Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
John Smith wrote:
Mike: Last time I took a chemistry class, when you burn hydrogen in the presence of oxygen you get water, and that is all... John What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen? Hydrogen is seen as some sort of saving angel in the energy issue. Producing the hydrogen is a bit of a problem though. It takes a lot of energy to produce it. It has a pretty low volumetric energy density. Interestingly enough, a gallon of gasoline contains more hydrogen than a gallon of liquid H2 - it's a great way to store hydrogen. But to the problem at hand, a somewhat practical method of producing H2 would be to electrolyze it, using Nuc power. The electrolysis plant would probably be set up near the ocean (let's not even talk of fresh water production - just ask the folks on the left coast about fresh water) So now we have an extraction plant that is powered by an unpopular power source, and has one big nasty polluting byproduct. Or we can use the other methods of generating H2. Of course, they cause as much pollution producing the fuel as if we just used the fuel in the first place. On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 20:52:28 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote: John Smith wrote: commander: Why two-thirds of the oceans are composed of hydrogen, and the oceans themselves cover two-thirds of the planets surface... course it takes more energy to get the hydrogen out of the sea water than you get back when you burn/use hydrogen--but, if we can develop a new generation energy source so we have cheap and abundant energy to extract the hydrogen from What are the byproducts? - mike KB3EIA - |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Michael:
I figured out the problem, you don't have a news reader which threads posts, or you are NOT using it correctly. Don't pose my EXACT same arguments back to me, YOU LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT WHEN YOU DO! Else, you haste for character assassination has drive you over the edge. Get a clue man--you are on the verge of looking like some insane, blathering nut case! Give us a break! John On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 08:25:30 -0400, Michael Coslo wrote: John Smith wrote: Mike: Last time I took a chemistry class, when you burn hydrogen in the presence of oxygen you get water, and that is all... John What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen? Hydrogen is seen as some sort of saving angel in the energy issue. Producing the hydrogen is a bit of a problem though. It takes a lot of energy to produce it. It has a pretty low volumetric energy density. Interestingly enough, a gallon of gasoline contains more hydrogen than a gallon of liquid H2 - it's a great way to store hydrogen. But to the problem at hand, a somewhat practical method of producing H2 would be to electrolyze it, using Nuc power. The electrolysis plant would probably be set up near the ocean (let's not even talk of fresh water production - just ask the folks on the left coast about fresh water) So now we have an extraction plant that is powered by an unpopular power source, and has one big nasty polluting byproduct. Or we can use the other methods of generating H2. Of course, they cause as much pollution producing the fuel as if we just used the fuel in the first place. On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 20:52:28 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote: John Smith wrote: commander: Why two-thirds of the oceans are composed of hydrogen, and the oceans themselves cover two-thirds of the planets surface... course it takes more energy to get the hydrogen out of the sea water than you get back when you burn/use hydrogen--but, if we can develop a new generation energy source so we have cheap and abundant energy to extract the hydrogen from What are the byproducts? - mike KB3EIA - |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Coslo wrote: What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen? Mostly salt. Hydrogen is seen as some sort of saving angel in the energy issue. Producing the hydrogen is a bit of a problem though. It takes a lot of energy to produce it. It has a pretty low volumetric energy density. Which means it is compressed and your fuel tank becomes a highpressure canister. Not only is the stuff flammable, like gasoline, but it's under high pressure. Two ways to go boom. But to the problem at hand, a somewhat practical method of producing H2 would be to electrolyze it, using Nuc power. The electrolysis plant would probably be set up near the ocean (let's not even talk of fresh water production - just ask the folks on the left coast about fresh water) So now we have an extraction plant that is powered by an unpopular power source, and has one big nasty polluting byproduct. Or we can use the other methods of generating H2. Of course, they cause as much pollution producing the fuel as if we just used the fuel in the first place. Maybe. There are all sorts of possible technologies to extract, transport and store hydrogen. For example, there's work being done to store the gas in metal hydrides. It could be extracted by using electricity made photovoltaically. Etc. The big question is whether such processes can be made economically competitive. How much will a hydrogen car cost? How much will they cost to drive per mile? What are the maintenance costs? The big problem is that there's probably no single magic long-term solution. Rather there are a bunch of small solutions that add up. Here's two favorites of mine: Imagine a tall (couple of hundred feet) hollow tower, in the desert. A vertical pipe, as it were, with holes around the bottom. Around its base is a large circular greenhouse whose roof slants toward the tower. When