Check this out:

http://www.americancarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050126.003/dodge/1.html

Pretty cool!

__________________
Enough about me, how are you doing?

Does anyone know how much water these produce?

Beware the evils of dihydrogen monoxide.

Not abusing MedMech here, but I am gunning for the concept of fuel cells. Fuel cells are an idea in search of an application. Aside from space craft, I can't think of a good use for them that couldn't be more economically addressed by diesel.

All that energy put into formation and sequestration of high pressure explosive gas for so little reward in motive force. True, the immediate product is harmless so it has immediate environmental appeal. It is also quiet. Nobody has to put-up with those damnedable rice-rockets and their resonators.

Somebody somewhere had to consume a lot of energy in some original form to produce 2 moles of hydrogen for each mole of oxygen. So we use a coal-fired plant to produce energy needed to produce hydrogen and oxygen through electrolysis. How much energy goes into electrolysis?

What's the carnot efficiency of a fuel cell? Pretty high compared to internal combustion, I'd guess. But the other half of the story is the creation, distribution and storage of the gases. Energy-wise, how does that compare to diesel fuel production, storage and distribution?

fuel cells are one of the great jokes of the age. particularly as a vehicular prime mover.

when you consider that most of the hydrogen will be produced from the historical hydrocarbons[oil, methane] that we have used for over 100 years, you should recognize that hydrogen as a fuel is a zenith of a con job.

when you do the energy equation of using conventional hydrocarbons as the feedstocks for hydrogen production, combined with the energy requirements that will be consumed to create a new fueling infrastructure, i think that you will notice that any conversion to hydrogen will be a deficit transaction.

i often hear some discuss using the conversion of water to produce the hydrogen. with current technologies, that conversion process requires the inputs of more therms of energy than the therms of hydrogen energy that will be produced.

and then, of course, there is that very nagging issue, where will that water be coming from?

I'm with you guys, I hear the point counter point and it reminds me of political talking points where both sides are so screwed up the truth that's in the middle is never heard.

B, do you think enough Biodiesel can be produced to meet current demand? I had dinner with a brilliant MSU prof this evening before the MSU-Michigan game and he stated that current technologies are going to have to be perfected to keep us going until something ELSE is developed. Meaning the fuel of the futer isn't even bouncing around inside someones head yet.

Good question about biodiesel for which I am completely ill-prepared to evaluate.

But when has that ever stopped me?

I'm thinking of all the carbohydrates of various kinds that go into landfills and sewage treatment plants. The trick is getting useful work out of that trash and crap. I know that India has some really nice small-community biodigesters that produce low-quality methane suitable for cooking. Low quality because it has CO2 and CO because of the processing method and no scrubber system, last I heard. I thought about this 30 years ago when I was a hippy goat and chicken and Cannabis farmer. Scrubber could be implemented by bubbling the mixed gas through aqueous NaOH or KOH producing Na2CO3 or K2CO3 + H2O and I think its exothermic. You get the NaOH or KOH the old-fashined way, get the fireplace ashes and pour water into them dissolving the 'potash' = potassium --> KOH. But I still wouldn't want to use it to fuel a car. Don't want any loose salts getting into the intake system, thank you.

But for longer chained hydrocarbons you have to have some method of rearranging simple carbons into complex carbons and that takes energy input. So I think you do it the old-fashioned way and just be patient.

Grind-up high-carbon trash with doo-doo to form a thick slurry and pump that melange into old saltmines. let that goo cook for a couple of decades in the natural heat of the mine and it's own anerobic exothermic reactions. The worst that could happen is that it would form methane and crack the salt mine, leaking an evil ooze out into the strata several thousand feet underground. That's essentially what forms around salt domes anyway. What would be extremely cool would be if instead of cracking the mine and causing subterranean environmental hell, it formed long-chain hydrocarbons. In that way the world takes stuff it doesn't want and can't use and can't hide and turns it into something interesting.

What's the over/under on a time for when the US starts drilling in all the sacred parks and wildlife preserves that are here that have known reserves.

10/20/50 years?

Or do we continue to try and control the Middle East until they run dry? Or both?

__________________
Enough about me, how are you doing?

This political year or next the Repos are gonna make a run at ANWR. The silly thing is that ANWR is just a symbol to both sides. There is an awful lot of territory up there both terrestrial and offshore, that hasn't been developed and is open for mineral development. ANWR is just easier to get to.

From the oil prospector's perspective, ANWR is cheaper and less risky to develop (risk in terms of both capital investment and in lives of derrick hands, etc). Also, the methods used now in AK have been proven through trial and error since AK oil was first developed. The footprint of the wells is about the size of an offshore system--a couple of acres with a ring levee to prevent spillage off-site and facilitate rehab after the well is spent. And with directional drilling multiple wells can be drilled from one site. Also, the pipeline intereference with migrating animals and melting permafrost has also been solved during the engineering of teh AK pipeline.

From the enviro perspective, it takes tundra forever to heal after disturbance. Scars of exploration and production will last centuries. An accidental release of oil, heated for pumping across the tundra, could cover a huge area in a congealed tar that may be impossible to ameliorate. The value of land is more than it's productive capacity. Folks who only see a dollar sign would clearcut MedMech's land and leave stumps just like they did 100 years ago. Cut-out and get-out. People who love the land value more than it's economic productive capacity and society has to balance that value against it's loss from development.

But I think the really interesting prospect is Siberia. If Russia can ever control its kleptocracy such that independent oil men can accurately assess their risk, that place will produce far more oil that AK and CA combined. Enough to offset OPEC, which would be really cool.

I think what's being missed, is that the fuel cells are only one part of the equation. Further development of solar and wind technologies can in time replace the old coal and gas power plants. The barrier is, and always has been money. However, this barrier is being overcome. Wind power now rivals fossil fuel plants on price per kw/hr. Solar panels broke the $1 per watt barrier a few years ago, when I last saw pricing for the panels. Phasing over to renewable power production, and using it to produce the hydrogen for the fuel cells, makes for a viable renewable and clean cycle. Again, it will take time, and will probably not be realized untill most of us living now, have long gone. Biodiesel can become a viable replacement for fossil fuel as well, if people would be willing to take over what is now useless desert to build and maintain algae farms - even at the chagrin of the enviro zealots and terrorists who think no rock should be touched.

The development and use fuel cells is the future that has arrived here and now. A Vancouver-based company, Ballard has successfully made fuel cells into a commercially viable alternative to fossil fuel.

Daimler-Chrysler was the first automaker to jump aboard and invested millions of dollars to insure and secure its place in the future of automaking. Ford was the recent investor of Ballard. (Yep, I hesitated the IPO Ballard '97 )

Ballard buses are already on the road in Europe, Canada, some parts in the U.S. Look out for them.

__________________
joel

Prayers bring forth enlightenment.

Where and how do they get the fuels?

How many BMW 750Hl's were produced?

Here is the link: http://www.ballard.com/

__________________
joel

Prayers bring forth enlightenment.

http://www.ballard.com/be_a_customer/power_generation/fuel_cell_powergen/airgen/airgen_fuel_options

AirGen™ fuel options

The AirGen™ fuel cell generator is fueled by hydrogen that can be supplied through industrial cylinders (for commercial and industrial use).

Industrial cylinders are available in a number of sizes and are sold separately with a cylinder adapter kit for the AirGen™ unit.

The bus thing might be good just to improve city air quality. But the thermal efficiency is not on the side of fuel cells without a compelling reason--like city air pollution.