arcs_n_sparks

Oldman · August 21, 2005, 04:29:57 PM

I do a lot of reading. I was reading about hydrogen fuel cells and the future. One of the place I was looking at is Howstuffworks. Anyway I came across this little car kit and order it.

This should be fun to do. What da' think? [:D] Now if I could just get a kit large enough to replace the work vans... LOL [^]

http://www.discoverthis.com/fuelcelcaran.html

What kind of fuel cell does the Fuel Cell Car & Experiment Kit use? The fuel cell uses a Proton Exchange Membrane or PEM fuel cell. PEM Fuel Cells utilize the energy from the electrons given up by hydrogen ions (or protons) during the reformation of water across the membrane to run the car's motor. The fuel cell is "reversible" meaning that it can both split water into hydrogen and oxygen, and combine hydrogen and oxygen into water. Interesting to say the least.

How often do I need to replace the water in the fuel cell? 
Not very often. Because the fuel cell is a reversible fuel cell, the water gets split into hydrogen and oxygen during electrolysis and then that hydrogen and oxygen are re-combined back into water. The water can be used over and over again. Of course, you will lose water to evaporation and spilling, and thus you will need to replace the water periodically.
 Neat-O~~! UH? One quart of distilled water and 10,000 miles to go....LOL!!!

Olds

Arcs_n_Sparks · August 21, 2005, 11:22:19 PM

Pretty slick. First time I've seen a reversable fuel cell sold as a hobby kit. The PEMs are getting a lot of attention, since a number of laptop vendors want to put them in their computers.

Arcs_n_Sparks

Oldman · August 22, 2005, 01:41:55 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The PEMs are getting a lot of attention, since a number of laptop vendors want to put them in their computers.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">To heck with that I want one for my house. [:D]

Olds

Arcs_n_Sparks · August 22, 2005, 05:20:38 AM

Well, there is the efficiency factor. Solar is not that efficient; it is going to take awhile to make it worth it versus other energy sources. I have been in this business a long time, with windmills out my office window by the thousands. No easy solutions. Hydrogen has to come from somewhere. Currently it is natural gas (which is at all time high). Electrolysis is very expensive (electrical costs plus inefficiencies of conversion). Now if we only had controlled fusion...[:)][:)][:)]

Oldman · August 23, 2005, 12:16:25 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> Now if we only had controlled fusion...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> Ya and if Frogs only had wings...

Olds

MallardWacker · August 23, 2005, 02:11:20 PM

a n s,

Tell us something. And please forgive me here for my pure IgnOrenecz. Where does hydrogen really come from as far making mass quantities of it? I have heard that the oil companies will still have a roll in producing it. Is that correct? And is it that plentiful?? I know this is a dumb question... All I do is deal DeltaV, Mr. Newtons laws and the results there of so this is totally out of my realm and sure have not thought about it since school.

SmokeOn,

mski
Perryville, Arkansas
Wooo-Pig-Soooie

If a man says he knows anything at all, he knows nothing what he aught to know. But...

Arcs_n_Sparks · August 23, 2005, 02:38:52 PM

MallardWacker,

Currently, the main industrial process for hydrogen generation is steam reforming of natural gas. Basically, you are pulling the hydrogen out of the methane. So yes, the oil/gas companies will be involved in hydrogen supply. The problem now is that we are building a lot of natural gas fired power plants (using natural gas as a power plant fuel was actually banned by Federal law for quite some time; saving it for petrochemical use and home heating). With that, demand (and price) are now up quite a bit.

This is why there is renewed interest in LNG (liquified natural gas) tankers and terminals. This is also why nuclear is getting a second look, since at very high temperatures, you can directly break water molecules into oxygen and hydrogen (as well as use electrolysis, but that is less efficient).

Arcs_n_Sparks

MallardWacker · August 23, 2005, 02:56:21 PM

So what you are saying this hydrogen thing does not have an endless type supply. I guess I haven't payed close enough attention to the fine print. Arcs am I missing something here? It has advertised as a silver bullet or something.

SmokeOn,

mski
Perryville, Arkansas
Wooo-Pig-Soooie

If a man says he knows anything at all, he knows nothing what he aught to know. But...

Arcs_n_Sparks · August 24, 2005, 02:18:43 AM

MallardWacker,

Yes, most people miss the fine print on hydrogen (more accurately, they don't ask the question you did: where does it come from?). Currently, it comes from fossil fuel sources, and has roughly the same supply and environmental concerns as those fuel types.

It gets worse if you go to electrolysis (say for home-based hydrogen generation). Unless the electricity comes from nuclear, you have the expected environmental emissions from the power plant, plus the inefficiencies associated with electrolysis.