the sun is out, the air under the greenhouse roof is heated, and rises. This creates an artificial wind towards the tower. The warmed air goes up the tower, which contains a wind-driven generator. Works whether or not there is a breeze. The generator and its impeller are near ground level. Etc. also There's a process called TDP (Thermal Depolymerization Process) that can supposedly break down various types of waste into fuel oil, gas and other usable products. For example, there's a pilot plant here in Philadelphia that takes sewage sludge (ugh) and breaks it down into a type of fuel oil, methane gas, water, and some other things that are usable as fertilizer. The result is also sterilized. Another plant in Carthage, MO, takes the waste from a turkey-processing plant and extracts oil, gas and some other products from it. The company claims that many other feedstocks can be used. Old tires, a chronic disposal problem, can allegedly be broken down into oil, gas, steel, fiberglass and carbon black. The process supposedly uses 15% of the product to run itself. Of course the above pilot plants produce fuel at the rate of a few hundred barrels a day. It's doubtful that either of the above will solve all our energy problems. It's also unclear as to whether they are economically feasible on a large scale. But if they are doable, they can sure help. In the case of TDP, a big part of the waste-disposal problem can be dealt with. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
N2EY:
As far as the danger of hydrogen, it is safer than gasoline, in an accident--hydrogen being lighter than air heads for the far upper atmosphere, gasoline lays around you burning (really bad if you are trapped in the vehicle.) In a hydrogen explosion more energy is directed upwards, in the direction of the hydrogen itself, with gasoline the energy is expended outwards towards people and property... hydrogens danger from a "spill" quickly disappears, gasoline/diesel stays there a long time... Gasoline/diesel is toxic and is devastating to the environment, hydrogen is almost benign (but large scale use would have to evolve to truly know the real consequences.) Danger is not a good reason to skip hydrogens use, propane is much more dangerous than hydrogen and used inside buildings on forklifts and other industrial equipment (even some city buses (and natural gas too) and other vehicles.) Hydrogen is a scam at this point in time, I think it always will be, when you finally have enough energy to remove hydrogen from sea water--why bother, the energy can already be used! But, if some alchemist discovers a way to remove it from sea water with little or no energy, GREAT! But, even hybrid vehicles are mostly a scam at this point, you are wearing out two different systems, maintaining them, with all the related use of energy to do so. And, this ignores the the manufacturing expenditure of energy which occurs in making the extra electrical components for the vehicle. It is mainly a "feels good campaign" used by politicians to soothe the people, and manufacturing for "gov't pork money." It looks to me a lot like putting props on jet aircraft... John On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 09:37:59 -0700, N2EY wrote: Michael Coslo wrote: What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen? Mostly salt. Hydrogen is seen as some sort of saving angel in the energy issue. Producing the hydrogen is a bit of a problem though. It takes a lot of energy to produce it. It has a pretty low volumetric energy density. Which means it is compressed and your fuel tank becomes a highpressure canister. Not only is the stuff flammable, like gasoline, but it's under high pressure. Two ways to go boom. But to the problem at hand, a somewhat practical method of producing H2 would be to electrolyze it, using Nuc power. The electrolysis plant would probably be set up near the ocean (let's not even talk of fresh water production - just ask the folks on the left coast about fresh water) So now we have an extraction plant that is powered by an unpopular power source, and has one big nasty polluting byproduct. Or we can use the other methods of generating H2. Of course, they cause as much pollution producing the fuel as if we just used the fuel in the first place. Maybe. There are all sorts of possible technologies to extract, transport and store hydrogen. For example, there's work being done to store the gas in metal hydrides. It could be extracted by using electricity made photovoltaically. Etc. The big question is whether such processes can be made economically competitive. How much will a hydrogen car cost? How much will they cost to drive per mile? What are the maintenance costs? The big problem is that there's probably no single magic long-term solution. Rather there are a bunch of small solutions that add up. Here's two favorites of mine: Imagine a tall (couple of hundred feet) hollow tower, in the desert. A vertical pipe, as it were, with holes around the bottom. Around its base is a large circular greenhouse whose roof slants toward the tower. When the sun is out, the air under the greenhouse roof is heated, and rises. This creates an artificial wind towards the tower. The warmed air goes up the tower, which contains a wind-driven generator. Works whether or not there is a breeze. The generator and its impeller are near ground level. Etc. also There's a process called TDP (Thermal Depolymerization Process) that can supposedly break down various types of waste into fuel oil, gas and other usable products. For example, there's a pilot plant here in Philadelphia that takes sewage sludge (ugh) and breaks it down into a type of fuel oil, methane gas, water, and some other things that are usable as fertilizer. The result is also sterilized. Another plant in Carthage, MO, takes the waste from a turkey-processing plant and extracts oil, gas and some other products from it. The company claims that many other feedstocks can be used. Old tires, a chronic disposal problem, can allegedly be broken down into oil, gas, steel, fiberglass and carbon black. The process supposedly uses 15% of the product to run itself. Of course the above pilot plants produce fuel at the rate of a few hundred barrels a day. It's doubtful that either of the above will solve all our energy problems. It's also unclear as to whether they are economically feasible on a large scale. But if they are doable, they can sure help. In the case of TDP, a big part of the waste-disposal problem can be dealt with. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
