The case for nuke cars—it's called 'hydrogen.'

[CountryME]

The case for nuke cars—it's called 'hydrogen.'
BY PATRICK BEDARD
October 2005

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....rticle_id=9978


This article reveals what a pipe dream the idea of a hydrogen economy and the use of hydrogen to fuel cars really is.

[desmo9]

So what? I posted the following several months ago. You'd expect Car & Driver could tell us something more useful...

---------------------------------
There is such a thing as a "nuclear-powered" car, if you know where to find it.

Alot of people don't seem to understand the true merits of a fuel-cell. We call them "Hydrogen-powered", but that's a misnomer. Hydrogen is not like oil ... it's not plentiful in a useful state that "powers" a car in the way oil/gasoline does. Hydrogen is like an efficient, easy-to-recharge battery, providing for portability of an energy source. The merits of going with hydrogen include the merits of electric vehicles: Enable alternative forms of energy to power a vehicle, including NUCLEAR. You'd never put a nuclear reactor on a car, but you would employ nuclear power to charge a battery on an electric car. You would also employ nuclear power to extract Hydrogen from water and other sources, then use the hydrogen as the means to get electrical energy to the drive motors (via fuel cell).

The value of a "hydrogen economy" isn't really in fuel cells or the quantity of Hydrogen atoms in the world ... the value resides in the ability to get more energy out of a hydrogen atom than the energy required to extract it. Until we get there, Hydrogen is not a true energy source the way oil is .. it simply helps facitate a "nuclear car."

desmo

[CountryME]

Originally Posted by desmo9

So what? I posted the following several months ago. You'd expect Car & Driver could tell us something more useful...

---------------------------------
There is such a thing as a "nuclear-powered" car, if you know where to find it.

Alot of people don't seem to understand the true merits of a fuel-cell. We call them "Hydrogen-powered", but that's a misnomer. Hydrogen is not like oil ... it's not plentiful in a useful state that "powers" a car in the way oil/gasoline does. Hydrogen is like an efficient, easy-to-recharge battery, providing for portability of an energy source. The merits of going with hydrogen include the merits of electric vehicles: Enable alternative forms of energy to power a vehicle, including NUCLEAR. You'd never put a nuclear reactor on a car, but you would employ nuclear power to charge a battery on an electric car. You would also employ nuclear power to extract Hydrogen from water and other sources, then use the hydrogen as the means to get electrical energy to the drive motors (via fuel cell).

The value of a "hydrogen economy" isn't really in fuel cells or the quantity of Hydrogen atoms in the world ... the value resides in the ability to get more energy out of a hydrogen atom than the energy required to extract it. Until we get there, Hydrogen is not a true energy source the way oil is .. it simply helps facitate a "nuclear car."

desmo

Your comments posted a few months ago are very insightful, however for those of us who need numbers to equate things, the C & D article provides a different way of looking at it.

[Carguy]

Sometimes I think PATRICK BEDARD is the BEST reason I have to keep getting C&D every month. He is the MOST REBELLIOUS and most POLITICALY INCORRECT they have!--------((GO PATRICK BEDARDMYSTER GO!!))

[Codester66]

(c&d quote)"Virtually all the hydrogen produced today, about 50 million tons worldwide, comes from natural gas. The process, called "steam reforming," is only about 30 percent efficient, much less, he says, "than if the natural gas were simply burned" in the generating plant."

thats interesting, especially since natural gas will peak shortly after oil peaks. theres just no positive alternatives filtering out into the public domain, and lets get real here, coal is energy intensive, it would scar the land for the thousands of miles of energy we'd need, and the climate and atmosphere are all out of whack as it is, without the increased greenhouses and particulates. neither can we afford another 10,000 nuclear power plants, besides that were looking at uranium shortages by 2020. and if we could pull together the recources to build this "hydrogen economy", we cant afford to convert our infrastructure to hydrogen because of the price, storage, and the recources involved aswell are becoming scarce.

and were talking about '07-'08 by the best of my research(and intuitions), at wich point the picture will become pretty clear. Iraq really is about oil, thats why we have the military bases there, and thats why we have this war on "Terror" in that region. they arent going to tell us whats about to happen to america, but the signs are all their:the weak dollar, the deficit, oil prices, the war on "terror", loss of rights, public systems out of control. the ones in the know, who are really behind the economy, who control government and corporate sectors...they arent going to warn us of this until its too late; for one they want to make as much money as possible, and two the economy wont stop growing, or see the signs of crisis until we are incapable of reacting.

