New hydrogen storage material could be added directly to fuel tanks

Not to mention that you can seperate hydrogen and oxygen from WATER with a small amount of electricity. You isolate the hydrogen and release the oxygen to the atmosphere. Both are easy processes that can be done with solar power. Problem solved. The only real problem is how to store the hydrogen in a state that is safe for transportation, especially in the event of a collision in an automobile. This article is showing one way in which they propose to accomplish that.

Have I mentioned that pure oxygen is also highly flammable? Maybe we should outlaw both elements. Oh, and those oxygen taps that are in most hospitals? You can say goodbye to those, too.

I don't understand these remarks. When hydrogen burns you get water. Normal energy sources are used to create it so it isn't any less environmentally unfriendly than any other energy storage medium that requires power from the electrical grid and better than some. It takes power to get oil and gas and it definitely ISN'T environmentally friendly when it's burned.

I have never read so many erroneous statements
about hydrogen. It's no wonder why we still rely on oil and probably will keep using because the oil lobbyist on this blog are insuring its demise.

H2 use will be an important space technology, yes? We can mine it from gas giants and make it from H2O found on the moon, mars, and comets. Developing the production, storage, and application tech here on earth through large-scale consumer use will benefit us in the future.

I don't understand these remarks. When hydrogen burns you get water. Normal energy sources are used to create it so it isn't any less environmentally unfriendly than any other energy storage medium that requires power from the electrical grid and better than some. It takes power to get oil and gas and it definitely ISN'T environmentally friendly when it's burned.

Sanescience: Ouch, I think that actually hurt to read. I am reminded of the saying by Pauli, "Not only is it not right, it's not even wrong!"

I don't understand these remarks. When hydrogen burns you get water. Normal energy sources are used to create it so it isn't any less environmentally unfriendly than any other energy storage medium that requires power from the electrical grid and better than some. It takes power to get oil and gas and it definitely ISN'T environmentally friendly when it's burned.

Sanescience: Ouch, I think that actually hurt to read. I am reminded of the saying by Pauli, "Not only is it not right, it's not even wrong!"

I can only assume you think all the statements are wrong.. You don't even know that when hydrogen burns it turns into water?" ... "Ding, you get the daily reward for most ignorant post."

I don't understand these remarks. When hydrogen burns you get water.

Normal energy sources are used to create it so it isn't any less environmentally unfriendly than any other energy storage medium that requires power from the electrical grid and better than some.

It takes power to get oil and gas and...

Normal energy sources are used to create it so it isn't any less environmentally unfriendly than any other energy storage medium that requires power from the electrical grid and better than some.

Do you think hydrogen is gathered from the atmosphere by perpetual motion free energy machines? Do you think burning hydrogen with a water byproduct is worse for the environment than burning gasoline? Did you think that we just scoop up gasoline from pools of it? Luckily you didn't actually refute any statements or you would look REALLY dumb.

I take it from the silence that rational discussion doesn't dispel the "hydrogen, it has be good!" meme, or people are too lazy to actually think about some of the most important issues that face our nation, let alone the world. With "greenies" like these, we're doomed.

Obviously ICE using hydrogen works, they have been built. The high energies released exceed the effect of molecular count being reduced by 1/3.

You can think of the molecules like sticky billiards balls. Since energy doesn't just dissapear, getting them stuck together means that the new heavier molecule carries the energy of its components.
Sorry to dissapoint you but BMW carried out exhaustive experiments for several years with hydrogen fueled ICEs. One of the main reasons why they finally gave up was, that the efficiency of hydrogen combustion was even lower that that of gas fueled ICEs. It is far more efficient to use that hydrogen in a FC.
So, combining three molecules into two doesn't yield 1/3 less pressure, but 1/3 higher temperature, which will of course leak out eventually, but not in the time it takes to push a piston in a combustion engine.

In fact, hydrogen producing water could be used to draw a strong vacuum on the exhaust side of an engine and greatly improve the efficiency because the engine has to work less to flush out the exhaust gasses. It might even -pull- the piston on the exhaust stroke.

