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

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

.... 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

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.

wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

What are the byproducts of converting seawater to hydrogen and oxygen?


Mostly salt.

And chlorine.


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.


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.

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.


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!

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...

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.


- Mike KB3EIA -

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

wrote:
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.

I wonder if there will be self-tank exchange stations? 8^)

No doubt it can be done.

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:

One of the biggest problems I see for many of these technologies is that
they often don't have the scalability needed to provide fuel for many
vehicles, let alone fuel the countries needs. If this plant went into
serious production, it might run out of feedstock pretty quickly.

I think that until the next big fuel comes along, we are going to enter
an age of "niche" fuel production.

That is okay, as long as we don't get involved in feedstock that might
otherwise be food, ie corn/ethanol production. There are possible
ethical considerations that will crop up in that case.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Michael:

Don't you think chinas' appetite for fuel will eventually (soon?) consume
the elephants share, we can probably scale back and ride bicycles so there
is enough fuel for trucks to bring us food and toilet paper--but, maybe
not...

John

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 23:54:19 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

wrote:
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.

I wonder if there will be self-tank exchange stations? 8^)

No doubt it can be done.

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:

One of the biggest problems I see for many of these technologies is that
they often don't have the scalability needed to provide fuel for many
vehicles, let alone fuel the countries needs. If this plant went into
serious production, it might run out of feedstock pretty quickly.

I think that until the next big fuel comes along, we are going to enter
an age of "niche" fuel production.

That is okay, as long as we don't get involved in feedstock that might
otherwise be food, ie corn/ethanol production. There are possible
ethical considerations that will crop up in that case.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Not with quick-connecting pipes. Leave it to the MEs.

I wonder if there will be self-tank exchange stations? 8^)

No doubt it can be done.

Self-closing snap-on connector for the hydrogen supply. Similar to what
is used for compressed air.

Very doable.

The big question is whether such processes can be made economically
competitive. 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:

One of the biggest problems I see for many of these
technologies is that
they often don't have the scalability needed to provide fuel
for many
vehicles, let alone fuel the countries needs. If this plant
went into
serious production, it might run out of feedstock pretty
quickly.

That's where so many people miss the point, Mike.

There's probably no single technology that will solve the
"energy crisis". Too many people want a single magic
silver bullet solution that will solve it all at once.
Extremely unlikely.

As you say, even if TDP works and is
economically competitive, the limiting factor may be
lack of raw material (imagine - not enough trash/waste
to feed the plants!)

The solution is almost certain to be a collection of
good ideas and new technologies. TDP may be one piece,
hydrogen another piece, geothermal, solar, wind, etc.

Then there's conservation and increased efficiency - a
penny saved really *is* a penny earned. For example, one
of the biggest users of electricity in most homes is the
refrigerator. Some new models use much less electricity
per year than their earlier counterparts of the same size
and features - to the point that replacing a 15-20 year old
fridge with a new one may pay for itself in energy savings
even if the old one was working fine.

It's possible to build air conditioners of very high efficiency,
but they cost more. However, using them means we don't have to build
new power plants and new power lines, because the electrical system
will have less peak load. (The peak load typically comes on an August
afternoon - from all the AC units).

Too many folks want one solution to solve 100% of the problem, without
requiring them to change anything, be responsible, or worst of all have
to think.

A more realistic and mature approach is to find a number of
solutions, each of which solves a piece of the problem.

Say you find 10 solutions, each of which solves 10% of the
problem. There you are.

"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used
when we created them" (*)

I think that until the next big fuel comes along, we
are going to enter an age of "niche" fuel production.

That is okay, as long as we don't get involved in feedstock that might
otherwise be food, ie corn/ethanol production. There are
possible
ethical considerations that will crop up in that case.

All of engineering involves ethical considerations. Heck, all
of *life* involves ethical considerations!

Is it ethical to import a large percentage of something - anything -
needed to keep a country's economy and way of life going? Particularly
when such importation requires dealing with,
and empowering, people whose values are very different from your
own?

--

Now someone will probably ask what any of this has to do with amateur
radio policy. The answer is that we see the same sort of
oversimplification of problems. We are told that the solution to all of
amateur radio's problems is to get rid of the Morse Code test. When
that fails to bring about a New Golden Age, then what?

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:


Now someone will probably ask what any of this has to do with amateur
radio policy. The answer is that we see the same sort of
oversimplification of problems. We are told that the solution to all of
amateur radio's problems is to get rid of the Morse Code test. When
that fails to bring about a New Golden Age, then what?

now you are just lying jim

73 de Jim, N2EY