.... sorry, the post above is mis-placed, I hope he is able to find it! grin .... don't fret, I do that all the time--make mistakes, no reason to point it out, I already am aware of it and working on the problem--problem is, alzheimers is on the way and most likely defeat the efforts of a lifetime. frown John On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:51:01 -0700, John Smith wrote: N2EY: As far as the danger of hydrogen, it is safer than gasoline, in an accident--hydrogen being lighter than air heads for the far upper atmosphere, gasoline lays around you burning (really bad if you are trapped in the vehicle.) In a hydrogen explosion more energy is directed upwards, in the direction of the hydrogen itself, with gasoline the energy is expended outwards towards people and property... hydrogens danger from a "spill" quickly disappears, gasoline/diesel stays there a long time... Gasoline/diesel is toxic and is devastating to the environment, hydrogen is almost benign (but large scale use would have to evolve to truly know the real consequences.) Danger is not a good reason to skip hydrogens use, propane is much more dangerous than hydrogen and used inside buildings on forklifts and other industrial equipment (even some city buses (and natural gas too) and other vehicles.) Hydrogen is a scam at this point in time, I think it always will be, when you finally have enough energy to remove hydrogen from sea water--why bother, the energy can already be used! But, if some alchemist discovers a way to remove it from sea water with little or no energy, GREAT! But, even hybrid vehicles are mostly a scam at this point, you are wearing out two different systems, maintaining them, with all the related use of energy to do so. And, this ignores the the manufacturing expenditure of energy which occurs in making the extra electrical components for the vehicle. It is mainly a "feels good campaign" used by politicians to soothe the people, and manufacturing for "gov't pork money." It looks to me a lot like putting props on jet aircraft... John On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 09:37:59 -0700, N2EY wrote: Michael Coslo wrote: What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen? Mostly salt. Hydrogen is seen as some sort of saving angel in the energy issue. Producing the hydrogen is a bit of a problem though. It takes a lot of energy to produce it. It has a pretty low volumetric energy density. Which means it is compressed and your fuel tank becomes a highpressure canister. Not only is the stuff flammable, like gasoline, but it's under high pressure. Two ways to go boom. But to the problem at hand, a somewhat practical method of producing H2 would be to electrolyze it, using Nuc power. The electrolysis plant would probably be set up near the ocean (let's not even talk of fresh water production - just ask the folks on the left coast about fresh water) So now we have an extraction plant that is powered by an unpopular power source, and has one big nasty polluting byproduct. Or we can use the other methods of generating H2. Of course, they cause as much pollution producing the fuel as if we just used the fuel in the first place. Maybe. There are all sorts of possible technologies to extract, transport and store hydrogen. For example, there's work being done to store the gas in metal hydrides. It could be extracted by using electricity made photovoltaically. Etc. The big question is whether such processes can be made economically competitive. How much will a hydrogen car cost? How much will they cost to drive per mile? What are the maintenance costs? The big problem is that there's probably no single magic long-term solution. Rather there are a bunch of small solutions that add up. Here's two favorites of mine: Imagine a tall (couple of hundred feet) hollow tower, in the desert. A vertical pipe, as it were, with holes around the bottom. Around its base is a large circular greenhouse whose roof slants toward the tower. When the sun is out, the air under the greenhouse roof is heated, and rises. This creates an artificial wind towards the tower. The warmed air goes up the tower, which contains a wind-driven generator. Works whether or not there is a breeze. The generator and its impeller are near ground level. Etc. also There's a process called TDP (Thermal Depolymerization Process) that can supposedly break down various types of waste into fuel oil, gas and other usable products. For example, there's a pilot plant here in Philadelphia that takes sewage sludge (ugh) and breaks it down into a type of fuel oil, methane gas, water, and some other things that are usable as fertilizer. The result is also sterilized. Another plant in Carthage, MO, takes the waste from a turkey-processing plant and extracts oil, gas and some other products from it. The company claims that many other feedstocks can be used. Old tires, a chronic disposal problem, can allegedly be broken down into oil, gas, steel, fiberglass and carbon black. The process supposedly uses 15% of the product to run itself. Of course the above pilot plants produce fuel at the rate of a few hundred barrels a day. It's doubtful that either of the above will solve all our energy problems. It's also unclear as to whether they are economically feasible on a large scale. But if they are doable, they can sure help. In the case of TDP, a big part of the waste-disposal problem can be dealt with. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
