Mazda's 15-Year Quest For Hydrogen Vehicles

[camrycev6]

I wanna ask the stupid question...I don't understand the concept too well. But I read up about this a while ago, doesn't liquid Hydrogen require an extremely cold environment to remain in a liquid form? What about the dangers of having a leak etc. Just a simple question i'm sure since it appears most of you guys seem like you know what you are talking about.

Not necessarily, but it sure helps. You have two choices to turn a gas into a liquid. Lower the temperature, or increase the pressure. (Or both of course...)

It would take far too much energy to lower the temp sufficiently, so you would have little choice but to increase the pressure. (Just like with propane tanks for your grill.) Of course, it takes a lot more pressure to make liquid hydrogen, and God help you if the tank ruptures....

 

[gw350z]

I just think its great companies are trying.

 

[Dalton]

And about Diesel, instead of killing the birds we can poison the fish lol I hate the sound and smell of diesel and will gladly form a vigilante resistance to them by smashing windows, etc. of the ones I see. "Is the trash truck outside?" "no my wife just pulled in the driveway coming home from the grocery store."

(strike)
Your views are so outdated, modern diesel engines comply with te strictest emisisions there are - no problems. Diesel engines produce very little carbon monoxide as they burn the fuel in excess air even at full load, at which point the quantity of fuel injected per cycle is still about 50% lean of stoichiometric. However, they can produce black soot (or more specifically diesel particulate matter) from their exhaust, which consists of unburned carbon compounds. Modern diesel engines feature diesel particulate filters, which catch the black soot and when saturated are automatically regenerated by burning the particles. Also Modern Diesel cars have catalytic converters in the exhaust. US still allows for crappy diesel fuel to be sold and this means that you will need to replace particle filter every 100 000 miles.

ALSO, Diesel engines are more efficient than gasoline (petrol) engines of the same power, resulting in lower fuel consumption. A common margin is 40% more miles per gallon for an efficient turbodiesel. Also diesel engines tend to have better torque characteristics and the lack of an electrical ignition system greatly improves the reliability.

 

[justhavnfun]

ok

 

[dkswim]

the hydrogen is only as cleen as where they get it from. curently most Hydrogen is aquired from stripping it off of natural gas so the carbon was released before the car as oposed to gas where the carbon is releasewd in the car. granted hydrogen can be cleen for example using solorpower to seperate hydrogen and oxygen from water. i found an interesting article on alternative fuels it dosnt go to far into detail but either way its good reading.
http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_110155/article.html

 

[camrycev6]

I am a little confused. What do you mean the hydrogen is only as "clean" as the source it comes from? I think you are saying that if I get hydrogen from methane, that we produce some carbon dioxide as a waste product. Is that what you mean? Clearly, I think the "cleanest" way to get hydrogen gas is simply from electrolysis of water. The only other bi-product is oxygen. Not a bad deal.

 

[dkswim]

but how cleen is the energy to preforme the electrolysis. is it coal or other green forms of energy. and yes thats what im saying. when they strip the hydrogen off of methane all the emissions and co2 is released then. so your overall emissions over the well to tire are the same as gasoline.

 

[camrycev6]

Oh... That is why I think we should use solar or nuclear power to get the energy for the electrolysis of the the water. Both are far cleaner and last (especially solar) longer other methods.

 

[jeffmsp]

they should just make plants that operate off a generator powered by wind or water, then there is no pollution to make the gas.

ive been playing around with HHO or "browns gas" lately. Pretty potent stuff, my lawn mower seems to love it

 

[camrycev6]

They do... but the problem is there are not enough suitable locations for the wind or water generation to satisfy the energy needs. We also use geothermal and tidal generators as well. But again, it just isn't enough. Solar is the only real long term answer, and nuclear is a good (and safe) alternative. It isn't perfectly clean, but again, it is far more cleaner than coal or other fossil fuels.

