2MuchMark

I don't think he's even checking this thread anymore.

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

Bladewire

The fact that he WANTS to change that shows how fucked in the head he is.

What kind of fuckwad wants renewable energy to fail? Vendzilla

__________________

2MuchMark

Vendzilla:

I found a good primer on electric cars and the current and near future battery technology for you.


The electric revolution is happening and happening really, really fast. Much faster than I could have ever hoped for actually. What I suggest is that if you are interested, that you take some time to learn more about how it works. It's good for drivers, good for the environment, and a good investment all around.

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

thommy

true - i would say in 5 years 25% on the street is electric and in 10 years 50%.

if there will be a big jump in hydrogen technology it may switch to hydrogen but the era of gasoline cars is definitely at it´s end.

__________________
Open for handpicked publishers and advertisers:
www.trafficfabrik.com

Jman

Been a while you gave us a good chuckle Vendzilla. Thanks ;)

__________________
Porn.ai
Deepfake.com
ai-dreamgirls.com
email: [email protected]
skype: jean.francois.laverdiere
TG: @jman1216

pimpmaster9000

its amazing that compressed air vehicles are not more popular...this is the simplest concept of all and although range is not great, they are incredibly easy to make and would be great for city transports...

__________________
Report a suspicious cracker: Click Here

King Mark

I think vendzilla is working on being the president of TURD (The Utra Right Denialists Party of MAGA)

__________________

Diomed

Das interestading

Why don't I remember my name being white?

__________________
10 years of experience in:

CHAT SALES - PAID TRAFFIC - CONVERSION - CREATIVES - CONSULTATION

VRPdommy

Ultimately, while we 'WILL' move to electric vehicles, the shape they take in power plants will change.

We will eventually move to some source of fuel cell. Either hydrogen based or methane based is more likely in the near future. Plenty of Nat Gas right now if they make a distribution system for the fuel.

You have this issue in the northern states of needing heat in them in the winter months.
Try to heat them up with electric and you will soon find your range about 1/10 of normal.
Fuel cells can generate the heat as well as the electric. Batteries do loose capacity the colder they get. They may warm some when you put a natural load on them. but a loss is expected. A mix of battery and fuel cells will be the thing in less than 8 years.
Fuel cells will become cheaper faster than batteries and reduce some of the weight overhead. Vastly improve the range & speed as well as quickness.

But all in all, the car co's will want them as they are just better for them in the long run.
The fact that you have fewer parts and much fewer moving parts will eventually become cheaper for them as this moves along. But you can never expect cheaper cars.
No matter what they do, it is a reason to raise prices.

No change can be a rapid one. But this is where everything is going.
For sports driving folks, you can't beat the instant torq available, provided they did a proper design job on the size of motors vs the weight.

2MuchMark

THat would be great. There are 5 houses on my street now with electric cars and I am seeing more and more on the road. I think we will reach your targets.

Hydrogen power is also electric, but I think the main differences is that there's no infrastructure to get Hydrogen yet, and the cost of delivery and manufacture is high. It has to be produced, stored, transported to gas stations and stored again. I think all of this is just inefficient compared to electricity where the infrastructure is already in place.

I thought about that, but there are problems with this too. The tanks have to be big and round, vs batteries which are fairly flat. Filling the tank with compressed air will generate alot of heat, and driving the car will make the tank super cold, so maybe that means some extra heating or cooling for this. Batteries do this too of course, but I think the heating/cooling, size and space, infrastructure and other requirements push compressed-air cars out of the market.

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

Diomed

What about the guy who made cars run on water?

__________________
10 years of experience in:

CHAT SALES - PAID TRAFFIC - CONVERSION - CREATIVES - CONSULTATION

Acepimp

This is why:

Tata Motors executive's murder: Cops in dark

Although the company now claims to be launching in 2020.

__________________

Acepimp

__________________

Vendzilla

You should know that I don't wear hats.

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

Vendzilla

To be honest, I want to see hydrogen powered ccars on the street, they make sense. Separating o2 from hydrogen has been going on for a long time and we have plenty of hydrogen on this planet. And the exhaust is all water. seems like much better way to go, but then I care more about the planet than what color hat someone is wearing

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

Robbie

Didn't Schwarzenegger have a Hummer that ran on hydrogen?