John Smith wrote:
But, even hybrid vehicles are mostly a scam at this point, you are wearing out two different systems, maintaining them, with all the related use of energy to do so. And, this ignores the the manufacturing expenditure of energy which occurs in making the extra electrical components for the vehicle. And now in the case of a crash of a hybrid, the rescue workers not only have to worry about gasoline fire, but the possibably of being electrocuted. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Coslo wrote: wrote: Michael Coslo wrote: What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen? Mostly salt. And chlorine. As you mentioned in another post, sodium hydroxide. However I don't see that as a big problem. Either the electrolysis process can be made to not split the NaCl, or it can be recombined and the energy recovered. The main byproduct problem I see is that you'll have lots of salt. Hydrogen is seen as some sort of saving angel in the energy issue. Producing the hydrogen is a bit of a problem though. It takes a lot of energy to produce it. It has a pretty low volumetric energy density. Which means it is compressed and your fuel tank becomes a highpressure canister. Not only is the stuff flammable, like gasoline, but it's under high pressure. Two ways to go boom. But to the problem at hand, a somewhat practical method of producing H2 would be to electrolyze it, using Nuc power. The electrolysis plant would probably be set up near the ocean (let's not even talk of fresh water production - just ask the folks on the left coast about fresh water) So now we have an extraction plant that is powered by an unpopular power source, and has one big nasty polluting byproduct. Or we can use the other methods of generating H2. Of course, they cause as much pollution producing the fuel as if we just used the fuel in the first place. Maybe. There are all sorts of possible technologies to extract, transport and store hydrogen. For example, there's work being done to store the gas in metal hydrides. It could be extracted by using electricity made photovoltaically. Etc. The infrastructure would be interesting. The best looking way for hydride storage that I've heard of so far, is the replacement tank method. Interesting, and I suspect that teh real quick stop for fuel would become a thing of the past. Not with quick-connecting pipes. Leave it to the MEs. The big question is whether such processes can be made economically competitive. How much will a hydrogen car cost? How much will they cost to drive per mile? What are the maintenance costs? Maintenance would *probably* be improved. I suspect that engines would last longer, and be a lot cleaner to be around. Agreed! But the cost competitiveness problem still exists. The big problem is that there's probably no single magic long- term solution. Rather there are a bunch of small solutions that add up. Here's two favorites of mine: Imagine a tall (couple of hundred feet) hollow tower, in the desert. A vertical pipe, as it were, with holes around the bottom. Around its base is a large circular greenhouse whose roof slants toward the tower. When the sun is out, the air under the greenhouse roof is heated, and rises. This creates an artificial wind towards the tower. The warmed air goes up the tower, which contains a wind-driven generator. Works whether or not there is a breeze. The generator and its impeller are near ground level. Etc. Good process, and an old one. A lot of places in the middle east use those type of towers (usually lower) to bring cooling air into the house. The process also works for a limited amount of time after the sun goes down. The warm ground heats the air above it. The ground under the greenhouse roof can be farmed, if there's water available for irrigation. also There's a process called TDP (Thermal Depolymerization Process) that can supposedly break down various types of waste into fuel oil, gas and other usable products. For example, there's a pilot plant here in Philadelphia that takes sewage sludge (ugh) and breaks it down into a type of fuel oil, methane gas, water, and some other things that are usable as fertilizer. The result is also sterilized. If nothing else, it gets rid of the stuff! Which is a major problem today. Two birds, etc. Another plant in Carthage, MO, takes the waste from a turkey-processing plant and extracts oil, gas and some other products from it. The company claims that many other feedstocks can be used. Old tires, a chronic disposal problem, can allegedly be broken down into oil, gas, steel, fiberglass and carbon black. The process supposedly uses 15% of the product to run itself. hmm, not too bad... *IF* it really does what is claimed. That's the problem with a lot of new technologies: If they're for-real, the developers are very secretive about the actual process because they're afraid it will be stolen. If they're a scam, the developers are very secretive about the actual process because they're afraid it will be discovered to be a fake. Of course the above pilot plants produce fuel at the rate of a few hundred barrels a day. It's doubtful that either of the above will solve all our energy problems. It's also unclear as to whether they are economically feasible on a large scale. But if they are doable, they can sure help. In the case of TDP, a big part of the waste-disposal problem can be dealt with. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|