🚀 go-pugleaf

Jack May wrote:
> "Mr. Precision" <Amaps.news@archeus.plus.com> wrote in message 
> news:m8r342-7f2.ln1@yelm.homenetwork...
> 
> 
>>You either burn fuel to create electricity to create hydrogen or you strip 
>>the hydrogen from hydrocarbons.
> 
> 
> May be mainly true now, but highly unlikely to be true in the future.

It's going to be true until fossil fuels become too expensive to pump.

> Looks like we will be able to do it with a photosynthesis related process 
> where the molecules convert water to hydrogen and oxygen directly like 
> plants directly convert CO2 to carbon and oxygen which they have been doing 
> for a couple of billion years.
> 
> That is one potentially low cost approach that may or may not work, but many 
> approaches are being developed

I'll believe it works when I see it.

> Batteries are not good enough to solve the problems and there is not a lot 
> of hope for them getting a lot better in the future if you project past 
> progress as was done in the Popular Science feature article.

 From what I can tell from your description of the article, it isn't 
worth the paper it was printed on. Battery technologies are progressing 
at an astounding rate, driven largely by the mobile market. All the 
market evidence contradicts you and the article.

> Hydrogen ICE is almost on the market now with almost the same efficiency as 
> fuel cells.  Affordable fuel cells are no where near being available in a 
> reasonable time.

Hydrogen ICEs certainly might be as efficient as the current research 
fuel cells, the production ones will be smaller, lighter and closer to 
their theoretical efficiencies. I agree that we're talking 10+ years but 
there's no future in a hydrogen ICE, it's a pointless device. Marketing 
maybe.

> I doubt consumer will agree.   Your range estimates appear to be way beyond 
> what is considered to be practical especially for an affordable price and in 
> cold winters in most of the county.  How much would the batteries cost for 
> the ranges you give.  Is it tens of millions, million, hundreds of 
> thousands, or what?

Practical range needs to be 350-400 miles, that's what petrol cars are 
generally capable of. It's unlikely BEVs will be designed with ranges of 
1200 miles. The cost? Several thousand dollars, less than ten thousand.

Link to an amateur ICE -> BEV conversion using previously mentioned 
Thunder Sky Li-Ions.
http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/main.htm


>>http://www.sionpower.com/
>>http://www.polyplus.com/
> 
> 
> If they bring their technology to market, the main question is will the be 
> cheap enough for electric cars, work in sub zero temperatures,  and have the 
> discharge characteristics required for electric motor.

They work way down below zero C, -40C in fact. Discharge characteristics 
are provided by ultracapacitors though Li-S is pretty good in this 
regard anyway.

e.g.
http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=JESOAN00015000000300A306000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes

> It looks like hydrogen ICE is going to be available many years before the 
> start up company batteries in the URLs are available. 

PolyPlus already have a product on the market for mobile phones. SION 
aren't far behind. It's only going to get better and cheaper.

-- 
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