In fact, hydrogen producing water could be used to draw a strong vacuum on the exhaust side of an engine and greatly improve the efficiency because the engine has to work less to flush out the exhaust gasses. It might even -pull- the piston on the exhaust stroke.

In fact, hydrogen producing water could be used to draw a strong vacuum on the exhaust side of an engine and greatly improve the efficiency because the engine has to work less to flush out the exhaust gasses.

Sorry to dissapoint you but after several years of exhaustive experiments on hydrogen fuled ICEs, BMW finally gave up. The main reason was that efficiency of hydrogen combustion was even lower than that of gas. Hydrogen fueled FCs are far more efficient.

Sorry to dissapoint you but after several years of exhaustive experiments on hydrogen fuled ICEs, BMW finally gave up. The main reason was that efficiency of hydrogen combustion was even lower than that of gas. Hydrogen fueled FCs are far more efficient.

The tuning is intended to make sure that low pressure halves of the reflected waves arrive at the exhaust ports during the time of the exhaust stroke in order to improve exhaust scavenging.

i have to say, i'm surprised to see so many still supporting biofuels. seldom have the unintended consequences of tampering with the energy market surfaced so quickly as with biofuels, but maybe the decimation of global food surplus isn't compelling enough and people just won't grasp the impact until they see it on their own dinner table.

Obviously ICE using hydrogen works, they have been built. The high energies released exceed the effect of molecular count being reduced by 1/3.

No, you're still confusing things.

Temperature is the average kinetic energy of the molecules.

Therefore if we have a constant volume V with N number of molecules, and we double the mass of the molecules but halve their number and change nothing else. Half as many molecules hit the walls, but with twice the energy. Pressure stays the same because the temperature increases.

Avogadro's law doesn't apply because temperature isn't constant.

I'm not sure, but I think you are arguing a helium filled balloon with it's lower mass molecules of gas will be compressed by the larger molecules of atmospheric gas at equal temperatures such that it's density will equalize with the atmosphere, and it won't rise.

That is a tad ignorant. Just because something is biologically produced doesn't mean there is a loss of food crop associated with it.

That is a tad ignorant. Just because something is biologically produced doesn't mean there is a loss of food crop associated with it.

Maybe you're familar with the jatropha nut in India...

I'm not sure, but I think you are arguing a helium filled balloon with it's lower mass molecules ... won't rise.

I think that you are instead describing the reason for lift. The atmosphere does indeed compress the helium gas, but because there's always a pressure gradient upwards, it compresses the gas upwards.

Consider that lift only happens if the athospheric gasses have a tendency to "push under" the lighter gas. If there were no nitrogen and oxygen, helium would stay happily close to the surface because there's nothing pushing it upwards and gravity is pulling it down.

I had thought that most of the plans for hydrogen in vehicles was surrounded by the Fuel Cell concept and not burning hydrogen in an internal combustion piston driven engine. I am hopeful that you were not aware of this, and were not arguing from a disingenuous point of view.

If we take the fuel cell concept into play, how does hydrogen stack up in comparison?

Hydrogen can EASILY be produced in a variety of ways, which are environmentally friendly.

Bio-desiel[sic] while attractive now, will serve to increase food costs across the board. When XXX becomes a grow-able energy source how long will it take for all of our soy/rice/wheat land to be converted over to growing XXX?

It's been a long time since I had my first contact with the 1st law of thermodynamics. Nevertheless it's still valid. The only difference is that modern physics no longer differentiates between energy and matter; everything is energy, matter is only another form of energy (E= mc˛).

It's been a long time since I had my first contact with the 1st law of thermodynamics. Nevertheless it's still valid. The only difference is that modern physics no longer differentiates between energy and matter; everything is energy, matter is only another form of energy (E= mc˛).

Fertile land cannot just be depleted and bereaved of it's nutritious contents. That's been accomplished often enough in the past. It took generations for the soil to be replenisched.