Yes...yes he did. GM had a Hummer running on hydrogen back 14 years ago:

https://newatlas.com/go/3378/

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Vendzilla

I remember that, also one of the Japanese car makers is going to offer a car power by hydrogen soon I believe. The thing with battery power is you have to charge it. That power has to come from somewhere and it's still a polutant. The materials for the batteries leaves a huge carbon footprint as well. Twatwaffles always get behind an idea that has a general appeal to it without looking at the dark side of it, sorta like the PPACA or Obamacare. Sure its great to have universal healthcare, but not at the expence of our economy and the fact it's failing under it's own weight.

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

2MuchMark

Just because that's what you personally want doesn't mean they are a good idea.


Sometimes yes, sometimes no.


Yes and No.

Says the guy calling everyone who doesn't agree with him names.



Yes, and you have to re-fill your hydrogen tank.

The energy required to make Hydrogen and deliver it to stations requires energy, and the source of that energy can be a pollutant too.

See above.

The energy it takes to make hydrogen few produces few miles on the road than it does when used to charge an electric car. Are you calling yourself names now?

What was that you said earlier about hats?

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

2MuchMark

Hey Vendzilla, question for you.

You do realize that Hydrogen powered cars are electric, right?

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

2MuchMark

I remember that too - it was pretty cool!

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

bronco67

But what about the precious coal miners? How will they fulfill their destiny of dying from black lung if we use hydrogen? Or is there a way for us to have this new, efficient energy technology AND dirty, polluting, death causing coal at the same time? That would be paradise.

__________________

Robbie

I remembered it because I had a 2005 Hummer H2 SUT I bought in 2005 and it was awesome. And then I saw Arnold on television with his and talking about clean energy and a "Hydrogen Highway" in California.

I always assumed the oil companies probably bought the patents for it and shut it down.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

2MuchMark

They wouldn't need to. Exxon can make Hydrogen fuel themselves. It looks like they are doing that now or at least researching the idea. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-a8035496.html

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

2MuchMark

Did you not know this?

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

Vendzilla

Reeducate the miners to run a hydrogen plant, simple enough for you?

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

Vendzilla

https://secure.energyandcapital.com/... oCUlsQAvD_BwE talks about this very subject, bigger than you might think. I have always been against battery powered cars, too limited and lithium batteries are just not the answer.

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

2MuchMark

Yes! Very good idea. They should be reducated to do another jobs, preferably green jobs like Hydrogen or electric, or other tech jobs?

Why didn't Trump think of that?

Come to think of it, Why didn't Obama think of that?

Oh wait, he did!

https://thinkprogress.org/obamas-bud...-106711d3a9a8/

How about that. You and Obama. Agreeing on stuff.


No, you have always been against Electric Cars. The title of this thread, that you started, is "So much for electric cars saving the environment"

I think you just didn't know that Hydrogen Cars were electric and now you're just trying to cover your ass.

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

VRPdommy

When folks talk about Hydrogen in motor vehicles, often there is a disconnect as we are not always talking about the same thing.
Pure hydrogen is expensive to produce. I did see some promising work discovered about 10 years ago in some medical research using gold at near a atomic level in with water that was being bombarded with high levels of radio waves to separate the 2 hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom per molecule. To get pure hydrogen this would have to be separated more. But there are other ways to produce pure hydrogen.

But that is called HHO in the real world. And much of that is what is used in direct burning as a gas in internal combustion engines.
Cheaper to produce but still expensive. As clean as it gets to burn (only water produced) but maybe not depending on how you produce the HHO.

Methane or Natural gas is pleasantly abundant right now and cheap. At least until all the liquefied exports to the EU get moving and we are short again.
You could reasonably convert all vehicles in the US to run on methane and we could export 80% of oil produced here in the us.
They do currently have a program of burning Nat Gas in diesel trucks/tractor-trailers but still require some diesel petrol for about 20%. Mainly for fleet use.

Hydrogen and methane fuel cells can be clean electric power plants that can be portable or large and stationary. Great standby power if you power is interrupted a lot. Google it.

