🚀 go-pugleaf

David Nebenzahl wrote:

>> You either burn fuel to create electricity to create hydrogen or you 
>> strip the hydrogen from hydrocarbons.
> 
> 
> Oh, really? So you're saying it's impossible to, say, generate the 
> electricity using solar energy (photovoltaic or thermal), wind energy, 
> tidal or geothermal energy? I guess those sources are all just figments 
> of someone's imagination.

No, but renewable is only a small percentage of electricity generation 
for the near future, 7%. Go look it up independantly if you don't 
believe me.

You then have to use that energy which is 93% from fossil or nuclear 
power plants to split water into hydrogen at a particular efficiency, 
which by the way reduces the faster you try to generate, you then have 
to compress that hydrogen or even liquify it to get a decent energy 
density which again happens at a particular efficiency, then you have to 
transport it across the country using a hydrogen distribution network 
which doesn't yet exist to hydrogen stations for people to fill up. It's 
an inefficient use of the energy you are generating at the power 
stations be it renewable or fossil, there are more useful ways to use it.

Then, instead of putting the hydrogen into a fuel cell which might in 
the future get a 40% or 50% conversion efficiency into kinetic energy 
you put it into an internal combustion engine and get a 10% - 15% 
overall conversion efficiency (around 25% for hybrids). It simply makes 
no sense to manufacture hydrogen for an internal combustion engine when 
you can put Diesel into it directly. It doesn't really even make sense 
to use the electricity to make hydrogen when you can put it directly 
into a battery instead.

-- 
UCE probe.
Don't send mail to Amaps.news@archeus.plus.com there's nobody home.
The address captures spammer addresses and /dev/nulls all their mail.
Regards, Colin.Smith at archeus.plus.com