The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
(Page 2 of 2)
Klaus Draeger, a BMW research manager, suggests that hydrogen today is where gasoline was 100 years ago. A century ago, he says, "who could imagine that there would be a world-embracing network of filling stations? Only a few visionaries would imagine that happening." Many of the BMW engineers hovering over the journalists noted that radical infrastructure changes are not a major challenge. And they're probably right. I've seen pictures showing what Berlin looked like 60 years ago. It's hard not to agree that infrastructure can be completely rebuilt in a matter of decades.
But only if it makes sense to do so. In this case, the infrastructure isn't the largest issue. Hydrogen is the largest issue. You can't just dig it out of the ground and burn it. You have to either extract it from hydrocarbon fuels, which defeats the clean-energy purpose, or extract it from water molecules by applying electricity--which means you are either burning the fossil fuel back at the power plant or taking away much-needed renewable electricity from the power grid.
When you extract hydrogen from fossil fuels, you actually end up emitting more carbon dioxide. In fact, driving a car whose hydrogen was extracted from natural gas results in roughly double the carbon-dioxide emissions produced by driving a car that simply burns the natural gas directly. For fossil-fuel extraction of hydrogen to ever make sense from an environmental perspective, the separated carbon dioxide would have to be sequestered underground.
And if you use electricity to split water, you'll need to make sure the electricity doesn't itself come from fossil fuels. The electricity would have to come from a renewable source, like wind or the sun. It's not clear that hydrogen production is the wisest use for renewable energy, except marginally: it can absorb electricity on very windy or very sunny days, when renewable power plants are producing excess supply.
BMW maintains that once we have breakthroughs in renewable supply and hydrogen storage, cars based on Hydrogen 7 technology can fill every driveway--and perhaps even every garage. I want the company to be right. The idea of a high-performance car that essentially emits only water vapor is very alluring. But for now, the Hydrogen 7 appears to be a remarkable engineering achievement for a future that may never arrive.
I have heard of a solution for the hydrogen dilemma. The company noted below has been covered in the news and the information is from their website.
Instead of burning hydrogen, bio mass or fossil fuels, BMW could burn ‘a new gaseous and combustible form of water’ that produces 3 times the BTUs of hydrogen alone. This gas is called Aquygen by its inventor Dennis Klein at Hydrogen Technology Applications, Inc. As noted in your article, hydrogen gas alone is difficult to make and store. However, when hydrogen is combined in “supermolecules” with oxygen it becomes safe, stable and dramatically more powerful. This new gas can be efficiently produced from water, via Klein’s invention, using only the electricity from the car’s alternator. The emissions are only water vapor.
I, too, want BMW to be right. BMW has gone a long way towards a remarkable goal, the last step is to use the fuel breakthrough that will make it all work for BMW, the consumer and the environment.
Best regards,
Pam Harding
Los Angeles Auto Show 2008: Kia Borrego FCEV concept
Vehicles with a fuel cell with hydrogen are the stars of green Motorshows worldwide. In the United States, the Los Angeles Auto Show is no exception: the manufacturer Kia will introduce its Kia Borrego FCEV (for Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle)Hydrogen Motors. The American auto event will take place from 21 to 30 November 2008 (website: www.laautoshow.com)
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
Guest (Andreas)
Hydrogen efficiency
Storing electrical energy as hydrogen is extremely inefficient (25%), since 75% are lost in electrolysis, compression or liquefaction, transport and fuel cell. By contrast electricity can be stored in batteries with around 85% efficiency:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/converted.swf
http://www.efcf.com/reports/
Reply
SVE
51 Comments
Re: Hydrogen efficiency
Yep. It seems pretty obvious that the whole Hydrogen Economy thing stands zero chance in the face of those awful efficiency facts. Heck, current ICE technology is better than that, especially with diesel & hybrids coming on. How come something so obvious escapes all these big corporate R&D efforts?
Hydrogen - the closer you look, the dumber it gets.
Reply
snedunuri
67 Comments
Re: Hydrogen efficiency
I don't think its escaped them at all. Its basically a stalling plan (pretty much the same way Bush's so called proposal was for a H2 economy). Now its difficult to accuse car makers of ignoring global warming. They can argue that there's no need to impose CO2 limits or anything of that sort because the H2 car is just around the corner.
Reply
MarkkuJantunen
3 Comments
Re: Hydrogen efficiency
I'd like to point out two things:
1) We are already living in a hydrogen economy of a kind. Crude oil refinement is a big consumer of hydrogen. Hydrocracking is used to produce diesel and jet fuel from heavier crude oil fractions.
2) Bulk hydrogen is produced usually by steam reformation of natural gas. Once natural gas production starts declining, one way to mass produce hydrogen would be thermal decomposition of water in high-temperature nuclear reactors.
With breeding, nuclear fission fuel reserves are enormous. It is curious that the author neglected to mention nuclear power.
I agree that hydrogen combustion might not be the best option to power vehicles in the future. There is a lot of scope for battery development using nanotechnology. The vast majority of motorists will never need high performance for their daily commutes.
Reply
futtemi
5 Comments
Re: Hydrogen efficiency
Excellent point!
As long as the hydrogen is made from natural gas (steam reforming), it would be way more sensible to fuel the BMW with natural gas. Just wonder what type of noise the engine would make then...
But even when the H2 would come from nuclear, I won't sit in such a car - too dangerous. Once batteries get better (and they are not far from acceptable performance), then electricity is the best solution. And I swear, BMW will start making electric BMWs. An interesting alternative, in particular for aviation fuel, is synthetic liquid hydrocarbons (cf. the discussion on the "Methanol Society") that can be manufactured from a carbon feedstock (coal, biomass and even CO2 from flue gas) and hydrogen. The hydrogen in turn can be produced by electrolysis or high temperature thermochemical processes.
And this is where nuclear comes in: there is no better power source that could possibly provide all the H2 for transport fuel or even fertilizer production. Renewables are fine but limited and unreliable, natural gas will be gone soon, and coal is extremely dirty, not only in terms of CO2 emissions.
Reply
Ecowriter
7 Comments
Re: Hydrogen efficiency
First, I wonder why you won't sit in a car with hydrogen, but presumably you don't have a problem sitting in one that contains gasoline, which is like sitting on a bomb?
Second, there are hydrogen-on-demand solutions (such as Ecotality's Hydratus, just to name one example) that don't require stored hydrogen, taking most of the explosive risk away.
Lisa Hart
Reply