When I was deeply involved in my solar research, I found a guy back in the 90's 80 miles from civilization (in the US west) with money to burn who was using solar to produce HHO and storing it at low pressure in more than a dozen 500 gallon propane tanks.
He cooked with it directly (about 300btu per cubic foot) He used batteries to store 'some' of the solar electric on a daily supply need (overnight) but had generators that ran on the HHO for extended demand or days of overcast sky.
He heater the water with HHO and air for a few chilly nights.

One could do the same based on his model a lot cheaper now-a-days but still requires some real estate to do. His solar array, tanks and these unique spheres he made for the de-mineralized water HHO production probably require about 3/4 of a acre.

I was very inspired to all the thought he placed into it. Very simple and practical thinking and could be made smaller in size.

I still say 'all of the above' is the only sane thing to do here.
The markets will find answers if you allow them. It's a national security issue that can't wait for the last minute need to work itself out.

Sorry to say, nobody seems interested in this stuff till what they currently use gets into their pocket.

EDIT: in the case you did not catch it, I was suggesting above that the use of Nat Gas/Methane is a good measure than can be implemented right now in a slower incremental way to reduce the need for imports and diversify our energy dependency as we develop better more cost effective methods. But do nothing till you have to, and it will cost you dearly.

King Mark

Lol, mark been on a roll lately. Slowly becoming my favorite Canadian or Russian or whatever.

__________________

Robbie

First off...you're a scientist? And millionaire playboy? WTF are you doing on a Porn business board man!

But seriously...you seem to be knowledgeable...In every report I ever heard on television about hydrogen powered cars they spoke of how it is so cheap and abundant.
What you are saying is in direct opposition to that.

I am in the entertainment biz (music and adult)...and I am an expert in both. Not so much in hydrogen. And all the other businesses that you are in. (that's why I am on GFY)

What is the deal then with all that misinformation that I and the general public were being told about hydrogen back in 2005?

Also I just checked Google again about hydrogen:
"Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the Universe"

That sounds pretty cheap to me. But again...you have more expertise, so lay it out for me.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Robbie

I found the answer, and it looks like they are getting it very close to being cheap enough to work:

"Two things have prevented major production of hydrogen-powered cars until now: the cost, and producing the hydrogen in the first place. Until recently, the platinum catalyst that splits the hydrogen into an ion and an electron has been prohibitively expensive.

Up to a few years ago, hydrogen fuel cells cost around $1000 for every kilowatt of power they generated – or around $100,000 per car. There were various avenues of research into how to bring the cost down, including work at Lawrence Berkley Laboratories on replacing the platinum catalyst with a platinum-nickel alloy that was 90 times more efficient.

By last year, US Department of Energy reported that it had got the cost down to $61 per kilowatt – far closer to the target cost of $30. One further possibility being explored by Ballard Power Systems is enhancing the platinum with carbon silk. This is expected to bring a 30% reduction in cost with no loss of performance."

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

2MuchMark

Ahem! Excuse me sir, but I prefer to identify as "Fucking Canadian Pain in the Ass!" if you don't mind. :D


No one here is. I like to think I'm well read when it comes to science, but overall no one here is a scientist, or a politician, etc. We are all people with opinions and keyboards to CAPS-POST at people about.

It is. It's everywhere, but the process of making hydrogen into something to generate electricity is still pricey, as is the infrastructure to deliver it, etc etc.

Interesting..! and Ballard Power is a name I haven't heard in a long time. Glad to see they are still at this.

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

Vendzilla

The submarine I was on that was built in the 60's used a process that used electrolysis to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water that we had previously purified for drinking and secondary water for the reactor from sea water. As the hydrogen had no use to us, it was simply pumped overboard using a defuser so no bubbles were generated and the O2 was stored in tanks. I say this because this was technology from the late 60's . Was on that sub in the late 70's and breathed in that O2.

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

Vendzilla

Toyota is all in.https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1KG0Y0

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

VRPdommy

Yes it is the most abundant in the universe. We live here on earth.
Look at your oceans. Pour some tap water.
Going to burn that in your furnaces ? Your car ?
Hydrogen does not 'BURN' without oxygen. That's why HHO makes sense.
If it were abundantly 'cheap' we wouldn't be using fossil fuel at all.
Call you local weld shop and ask how much for a compressed cylinder !
(the only form you might buy it in)
On second thought, don't since you will unlikely be able to understand or equate how much volume you are getting to compare to costs of methane or propane.
But you can look at it by btu content.