if you believe in carma, as i do, then the fact that we are the wealthiest nation on the planet, and yet one of the most greedy, afluent, materialistic, and in some way morally perverse, with almost no accountability( like a teenager with unlimited access to her daddys credit card), and now soon we coudl be finding ourselves killing people, and fighting wars to sustain our way of life-as a matter of life and death-is incredibly prophetic. i dont know how we can justify that kind of selfishness without getting our come-up-ins. its the whole yin/yeng, balanced energies idea...but its talked about in almost all major religions and spiritual prophecies, so i dunno

[DanCBJMS1988]

That's weird - I know Iceland is aggressively going towards a hydrogen economy by using the same source that they use for electricity and hot water - geothermal power. Right now Shell and BP own hydrogen filling stations all over Iceland and are retrofitting cars to run on hydrogen, and the Icelandic government is working towards creating an all-hydrogen economy by at least 2008.

[dindak]

Everyone has an opinion on this but from what I have seen, hydrogen can and likely will succeed. Ballard and GM have made huge strides in the last 3-4 years. Also, I saw pres. of Ballard on Autoline Detroit and he was very convincing.

[DanCBJMS1988]

Originally Posted by dindak

Everyone has an opinion on this but from what I have seen, hydrogen can and likely will succeed. Ballard and GM have made huge strides in the last 3-4 years. Also, I saw pres. of Ballard on Autoline Detroit and he was very convincing.

Finally, a believer!! I'm looking forward to hydrogen cars, especially from these manufacturers:

Ford
GM
DaimlerChrysler
BMW

Ford is testing hydrogen versions of the Focus; GM is testing the Hy-Wire and a fuel-cell Zafira; DCX has Mercedes-Benz's highly-sucessful NECAR project which would have powerful implications for Merc, smart, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Hyundai, Kia, and Mitsubishi; and BMW is testing a hydrogen 7-Series model (as least from what I can tell from the BMW ads). Not to mention that all of them are with Ballard. Hydrogen is the wave of the future, no doubt about it. While Honda and Toyota (and enviromentalists) may be wedded to the hybrids and electric vehicles, I say hydrogen will have a better chance. Now if all four were to launch production-ready hydrogen cars around 2007-2008 (and convince Shell and BP to apply their hydrogen research here), then we'd be on a roll. Shell and BP could easily convert their gas stations to hydrogen - they're doing so in Iceland on the orders of the Icelandic government. The only problem would be what to do with the gasoline once everyone goes hydrogen.

[CountryME]

Did you even read the article? Hydrogen is not the answer, especially here in the US where we do not have the geothermal energy to convert like they do in Iceland. Trying to convert to hydrogen is like trying to invent a perpetual motion machine, it's just not possible by the laws physics. You get way less out of it than what you have to put in to make it. We need to be looking at BioDiesel and Ethanol as home grown alternatives to gasoline rather than the magical pie in the sky use of hydrogen. Don't get me wrong, as an engineer I can appreciate fuel cells and what a marvel they are. I even used to work at one of Ballard's competetors, Granted it was a few years ago now. But you have to look at the energy source not just the end use. Believing that hydrogen and fuel cells will solve our energy problem is like believing that a Toyota will run on hugs and only emit bunnies as exhaust.

[desmo9]

Originally Posted by CountryME

Did you even read the article? Hydrogen is not the answer, especially here in the US where we do not have the geothermal energy to convert like they do in Iceland. Trying to convert to hydrogen is like trying to invent a perpetual motion machine, it's just not possible by the laws physics. You get way less out of it than what you have to put in to make it. We need to be looking at BioDiesel and Ethanol as home grown alternatives to gasoline rather than the magical pie in the sky use of hydrogen. Don't get me wrong, as an engineer I can appreciate fuel cells and what a marvel they are. I even used to work at one of Ballard's competetors, Granted it was a few years ago now. But you have to look at the energy source not just the end use. Believing that hydrogen and fuel cells will solve our energy problem is like believing that a Toyota will run on hugs and only emit bunnies as exhaust.

I think, unless the world reverts to Tarzans and bonfires, electrically-based power is the future. May not be generated with geothermal or coal, but one way or another, we'll need a means to get electrical power to mobile devices. Fuel cells are probably better than batteries in this regard.

If, and it's a big IF, fusion holds the key to the future, then we need fuel cell development in parallel with fusion development (which is ongoing in a huge project housed in France).

[Joevette]

maybe if all the money that is spent on the war was spent on implementing atleast a government/military hydrogen infrastructure we would have an idea of what is needed to bring it to the masses, instead the government is just sucking down a large proportion of our gas and oil supplies and trying to take over the middle east's supply while still ripping us off in this country with $3+ gallons of gas