View Single Post
Old 06-15-2009, 09:44 PM   #78
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,585
Current Game: KOTOR III
Originally Posted by Bimmerman View Post
This isn't the first time I've said this-- you need to specify clearly what you mean by "hydrogen." Do you mean electrohydrolysis? Do you mean combusting? Fuel cells? Please specify.
It's irrelevant to the issue I was bringing up. I am going to give a rhetorical statement that I know people must already have figured out, but just so they know where I am...

Hydrogen is not in itself an energy source like coal, nuclear, or solar. It is a method by which energy can be transfered from a source to its destination. It must be backed by another form of energy and no matter what form that is, any method you use will have a net loss of energy. When you use a chemical reaction to power your vehicle, you will get less energy back than what you used to produce the fuel in the first place.

My source is two years old, so maybe the production methods have improved, but in 2007, the net return was about 54% of what was invested to produce the hydrogen fuel.

Originally Posted by Bimmerman View Post
What do you mean by "fractional return from the fuel cell?" It makes enough power to move the car, or power the shuttle, or ....blah. What it is not is a net positive source of power, nor will it ever be when the source of the hydrogen is hydrolysis.
Bad wording. You only get a fraction of the energy you originally invested into the hydrogen fuel. There is always going to be a net loss from changing one form of energy to another (solar to electrical, electrical to chemical(hydrogen), chemical back to electrical(fuel cell), electrical to kinetic energy) Might as well just go right from solar to electrical and skip the hydrogen fuel altogether. You only lose about 3% of electricity for each 1000 km it has to be transmitted.

And these powerplants that don't operate so efficiently... that has to also be taken into account if you are outputting hydrogen with that electricity from a power plant. And so how does this 100% powerplant capacity thing make any difference? It would just mean having to build more power plants in order to produce the hydrogen you are advocating for. It might be a means to harness this excess energy that otherwise would be wasted, but beyond that, nothing about it makes sense.

Last edited by Darth_Yuthura; 06-15-2009 at 09:52 PM.
Darth_Yuthura is offline   you may: quote & reply,