@ 300btu per hr per cubic foot, it has no where the punch of methane @ 1000btu hr or propane @ 92k btu per gallon of liquid but now you have to equate that to cf gas.
It is lighter than air at a atomic weight of just 1 so it's not like you can just suck a bunch up at ground level. But it can be separated by vacuum.
It is the cost of breaking it down to just hydrogen. As compared to drilling a whole in the ground and piping it for methane.
Charging de-ionized water by solar electric is the cheapest way to make Hydrogen. Takes a lot of real estate to make a bunch via solar.

Lots of hopeful dreams were put forward when hydrogen fuels cells were making a market. (Not the same as just burning hho in your car) But it's the cost of production AND distribution that hinders it.
Definitely the cleanest and smartest but not effective yet in today's world.

King Mark

Aye Robbie, where can I find you on Spotify? I need some new ear candy in my life.

__________________

VRPdommy

The methods are nearly the same now. Just slightly more efficient. Not much though.
Yes, when you charge the water that needs to be de-ionized or de-mineralized you get the hydrogen collecting on one electrode side and the oxygen collecting on the other side electrode.
You must have been on a nuclear trident capable of staying under for months.

They could have made use of the hydrogen, but the cost and space on the sub was to costly. Not to mention additional hazards. But I do wonder how they dispersed the hydrogen without making much noise, which you know is a bad thing.
I will guess and say they spread it to tiny outlets spread across the entire length of the hull and perhaps only released it after crossing thermal layers or right at them.

VRPdommy

I am hopeful this gets going. You know folks are going to fight it and try to create things that will run the cost of it up. But it will bring competition. Especially if the show they are making money at it.

But it will bring the cost of the fuel cell down so I might afford to use one to power my solar powered house. And make hydrogen with my existing solar array.
It's just a more efficient method to store the hydrogen without loss like batteries and no hassles from the power co trying to use grid tie inverters.
Been trying to 'cut the wire' for 25 years.
Costs me $16 monthly just to be connected to the grid. More if you want grid-tie/net-metering. Plus a bunch or other costly requirements and they want to charge me a delivery cost of what I pump back into the grid !

They are going to steal their way to no customers. But only if we have alternatives.

As I said in a earlier post in this thread, fuel cell powered electrics will be the norm in 8 years, but most here in the US will be powered by methane fuel cells. It's just cheaper all the way around, for now anyhow. There are already networks of CNG fuel stations.

BMW and GM has a program as well, but I have not herd much about them lately.
That will probably change soon enough. But it is smart to let others help build-out the fuel distribution systems and arrive at market after that has been established.
I can imagine California and NY being the first to have them in the US anyway.

Honda has this NOW
https://automobiles.honda.com/clarity-fuel-cell

Robbie

Did you happen to see this part in my last post? And what do you think of that:

"Two things have prevented major production of hydrogen-powered cars until now: the cost, and producing the hydrogen in the first place. Until recently, the platinum catalyst that splits the hydrogen into an ion and an electron has been prohibitively expensive.

Up to a few years ago, hydrogen fuel cells cost around $1000 for every kilowatt of power they generated – or around $100,000 per car. There were various avenues of research into how to bring the cost down, including work at Lawrence Berkley Laboratories on replacing the platinum catalyst with a platinum-nickel alloy that was 90 times more efficient.

By last year, US Department of Energy reported that it had got the cost down to $61 per kilowatt – far closer to the target cost of $30. One further possibility being explored by Ballard Power Systems is enhancing the platinum with carbon silk. This is expected to bring a 30% reduction in cost with no loss of performance."

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

VRPdommy

The cost of a fuel cell and the cost of producing and distributing hydrogen.
They are 2 matters that effect this being a consumer staple.

First you should know it takes 80 kilowatts to power a small car. about 90-120 for a mid-sized sedan. 140-190 for a pick-up/suv. (somewhat close as the weight keeps changing as they make newer models)
So take that cost per kilowatt and multiply based on the data you have shown. I have not seen that myself but something similar but not the same and that was a few years ago.

