View Single Post
Old 06-18-2009, 10:14 AM   #80
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,585
Current Game: KOTOR III
Originally Posted by Bimmerman View Post
So mining coal and combusting the coal to heat water to spin turbines and compressors to generate electricity is a net loss of energy? Nuclear power is a net loss of energy? Burning gasoline in your lawn mower is a net loss of energy?
That was not what I was suggesting and you know it. You get less energy back from hydrogen in a fuel cell or combustion than what you used to produce it in the first place. Hydrogen returns less energy from your automobile... much less than what you invested into producing the fuel in the first place. You might as well have just used electricity and you would have had a lot less energy lost in the transfer.

Originally Posted by Bimmerman View Post
False. Absolutely false.
True absolutely true.

But that also applies to electricity. The difference is that you lose a lot less in the transfer of electricity from the power plant to your home than producing hydrogen fuel with that same electricity and getting even less back than what you invested in the first place.

The ONLY advantage the hydrogen has is that it can be stored where electricity cannot on a large scale.

Originally Posted by Bimmerman View Post
Would commercial hydrolysis plants require the conventional powerplants to consume more fuel? Absolutely. Keep in mind that gasoline refineries don't magically operate without power, that steel works don't melt steel without power and fuel, that your computer doesn't run without power, that our entire society runs on electricity. If the powerplant is operating below capacity, or in many cases, producing a surplus of energy, adding another load to the line will not accidentally the whole earth.
So you are suggesting that we actually increase our demand for energy in a time when it is becoming increasingly more expensive? There are more subtle ways to deal with our energy crisis that don't require going to extreme lengths as switching to hydrogen power. The best thing would be to find inefficiencies and correct them before demanding more energy altogether.

What I've come to expect of supply/demand, all the focus is on increasing supply indefinitely with little or little concern with on decreasing demand. Hydrogen has an advantage of capturing squandered electricity that is not used during peak demand, but even a 60% RoI is that much energy that otherwise would have been lost. Any ideas that the US switch to hydrogen for most of its transportation needs are really not seeing that there are far easier and more effective steps that should be taken first.
Darth_Yuthura is offline   you may: quote & reply,