[ausev] hydrogen efficiency

Mon Jun 2 18:36:53 GMT 2008

Ian,

I agree 100% with most of what you have encapsulated here but I still 
disagree with the Hydrogen efficiency issue. Fact: approx. 61,000 btu 
per pound of H, approx. 20,000 btu per pound of gasoline. I haven't yet 
made an estimation for batteries. There are approx. 1833 gallons of 
Hydorgen gas in a gallon of H2O and the well to wheels concept considers 
I believe the compression and storage of hydrogen and I also believe it 
is flawed in some aspects. maybe more on that later. So if I can extract 
hydrogen gas from H20 with only 12 watts of clean electricity
I've already fractured the some of the concepts of non green energy 
production and efficiency
issues, but like I've related and you seem to agree, truly clean energy 
today is probably non-existent. I do agree chemical reaction cells are 
the best source of EV power at the moment,
maybe, but I truly believe hydrogen is a superior source in most aspects 
if the truth is allowed to
become known. There's way too much misinformation being propagated about 
energy by the powers that want to be kings and masters of the universe 
and as long as our minds are not open about things that some say can be 
we're just supporting the wannabe dictators by giving them
verification. I may be misguided about hydrogen by my disgust with 
Corporate America raping us the way they are and overly hoping hydrogen 
is a good source of power for EV's. But if corporate America is using it 
and denouncing its attributes to control it then I think they are not 
wanting us to know something very important or want us to continue our 
lemming like activity. A society that just throws away things when 
certain troubles arise and follows the whim of debt controllers.
My hydrogen generator is very rudimentary and for a reason. It is an 
experiment to establish parameters and create verifiable data. Hopefully 
soon the design changes I make will establish
some interesting characteristics, which are impossible to find even on 
youtube, and point me in a positive direction.
Wonderful discussing this with you and anyone else, but please note: 
Hydrogen does not explode except in bombs or devices made for that 
purpose and I'm not intending to blow any thing up.
LOL.

marv

Ian Ward wrote:
> I think the spirit of the AUSEV mailing list charter is specific to 
> Austin area topics, but otherwise this is (IMO) a fairly valid topic - 
> how to separate fact from fiction and enable us all to be better EV 
> advocates. In order to do so, we must understand the implications of 
> the hydrogen economy that the oil industry is selling in an attempt to 
> derail EVs, but key is the last one:
>
> 5. Electric vehicles (EVs) are an answer to the problems of oil 
> dependency, pollution, and energy efficiency.
>
> 4. Fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) are EVs, but have additional subsystems 
> that could provide greater range than existing BEV technology, 
> although charging (electrolysis) and discharging (fuel cell) is very 
> inefficient.
>
> 3. The parts and knowledge are available to build or convert an 
> existing conventional vehicle to a BEV. The parts and knowledge are 
> not available to build a FCV.
>
> 2. The average citizen already has the infrastructure to refuel a BEV. 
> The average citizen does not have the infrastructure to refuel a FCV 
> (oil companies like this).
>
> 1. FCVs are about 1/3 as efficient as battery electric vehicles 
> (BEVs). source: Argone National Labs "Well-to-Wheels" analysis using 
> the GREET model
>
> Besides longer range, fuel cell proponents used to say that they could 
> offer faster refueling than BEVs too, but that is no longer the case. 
> I am confident that battery energy density will be improved enough to 
> meet consumer expectations (300+ miles?) far before a fuel cell 
> membrane can be discovered that will be as durable at the same cost as 
> the new generation of chemical batteries.
>
> The biggest myth about hydrogen is the pollution argument. It takes 
> energy to crack water, and if you use the current US mix of 
> electricity sources (to make it apples to apples with EVs), FCVs are 
> way worse (+65%) than internal combustion engines (ICEs) in terms of 
> green house gases (GHGs).
>
> If you consider any source of energy, the efficiency math is between 
> the added weight of the large battery and the efficiency of the H2 
> generation and fuel cell. Currently, the BEVs are winning (even good 
> old lead acids). I don't see this changing. If you consider the 
> incredible cost of the fuel cell components themselves vs the cost of 
> even a high-end lithium-ion, water-cooled AC drive, there is no way to 
> argue the feasibility of FCVs. Then, you have these guys that want to 
> BURN hydrogen using ICE conversion kits, which trades the 50% 
> efficiency of the fuel cell for the 15% efficiency of the ICE, and 
> you're going the WRONG WAY!
>
> The technology for EVs is here today and can be applied to help 80% of 
> Americans' commuting needs. It is here at a price that most people can 
> afford. The technology and prices are only getting better. You can't 
> say any of that about H2.
>
> If you don't trust me, please do some more research:
> http://www.evworld.com/library/abrooks_carb_nov2_05.pdf
> http://www.econogics.com/ev/fcevreal.htm
> http://www.teslamotors.com/blog2/?p=49
> http://www.switchingpowermagazine.com/ 
> <tr_1212292355524>downloads/Future%20of%20the%20Electric%20Car.pdf 
> <http://www.switchingpowermagazine.com/downloads/Future%20of%20the%20Electric%20Car.pdf>
> http://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/review05/anp_7_wang.pdf
> *
> *- ian*
> *
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusEV mailing list
> AusEV at austinev.org
> http://www.austinev.org/mailman/listinfo/ausev
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG. 
> Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.24.4/1478 - Release Date: 6/2/2008 7:12 AM
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.austinev.org/pipermail/ausev/attachments/20080602/0b08354f/attachment.htm 