 

[clos561]

hosuehold solar panels ad genrators...the problem is..everyone wants to make money of stuff and removing gas stations and putting in hydrolosis stations to charge people seems un practical. there was a man that created a kit for a sand buggy a long time ago and a hosuehold electrolosis station he used on his car. solar panels on a car and plugging it to ur house is enough power for the car.

-o yea and nuclear plants may be great and all, but the problem is the waste...we cant just keep burying the stuff

 

[clos561]

did you guys see that special on discovery with the car that runs on compressed air, it has a on board compressor that runs on compressed air and produces more air than it uses...very good concept and i can see that being a good alternate for personal transportation.

 

[camrycev6]

I did see that, but you are missing on critical point, the car still requires an external energy source to produce more air than it uses. You can't have a system that outputs more energy than goes into the system. It is the first law of thermodynamics. Since energy must be conserved, the system would have to return 100% of the energy to compress the air again. That would mean there would be none left to drive the car. Let's not forget that the system would also have to be perfectly frictionless so that no heat was generated. (Which is... impossible.)

So.... the long and the short of it is the air compression vehicles are still going to require an external / or alternative energy source.

Lastly... as far as nuclear waste is concerned... That is what deep holes in the desert (near the salt flats) are for. Nuclear plants require 1/10 the land area of a coal plant, and produced 95% less pollution. Think about that....

 

[dkswim]

it would be nice if congress authorized a new plant made on newer technology.if i recall all the reactrers in the states are 2 gen reacters and there are alredy 4 and 5 gen reacters out elsewhere in the world. safer designs and more efficent less harmefull waste.

 

[clos561]

I did see that, but you are missing on critical point, the car still requires an external energy source to produce more air than it uses. You can't have a system that outputs more energy than goes into the system. It is the first law of thermodynamics. Since energy must be conserved, the system would have to return 100% of the energy to compress the air again. That would mean there would be none left to drive the car. Let's not forget that the system would also have to be perfectly frictionless so that no heat was generated. (Which is... impossible.)

So.... the long and the short of it is the air compression vehicles are still going to require an external / or alternative energy source.

Lastly... as far as nuclear waste is concerned... That is what deep holes in the desert (near the salt flats) is for. Nuclear plants require 1/10 the land area of a coal plant, and produced 95% less pollution. Think about that....

on the special i remember them saying that the on board compressor for the air outputs more than it needs to produce. and teh car has big tanks on each side to hold air.

 

[camrycev6]

on the special i remember them saying that the on board compressor for the air outputs more than it needs to produce. and teh car has big tanks on each side to hold air.

Well they either lied, or neglected to mention (most likely) that there is another source of energy (battery / solar / etc.) providing additional energy to the system to keep up the supply of air. If you have no other source of energy, I am telling you it is completely impossible to output more work (energy) in a closed system than was initially provided. This would be tantamount to a perpetual motion machine. They don't exist and never will.

 

[jeffmsp]

closest ive seen to perpetual motion is those magnetic devices, they arent anywhere near being reliable but I have seen one spin for quite a long period of time from just the flick of a finger to start it. I was so impressed I tried to make one of my own using old HD magnets and some other crap I had lying around the house. Its a cool conversation piece but nowhere near perpetual motion lol

 

[camrycev6]

I have seen them as well...they are very cool. Because of the magnetic suspension, they go for quite a while (very low friction), however, they really can't do much work, hence they don't do very well as machines. In order to get useful work from them, you have to eventually interact with the magnet directly (or some other moving surface) and then you are right back at the same problem with friction. Good entertainment though...

 

[Jedidiah55]

I wanna ask the stupid question...I don't understand the concept too well. But I read up about this a while ago, doesn't liquid Hydrogen require an extremely cold environment to remain in a liquid form? What about the dangers of having a leak etc. Just a simple question i'm sure since it appears most of you guys seem like you know what you are talking about.

its just like how they store liquid nitrogen, they put it in a vaccum and its only good for so long depending on the storage container and the amount of liquid nitrogen