piclist 2008\07\28\233901a >
Thread: : Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America
www.piclist.com/techref/power.htm?key=power
face
flavicon
face BY : Apptech email (remove spam text)



>> Most of the statements made below are a result of a
>> misundertsanding, genuine or contrived, on the part of
>> the
>> writer.
>> Substitute the word "battery" in most cases and the
>> obviousness of the statements will become true. Perhaps
>> reword somewhat for the technology in use.

> I don't think that it is possible to compare hydrogen to a
> battery in such a
> direct way.

You can. They are directly comparable. In both cases and
energy source is used to "charge" a medium or store energy.
In all comparable by energy storage by chemical reaction and
using molecular bond energy. NimH, LiIon, LA, H2, .. .
In the case of H2 you could use eg a fuel cell as the output
device to make the comparison more obvious. You could also
build the charger and fuel cell into one unit (or car) if it
helps. Then it would be electricity in and electricity out,
like the other batteries mentioned.


> Hydrocarbon fuels not derived from petroleum may be
> available in the
> future.

Certainly. And *producing* all such fuels will require
storing energy into them, or using energy which is already
there and which could be utilised in other ways if desired.
eg much organic trash can be converted to hydrocabons
suitable for fuel. But it can also be burnt directly to
release energy, if desired.

>> Of course. Would you expect net energy out of eg a car
>> battery (lead acid . NimH/LiIon) ?

> No I wouldn't, but I think the battery would be better in
> this respect than
> hydrogen.

There is no reason to think this must be so. It MAY be so in
some implementations, but not in all implementations.

{Quote hidden}

Yes. I do. And the point is misleading to the point of being
invalid every time that she makes it. Yes, there are some
sources of energy rich materials which can have there
Hydrogen liberated for net energy gain. But they are largely
in the same area as petroleum - finite resource. When you
get to grown bio resources you are storing energy in them.
If this is by eg using sunlight with eg algae the process
may be low effort andf low pain etc - or may not. But it's
still storing energy in the system from another energy
source.

>> > because in order to get it you must overcome water's
>> > hydrogen-oxygen
>> > bond,

>> It's usually called "charging the battery".
>> ALL secondary batteries have this propery.

> Of course, but to what extent?

100%. In all cases.
Some chemistries may have a primary energy component due to
using "partly charged" chemicals (to coin a concept) in
their use, but after the first cycle it's all energy in >=
energy out.


{Quote hidden}

ANY energy storage medium must by definition have a net
energy deficit. All secondary batteries are prime examples.
Petroleum ONLY works becvause we are not factoring in the
energy used to "charge" it originally when the oil etc was
made.


{Quote hidden}

No reason for electrolysis to be that low.
OTTOMH >90% is doable.

NOBODY is seriously suggesting using liquid Hydrogen for
mobile end use. Great idea though !!! :-).
For mass transport maybe.
BUT even that can be improved if you are keen enough by eg
coolth heat exchanging at the destination. Such an
interesting spinoff is liable Too much for this sort of
discussion ... .

> So if using a nuclear power
> plant that is 35% efficient

I don't think that % efficiency is usually applied to
fission stations. Efficient relative to what? Total
potential energy. Or ... ?

> ... to create the hydrogen then you're at a 16%
> efficiency. Yes, I think real batteries are better than
> this, but the energy
> needed to produce the battery would need to be factored
> in. The above
> percentages come from Friedemann's article, so if you
> think they're off then
> I would like sources to better figures.

If one wanted some initial updates then wikipedia is often a
good first start. Electrolysis would be a good firststarter.

> Hydrogen looks even worse when you factor in the
> efficiency of the internal
> combustion engine that moves the vehicle.

Stirling engine?
Fuel cell?
... ?


       R

<097401c8f12c$7daf61c0$e701a8c0@y2k> 7bit

See also: www.piclist.com/techref/power.htm?key=power
Reply You must be a member of the piclist mailing list (not only a www.piclist.com member) to post to the piclist. This form requires JavaScript and a browser/email client that can handle form mailto: posts.
Subject (change) : Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America

month overview.

new search...