 | |
Re: Where are our hydrogen-powered cars?
Volvo automobiles Volvo automobiles. (alt.autos.volvo)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Where are our hydrogen-powered cars? -
07-27-2009
, 10:47 PM
|
Tony wrote: Centre Parting wrote: Tony wrote: Water vapour is perfectly harmless when in clouds in the atmosphere, in fact more likely to cause cooling than heating, however we don't want large amounts of it produced at ground level. And that would be because ..... ? Because it would change the environment we live in, more quickly and faster than we can adapt either our bodies or infrastructure Wow. So we'd have to evolve to cope with the water vapour ? (Mental note to self : - Must find some time to fit in a bit more evolving this weekend) What a mind! |
simple. See ya.
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <7d6sn4F2a7omnU1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net>, "Centre Parting" <nokia.account (AT) ntlworld (DOT) com> wrote: Tony wrote: Centre Parting wrote: Tony wrote: Water vapour is perfectly harmless when in clouds in the atmosphere, in fact more likely to cause cooling than heating, however we don't want large amounts of it produced at ground level. And that would be because ..... ? Because it would change the environment we live in, more quickly and faster than we can adapt either our bodies or infrastructure Wow. So we'd have to evolve to cope with the water vapour ? (Mental note to self : - Must find some time to fit in a bit more evolving this weekend) What a mind! There you go again, distorting what others say. You're a liar, pure and simple. See ya. |
need to grow up or shut up.
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
Tim McNamara wrote: In article <7d6sn4F2a7omnU1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net>, "Centre Parting" <nokia.account (AT) ntlworld (DOT) com> wrote: Tony wrote: Centre Parting wrote: Tony wrote: Water vapour is perfectly harmless when in clouds in the atmosphere, in fact more likely to cause cooling than heating, however we don't want large amounts of it produced at ground level. And that would be because ..... ? Because it would change the environment we live in, more quickly and faster than we can adapt either our bodies or infrastructure Wow. So we'd have to evolve to cope with the water vapour ? (Mental note to self : - Must find some time to fit in a bit more evolving this weekend) What a mind! There you go again, distorting what others say. You're a liar, pure and simple. See ya. Now I'm not the sort to mock the congenitally retarded, but you really do need to grow up or shut up. |
contest with a skunk ;-)
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
Centre Parting wrote: Tim McNamara wrote: In article <7d6sn4F2a7omnU1 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net>, "Centre Parting" <nokia.account (AT) ntlworld (DOT) com> wrote: Tony wrote: Centre Parting wrote: Tony wrote: Water vapour is perfectly harmless when in clouds in the atmosphere, in fact more likely to cause cooling than heating, however we don't want large amounts of it produced at ground level. And that would be because ..... ? Because it would change the environment we live in, more quickly and faster than we can adapt either our bodies or infrastructure Wow. So we'd have to evolve to cope with the water vapour ? (Mental note to self : - Must find some time to fit in a bit more evolving this weekend) What a mind! There you go again, distorting what others say. You're a liar, pure and simple. See ya. Now I'm not the sort to mock the congenitally retarded, but you really do need to grow up or shut up. Dear Centre: Remember, you never, ever can win a pissing contest with a skunk ;-) |
Never argue with a fool.
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
Where are our hydrogen-powered cars?http://www.techespot.com/2009/05/hydrogen-powered-cars.html |
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article 519d3b97-2733-45ac-8a3f-737356a83... (AT) d4g2000prc (DOT) googlegroups.com>, *jolly <freedatingsi... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote: Where are our hydrogen-powered cars? http://www.techespot.com/2009/05/hydrogen-powered-cars.html Don't want them. *Water vapor is a greenhouse gas, after all. *And imagine the local effects of 1 million cars spewing water vapor during rush hour. *Ugh in the summer, wheeeeee! at 30 below zero in winter. * Hydrogen is a non-starter as a fuel- it's expensive to make, dangerous to transport, difficult to store in a car in adequate quantities. *It's an attempt to keep thinking inside the box (e.g., maintaining some form of internal combustion engine). At the risk of perturbing some folks, the simplest future for individual urban transportation is the bicycle. *Infrastructure is already in place and less expensive to maintain (bicycles causing dramatically little wear and tear on roads compared to cars). * Locally (Minneapolis) the number of people going to work by bike has more than doubled in the past two years (from 1.7% to 3.6%, so a little more than 100,000 people), increasing particularly when gas hit $4 a gallon but interestingly not dropping much after gas prices receded. * The bike arterials in Minneapolis are seeing traffic counts 25-30% higher than for the same periods one year ago. The percentage of daily trips done by bike in various cities: Copenhagen - 55% [37% in Greater Copenhagen] Gronningen, Netherlands - 55% Assen, Netherlands - 40% Amsterdam, Netherlands - 40% Münster, Germany - 40% Utrecht, Netherlands - 33% Ferrara, Italy - 30% Malmö, Sweden - 30% Linköping, Sweden - 30% Västerås, Sweden - 30% Odense, Denmark - 25% Basel, Switzerland - 25% Osaka, Japan - 25% [est.] Bologna, Italy - 25% Parma, Italy - 25% Oulu, Finland - 20% Rotterdam, Netherlands - 20-25% Berne, Switzerland - 20% Tübingen, Gemany - 20% Aarhus, Denmark - 20% Tokyo, Japan - 20% [est.] York, UK - 18% Munich, Germany - 15% Davis, USA - 15% Cambridge, UK - 15% Berlin, Germany - 12% Turku, Finland - 11% Stockholm, Sweden - 10% |
cell to run electric motor.
Advantages are that it could therefore bridge while we switch over,
and that it maintains the paradigm of being able to stop and refuel in
a couple of minutes when you run out of fuel, which a lot of the
battery setups won't let you do.
On the other hand, of course, it requires construction of an entire
new infrastructure which would become instantly obsolete when and if
somebody ever discovers a decent battery technology.
#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
Centre Parting wrote: Tony wrote: Water vapour is perfectly harmless when in clouds in the atmosphere, in fact more likely to cause cooling than heating, however we don't want large amounts of it produced at ground level. And that would be because ..... ? Because it would change the environment we live in, more quickly and faster than we can adapt either our bodies or infrastructure (just like global warming), hence we would not want to jump in without proper study. The global warming problem has happened because we assumed the environment was an infinite sink, or at least that we cannot significantly affect it. *Which of course cannot be true in either case, all it takes is bigger industry and enough consumers. *If I was going to make a replacement suggestion for transporting energy I would think we should have learnt this lesson to not just look past our own noses for potential problems. The problems with an H2 consumption infrastructure are many, and perhaps the humidity worries could be removed with a simple condensing system, however greater problems exist in the storage and conversion. *For example power cells require Platinum and if you were to try to replace all cars with current fuels cells, there would not be enough to go around.. Generally the efficiencies do not look good, with batteries more efficient and materials in greater supply (but not infinite either). H2 is not currently viable and most trials seem to be winding down until there is some breakthrough in storage and conversion technology. -- Tony |
water, so it's essentially a closed cycle, rather than generating any
additional water.
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hydrogen doesn't have to be fuel for IC engine, can also serve in fuel cell to run electric motor. Advantages are that it could therefore bridge while we switch over, and that it maintains the paradigm of being able to stop and refuel in a couple of minutes when you run out of fuel, which a lot of the battery setups won't let you do. On the other hand, of course, it requires construction of an entire new infrastructure which would become instantly obsolete when and if somebody ever discovers a decent battery technology. |
It's not worthless, it is a decent way of storing a large amount of
energy in a small space. It is not however, the world-saving panacea
that a lot of people seem to think it is.
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.