The DOE does not make cells nor do R&D on them. Companies do.
So, I'm not sure who 'they' are.
But you are probably looking at the cost to make (without profit or operational costs).
Just the cost to make the cell.
The major advancements came in around 2005 in technique but were not realize in cost of actual production until recently. You can figure out a better way to do something but it is a new thing to figure out how to mass produce it accurately and cost effectively.

But it's the cost of making the hydrogen and moreover the cost of distribution.
It's not like it has a liquid state that we can handle like LP or even Oxygen. It liquefies at -423F

It has to be handled like compressed natural gas.
A CNG station can compress their own at the station with a gas pipe supply, a non ferrous multi stage high pressure compressor and a storage tank. But could compress and fill at the same time but that takes much longer to fill.

It's the cars storage gets to be the same issue for both CNG & Hydrogen.
Those high pressure tanks for onboard storage cost about $1200 for a 3-4 gallon tank and are very heavy. Your not going very far on one tank. You need two for a medium range.
That is where many advancements has come about the last dozen years. New light weight high pressure tanks made of aluminum & carbon fiber composite materials. But have given some safety issues compared with large heavy steel cylinders. They have been experimenting with special carbon/graphite nanotubes inside of the tanks to arrange the methane molecules in the composite tanks better to actually get 20-35% more in them. Not sure if that can be done with Hydrogen but I personally doubt it since hydrogen is the most basic molecule/atom and isn't going to be rearranged.

Now think of the fueling station needs and how much compressed gas a truck might be able to carry to re-fill the station. A busy one would need a constant flow of trucks.
CNG is stored at either 3000psi or 3600psi. Not sure what they are using for Hydrogen but suspect it to be similar just because of the tanks limits. Nat Gas can be liquefied and is being liquefied for export. It's kinda pricey to do that but apparently profitable to export to certain areas who have little to no choice. Not sure how they will address this problem but they will.

We are close but we are just not there yet. The more progress we make in some areas puts pressure on other aspects of the whole equation.
It will be there in 10 years and we have and will continue to have more products, but it's just not cost effective 'yet'. I'm not giving up. I'm hopeful as I have been since the 90's.
But it is what it is.

Competition will ultimately bring the cost down as we find new/better methods of doing the same. That is unless merger and acquisition have their say.
Look how cheap it may seem if oil moves over $120 bl ! It will help keep that in 'check'.

But know this threatens the electric power industry and I'm sure they will throw something into this to monkey it up, just as they have with solar and the oil co's have over the years. So they have 2 industry's poised to make it fail.

So... that's what 'I Think', like it or not. I'm not a nay sayer, just a realist. I've been watch'n this for a long time. Even played with some small experimental fuel cells.

EDIT: I should add that once there are FCV on the road, anyone can produce hydrogen for sale.
That will bring the cost down. Gotta start with the need before we can produce the supply.

Robbie

Is that what the original article I posted about GM's 2005 hydrogen Hummer was talking about when it spoke of a California "Hydrogen Highway"?

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

VRPdommy

Not sure I read exactly what you are speaking to, but I believe the Cal Highway network was government involvement partnered with the industry to provide incentives to creating the infrastructure needed to having a regional viability. The industry provided the spec and the government moved to provide the incentive. Some with rule/regulation relaxing and some with tax breaks.
Meaning you can't have cars or people willing to make them and sell them if conditions can't be made favorable for folks to sell hydrogen in a variety of areas.
I don't know how it turned out or if the original is still in existence under the same names.
But I'm sure everyone at least learned something on how to proceed.

California has been trying many things to 'make it happen' for them and alt forms of energy.
Some fail and some are doing great. Their attitude changed in the 70's when all the smog was such a issue. Then came Enron to burn their ass. LOL
They have unique set of issues and some that are the same as everywhere else. Most new alt energy methods are tested there first, commercially anyway. There is a incentive to do so. They often pave the way for the rest of us anymore with most of the advancements.
Wish some other would do the same.

BTW... Arnold's Hummer was a HHO conversion using the regular engine. Not electric and fuel cell.
Perhaps you knew that but I said it so others did not get confused.