So, the recent Honda ads with water dripping out of the tail pipe are nice, but fail to tell the entire story. Hopefully, this is not more than you wanted to know.[:)]

Arcs_n_Sparks

MallardWacker · August 24, 2005, 01:58:37 PM

Thanks arcs,

Nice to know that we can count on the government to keep us well informed. Also, how come the tree huggers are not screaming this. It took them a while about the rechargeable electric cars and the impact the batteries had, I think they were too busy watching Ed Beagley Jr. driving his battery car all over Hollywood.

But if it takes less fossil fuel per mile to produce the hydrogen cars, I guess that is better. About the water, I do agree that is better for the air, I am still not sold on the THEORY about global warming. When I was in high school, the great fear was global freezing and the earth was going to move off it's axis and the only folks that were going to live was the ones on the east side of Pikes Peak.

Sorry for getting a little political there, please forgive me. I don't usually get that gun out of my holster.

SmokeOn,

mski
Perryville, Arkansas
Wooo-Pig-Soooie

If a man says he knows anything at all, he knows nothing what he aught to know. But...

Phone Guy · August 24, 2005, 05:44:36 PM

Not just from fossil fuels. Check this site.

http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid557.php

Arcs_n_Sparks · August 25, 2005, 03:03:36 AM

Phone Guy,

I have met Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute; we had a pleasant meeting. However, MallardWacker's question was more along the lines of main stream hydrogen supply, and that is steam reformed methane. There will always be "boutique" methods of alternatives (which may or may not reach fruition on a large scale (like coal gasification)). I remind people that Californians use well over a billion gallons of gasoline per month during the summer peaks, so if your solution "only" provides 10 millions gallons of alternative fuel per month, you are at least one order of magnitude away from making a difference, and two orders of magnitude away from making a change.

Out my window at work I see thousands of acres covered with windmills; they would not be there without price supports and tax credits. Their entire output could be replaced by a tiny power plant tucked away where no one would see it (and if the environmentalists in California have their way, that will happen, since they kill birds of prey).

As I tell my friends, no easy answers, just difficult choices. I keep working on providing options for difficult choices. However, the choice this weekend is easy, I'm smokin!!!!!!!

Arcs_n_Sparks

Oldman · August 25, 2005, 05:40:43 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that in the past couple of weeks in my local paper it stated that Brazil was pretty much no longer dependent on oil. They started a program back in 1991 and today it has paid off.

Now if they can do it why can't we?

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">so if your solution "only" provides 10 millions gallons of alternative fuel per month, you are at least one order of magnitude away from making a difference, and two orders of magnitude away from making a change.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">That still is 10 million less... Perhaps instead of us planning on going to Mars we should take those monies and put it into development.

My understanding is that the hydrogen cars we have now will work just fine. The problem is there are no filling stations. What do you all say we take a vote.

1.) We go to Mars.

OR

2.) We put up some filling stations first.

I vote for #2.

Yes it is true it will take some form of fuel to create the needed electic to split the stuff out of water. However, I also know it is true that hydrogen is a major bi-product of many industries.

At my age if my next car runs on oil or hydrogen it will not make any difference. However, many of you are not my age. I fully believe it will make a difference to your children.... I sure hope everyone feels this way. What we do in the next 5-10 years will really effect the next generation. More so than in any point or time in history.

We are a "Super Power" that cannot even pay its own bills. The Chinese are. If you don't believe that then go find out who is buying up our paper. I believe that if we move quickly we can buy back our country. Oil is not part of that solution. If the American People don't take a stand, then those who don't do not deserve the type of American Life I have enjoyed. In fact it just will not be there. You will be drain dry through payments alone.

The greatest end result of not having to use oil, beside taking back our real estate, is we will no longer have kids dying in the Middle East.

We, errrr let's make that You-All of younger age, need to make this happen. It is your lifetime that will see the pivot. Not mine.

There is an old idea I live by. Save a Buck. One day there will be many dollars saved. If what we can do today will only shave off 10% of our need for oil... then one day there will be much that is no longer needed. Save a Buck!

You have to start somewhere.

Olds

MallardWacker · August 25, 2005, 12:49:18 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by arcs_n_sparks
 . However, the choice this weekend is easy, I'm smokin!!!!!!!

Arcs_n_Sparks
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">WORD to the sparky!

SmokeOn,

mski
Perryville, Arkansas
Wooo-Pig-Soooie

If a man says he knows anything at all, he knows nothing what he aught to know. But...

Arcs_n_Sparks · August 26, 2005, 01:21:10 AM

A good overview of the energy situation in Brazil is here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/brazil.html

The Cliff Note answer is increased domestic production to narrow the import gap (on track to be self-sufficient in 2006). Also, eliminated the government oil monoply in 1995, which spurred competition.

Did not mean to imply not working alternatives; been doin' that a long time, and it needs to be done. Just pointing out what I call the "valley of death," bridging the gap between novel new ideas and the reality of what people and markets expect.

Arcs_n_Sparks