unmet, say 15-20 years from now.

Nuclear power takes a loooong time to implement. We need to start now...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advantages of a Fuel Cell over a Hydrogen ICE:

- less weight

- fewer or no moving parts

- more controlled environment gives more complete burn

- more compact packaging allows for lower CG

Problem with Hydrogen, either way, is that it is an energy storage method.

That power has to come from somewhere. Our governments have their heads happily in the sand about this issue right now.

That's why I can't wait to get myself a Volt, or failing that, some other electric or hydrogen car. The sooner the early adopters like me start drawing the power off the electricity grid, the sooner the government will realize that we need more power plants, something on the order of twice as much electricity as we produce now. The sooner this happens, the better prepared we will be when oil demands suddenly go unmet, say 15-20 years from now.

Nuclear power takes a loooong time to implement. We need to start now...

I'd agree with YD there....

That's not counting the population boom either...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping that the development for hydrogen ICE's is relatively simple when compared to fuel cells and maybe that's why more manufacturers are not keen on the idea yet.

Then again, GM and Chrysler are partnered with BMW on alternative fuels, so who knows?

I just know that BMW (A few years ago) dedicted themselves to ALWAYS having ICE's because the engines are "crucial to the driving experience". So, at least they are a bright spot in what seems to be developing into a race to eliminate everything but electric propulsion. (You know; still burn the fossil fuels, but burn them for the benefit of the electric industry now and compromise our power grids)

I certainly hope I never have to face the reality of not driving an ICE (Which I'm pretty sure I'll always have that choice, but still.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Problem with Hydrogen, either way, is that it is an energy storage method.

I used to maintain this same point as the only way to generate hydrogen consumed as much energy as it produced.

However, a recent discovery, of which Camino posted an article about, found a way to produce hydrogen using bacteria and only consuming a small fraction of the amount of power generated by the resulting hydrogen.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only BMW has "seen the light".

Everyone else is too addited to the notion of the fuel cell being the "magic bullet"

Hopefully reality will set in and other manufacturers will follow BMW's lead on this.

I'm going to have to disagree with you <and other ICE supporters> here. ICE is not nearly as thermally efficient as Fuel Cell technology. A fuel cell is basically a battery replacement. In the electric motor there are two bearings.... that's it. How many bearings are there in a V8.... including valve train....including piston rings <basically bearing that run in a different direction>? Those are all friction points that the energy generation process must overcome.

So... pre transmission, the number of friction points are:

Fuel Cell powertrain: 2

V8 ICE powertrain: 8 piston rings, 4 main journals, 8 rod bearing, 4 cam bearings <pushrod>.... etc etc etc.

So.... I'll see your V8 rumble and raise you 300ft/lbs of torque at 0 rpm.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tech to use hydrogen in cars and trucks of any size and type exists right now, only infrastructure is lacking.

Fuel cells - not so much

And no, I don't want to drive an electric car really. And what about all of those spent batteries? What do we do with that toxic waste?

An interesting side effect of electric power used in cities was mentioned on C-SPAN recently. A guy called in to say that he was nearlt killed by one recently because he couldn't hear it coming - the caller was bliind.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to have to disagree with you <and other ICE supporters> here. ICE is not nearly as thermally efficient as Fuel Cell technology. A fuel cell is basically a battery replacement. In the electric motor there are two bearings.... that's it. How many bearings are there in a V8.... including valve train....including piston rings <basically bearing that run in a different direction>? Those are all friction points that the energy generation process must overcome.

So... pre transmission, the number of friction points are:

Fuel Cell powertrain: 2

V8 ICE powertrain: 8 piston rings, 4 main journals, 8 rod bearing, 4 cam bearings <pushrod>.... etc etc etc.

So.... I'll see your V8 rumble and raise you 300ft/lbs of torque at 0 rpm.

Someone on Camaroz28.com brought this up too.. But the problem is the added weight of the batteries. Sure, you'll have torque at zero RPM but then how is the added weight going to counteract that in a pull?

Besides, if the only reason I drove an ICE vehicle was speed, I'd buy a motorcycle.

Here's hoping that fuel cells see major technology problems for the next 20-30 years. :cheers:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Someone on Camaroz28.com brought this up too.. But the problem is the added weight of the batteries. Sure, you'll have torque at zero RPM but then how is the added weight going to counteract that in a pull?

Besides, if the only reason I drove an ICE vehicle was speed, I'd buy a motorcycle.

The tesla motor weighs 70 pounds the batteries weigh 900lbs.

How much does an HF3.6 + 6speed weigh?

Here's hoping that fuel cells see major technology problems for the next 20-30 years. :cheers:

Why would you want to limit choice for those of us who would like to see that technology advance?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear power takes a loooong time to implement. We need to start now...

It's already started. The NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) is nearly finished streamlining the process for approving new plant building/operation licenses, and about 100 new nuclear plant applications are waiting to apply. Many look to be operational by 2012 IIRC.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would you want to limit choice for those of us who would like to see that technology advance?

I don't...

Like I said; I'm all for choice as long as I have the CHOICE to buy an ICE. And I'm betting that's not a part of the technology humpers plans.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if we had pebble bed reactors using helium that heat can split water and produce electricity. and pebble-beds are supposed to be fail-safe by design. Helium is expensive, but needed. this is the way to go. solving our supposed "carbon problem" (i don't think carbon is the real problem...the aquisition of our power is more of the problem), giving our hydrogen economy a place to start.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if we had pebble bed reactors using helium that heat can split water and produce electricity. and pebble-beds are supposed to be fail-safe by design. Helium is expensive, but needed. this is the way to go. solving our supposed "carbon problem" (i don't think carbon is the real problem...the aquisition of our power is more of the problem), giving our hydrogen economy a place to start.

the pebble bed reactors do look interesting. Too bad they are banned here in the US, it violates some old nuclear treaty we have or something, i dont really know. Whats sad is to think that all the US nuclear power plants are antiques compared to modern ones elsewhere in the world (doesnt mean they cant put out some serious wattage tho :P).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only byproduct of Hydrogen fuel cell engines is water vapor right? Well with all the recent advances in hydrogen production, wouldnt it make sense to move towards Hydrogen rather than E85 or BioDiesel... The only reason i say this is cause...

1) If everyone in large cities used hydrogen fuel cell engines, The water vapor produced from the cars and the relative lack of traditional emissions would create a sort of counter greenhouse effect. The increased water vapor in the area would reflect more light back into space, cooling the local area and of course providing more rainfall... instead of trapping in heat and causing crappy air quality. Now in places like the south.... where its already humid, this might sorta suck. lol.

And thats my 1 point plan for success.

I see a major flaw in your view there: water vapor acts as a greenhouse gas, almost as bad as CO2. Increased water vapor, to a small degree, would not only trap more heat but would also cause a change in the the water cycle which could change rainfall patterns as well as air and ocean currents.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the pebble bed reactors do look interesting. Too bad they are banned here in the US, it violates some old nuclear treaty we have or something, i dont really know. Whats sad is to think that all the US nuclear power plants are antiques compared to modern ones elsewhere in the world (doesnt mean they cant put out some serious wattage tho :P).

actually, it violates some old stupid law that Jimmy Carter signed back in the 70s because they thought Pebble Bed reactors would lead to nuclear proliferation due to their relatively small size.

Congress could rescind the law.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

Loading...