Robbie

I was talking about this part of that article:

"October 29, 2004 General Motors has adapted a HUMMER H2 SUT to run on hydrogen, and will share it with the office of the Governor of California (aka Arnold Schwarzenegger). The HUMMER H2H will assist efforts to learn more about hydrogen storage and refueling infrastructure development. "The H2H is a bold experiment that along with the Hydrogen Highway Network will help California demonstrate the economic and technical viability of hydrogen," said California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. "Californians invent the future and the H2H shows that a vehicle of today can run on the fuel of tomorrow."

So I'm guessing the "Hydrogen Highway Network" was going to be fueling stations?

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Vendzilla

Fuel cell distribution centers.

__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that

2MuchMark

The process of electrolysis requires energy. The trick is how much energy is required to make a tank of hydrogen for a car, what is the source of that energy, and what is its carbon footprint including production and delivery.

Personally I don't see Hydrogen being very popular but I could be wrong. If it becomes popular though, then fantastic! It will be yet another green alternative to oil and gas, and that's what's really important.

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

VRPdommy

It was to create the infrastructure of them. A learning experience.
They had/wanted to figure out if they could really service locations and what issues they were up against.

But the H2 on hydrogen (H2H) is not a fuel cell vehicle and was never made for the public.
It was a conversion internal combustion engine. It had a compressor to increase the compression ratio (supercharger). That got you up to 180 HP on hydrogen.
$20,000 just for the conversion.
Not near it's natural over 300 HP on gasoline (it's a 6,000lb vehicle) and the fuel range was under 65 miles with the installed tanks. But that is all they needed for their experiment.

The experiment is distribution of fuel over a region that would be the same if they were fuel cell vehicles. Probably had some other testers that got no media using them.
Just because they successfully did it does not mean they could make it a profitable operation. It was a learning experiment. Those were not 'self service stations' and even Arnold, the governor could not 'fill' his own vehicle. But could be made safer self serve. May have been since then.

Somehow, it did not make much news but he also had a couple of diesel powered hummers. One ran on Veggy oil and one on bio diesel (not a lot of difference but different they are).
Those were much more cost effective in any way you measure it. More cost efficient to convert and run on a daily bases. More cost efficient to distribute the fuel for. And folks have been doing that all over the US without helpful intervention. Same with CNG.

In fact, take a look at the US DOE map of nationwide CNG stations. I have not looked at this in a few years and it continues to grow.
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/natura...arest?fuel=CNG

Here is the same for hydrogen
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrog...earest?fuel=HY

BioDiesel
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/hydrog...earest?fuel=BD

The cost of H in southern Cal is on average $14 per kilogram. About the equivalent of $5.50 a gal of gasoline. Not sure what it would be without tax incentives.
But know that without road tax and sales tax in Ca, gas would be about $1 gal cheaper.
And nobody is getting a tax break on profits from gasoline sales.

The average cost of CNG in gasoline equivalent is $2.05 per eq gal

Hydrogen 'can be' transported by cryogenic liquid tanker, getting it down to -423F.
I hope nobody thinks that does not take a bit of energy to do and costs a bit.
You can not store that very long at those temperatures unless you keep it refrigerated.

The answer to this for hydrogen is more localized producers. Preferably using solar and wind to generate the electric needed to separate the H from H2O.
Currently (I think it still holds true) that you 'can' make it cheaper than you can distribute it in that method.
There is a infrastructure for distribution that exists for industrial purposes.
I think they might be onboard if the infrastructure of stations were there.
In fact, after a new look... (last years news)
https://corporatenews.pressroom.toyo...california.htm

If we are not careful, we will be in one of those chicken and the egg quagmires. Toyota, Honda & BMW have invested in regional distribution here in the states. Even at least plans for NY.
But how long do you think they will sustain losses if it can't grow profitably on it's own. Tesla surprisingly did very well with their charging stations. I may open a station or two myself distributing all alt fuels. The timing seems right unless there is hanky panky in regulation created by those who would be foes of alt energy.

So yes, we need government incentive to help make it happen with tax incentives.
Perhaps even loan guarantees. I prefer this move on it's own merit cause when a 3rd party is involved in 'keeping it gong', the costs seem to go up as folks leach the system just like health care.
Doubt we will see help under the current admin. But we can hope. Hopefully he won't do anything to disrupt the progress made.

But if we were to get 15% converted to Hydrogen, 15% to Methane and 15% on biodiesel and perhaps 20% methanol in gas from sugar cane (not corn) we might be the largest net exporter of oil in the world.
Currently, we still import oil to fill our consumption needs. That has been shrinking since the fracking industry came to play. If you look at it the way they sell you, it is 'North America' that will be energy independent by 2021 (a play with words). That includes CAD and MX, major exporters to the US. We still import big time and will for the foreseeable future unless something is done on the demand side. All the above is the answer.

It's all about who you want to serve. To much power in any one spot is good for nobody.
Energy providers of the past have certainly shown that to us.
Do not allow big mergers !

When I last bought a array of solar panels, I bought the best at the time and paid what I thought was a bargain then of $7.50 per watt. Going rate then was over $9. Shortly after, BP bought the company out and quit making my panel.
Mine have survived 1.5-2.5 inch hailstones twice without indecent. But they are at he end of their 20 year design life, but still produce better than 95% of rated output.
Everyone asked me if I was saving anything and how much.
At the time, I did not care about the savings, just to have clean reliable power all the time was the issue. But I got a complete payback in 6 years for all the equipment.
How do you put a price on the value of having power when nobody else around does ?

Now... you can buy new panels, perhaps not made as well physically, at about $2 a watt.
The rest of the equipment is less than half the cost and much better and more versatile.
I have been looking at slightly used large array's at $1 a watt. And have the real estate to place them. I don't really need them but a novel project in perhaps making my own HHO, but will likely power a geothermal heating/cooling system and some other stuff.

Anyway, there is a lot to know about this stuff and you can't really understand it with just a few days of googles. I don't track it as close as I once did. A lot has change in just 2 years.

Robbie

I don't think it will come down to being "another". I think only one will be the winner.

NYC had an entire FLEET of Electric Taxis in the 1800's:
"The first taxicab company in New York City was the Samuel's Electric Carriage and Wagon Company (E.C.W.C.), which began running 12 electric hansom cabs in July 1897"

Then Rockefellar paid scientists to find uses for the "waste" that they were dumping by the millions of gallons from production of kerosene...and one of those uses was the combustion engine and the "waste" was gasoline.

So this new cheap and powerful energy source became THE thing for cars.

Yes, right now we have some electric vehicles and plenty of gas vehicles being produced.

But in the end...it will come down to one of them being predominant.
Both industry's know that.
One will become the Sony Betamax. The other will be the VHS tape. (just an analogy)

I think the Hydrogen industry is trying to get in on this too before it gets set in stone.

So oil will be fighting off electric and hydrogen.

And in a decade or two...we will either have: Gas stations everywhere like we do now, Hydrogen Fuel Centers, or super fast charging stations.

And car manufacturers will take it down to producing ONE of these to cut costs and re-tooling.

That's the stakes. And they are very high. The winner will be THE industry.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Robbie

I have still never seen a Tesla charging station with my own eyes.
I know that for the last few years the casinos here in Vegas all have certain parking spots where you can plug your car in.

But I haven't seen any stand alone charging stations yet.

I did see that we have a Tesla dealership here in Vegas now over on Sahara Ave. Pretty cool. But I just can't get into the "Sedan" styling. The car lot just looks like a bunch of generic cars.
Wish they'd bring back the Roadster style.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

2MuchMark

Hi Robbie,

It looks like there is 1 right near the McCaran Airport and one near henderson according to this map.

I'm surprised there are not more. There are 4 not far from me. You can also charge at Tesla dealerships.

Then again maybe they aren't necessary. The car charges to 80% in 20 minutes and you get something like 400 miles of range, so maybe they are spread out based on this fact. On the same map they are called "Destination Charging" but I'm not sure what the difference is.

Try one. They are cooler than they look.

m

__________________

VideoChat Solutions | Custom Software | IT Support
https://www.2much.net | https://www.lcntech.com

astronaut x

I have to make a pitstop.... car needs a coal refuel.

__________________
Hello