View Poll Results: What would be the fuel of the future?

Voters
30. You may not vote on this poll
  • Oil

    2 6.67%
  • Coal

    0 0%
  • Biomass

    0 0%
  • Nuclear

    4 13.33%
  • Cold Fusion

    0 0%
  • Solar

    9 30.00%
  • Wind

    0 0%
  • Hydrogen

    5 16.67%
  • It's not invented yet

    4 13.33%
  • Other

    6 20.00%
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 82

Thread: The fuel of the future

  1. #51
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by celticwar17 View Post
    Thats a myth if you think its flammability actually affects the safety of the car... it doesnt... gasoline is actually more dangerous

    Takes more BTU's???? The electricity used to making hydrogen in our own homes can come from solar energy.

    And i didnt say federal funding either -_-.
    Your knowledge of physics and chemistry is about nil.....
    It takes more energy to produce H2 than you can get back out of it, source of the electricity means nothing. It is a net LOSS. You would be better off using your solar panels to charge batteries.

    Explain how gasoline, which is in liquid form, will burn.....you can run over a rock, rip a hole in your gasoline tank, and all it does most of the time is leak out. Been there, myself....
    Don't believe the stuff you see on TV, cars seldon explode in fireballs.. OTOH, ever see the footage of the Hindenburg Airship?
    H2 burns over a wide range of concentrations and temperatures, because it is already a gas.
    Gasoline needs to be vaporized first.
    Last edited by UtahBill; 05-01-11 at 04:04 PM.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  2. #52
    Professor
    Alfons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    10-31-17 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,460

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    So, you've never heard of Chernobyl and Fukushima, huh?
    Chernobyl was diversion of Gorbatschow's henchmans to launch "Perestroika", all security devices were off.
    Fukushima is a problem which will be never happens again.
    Rom 6:23:For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

  3. #53
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,908

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    Your knowledge of physics and chemistry is about nil.....
    It takes more energy to produce H2 than you can get back out of it, source of the electricity means nothing. It is a net LOSS. You would be better off using your solar panels to charge batteries.

    Explain how gasoline, which is in liquid form, will burn.....you can run over a rock, rip a hole in your gasoline tank, and all it does most of the time is leak out. Been there, myself....
    Don't believe the stuff you see on TV, cars seldon explode in fireballs.. OTOH, ever see the footage of the Hindenburg Airship?
    My major is in Physics, and like my friend i mentioned before had his degree in Hydro cell engines and he personally made engines that worked in the 80s.

    Your ignorance astounds me...http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/in..._than_gasoline
    Myth #2. Hydrogen is too dangerous, explosive, or “volatile” for common use as a fuel. The hydrogen industry has an enviable safety record spanning more than a half-century. Any fuel is hazardous and needs due care, but hydrogen’s hazards are different and generally more tractable than those of hydrocarbon fuels.34 It’s extremely buoyant — 14.4 times lighter than air (natural gas is only 1.7 times lighter than air). Hydrogen is four times more diffusive than natural gas or 12 times more than gasoline fumes, so leaking hydrogen rapidly disperses up and away from its source.35 If ignited, hydrogen burns rapidly with a nonluminous flame that can’t readily scorch you at a distance, emitting only one-tenth the radiant heat of a hydrocarbon fire and burning 7% cooler than gasoline. Although firefighters dislike hydrogen’s clear flame because they need a viewing device to see it in daylight, victims generally aren’t burned unless they’re actually in the flame, nor are they choked by smoke.

    Hydrogen mixtures in air are hard to explode, requiring a constrained volume of elongated shape. In high-school chemistry experiments, hydrogen detonates with a “pop” when lit in a test tube, but if it were in free air rather than a long cylindrical enclosure, it wouldn’t detonate at all. Explosion requires at least twice as rich a mixture of hydrogen as of natural gas, though hydrogen’s explosive potential continues to a fourfold higher upper limit. Hydrogen does ignite easily, needing 14 times less energy than natural gas, but that’s of dubious relevance because even natural gas can be ignited by a static-electricity spark.36 Unlike natural gas, however, leaking hydrogen encountering an ignition source is far likelier to burn than to explode, even inside a building, because it burns at concentrations far below its lower explosive limit. Ignition also requires a fourfold higher minimum concentration of hydrogen than of gasoline vapor. In short, in the vast majority of cases, leaking hydrogen, if lit, will burn but not explode. And in the rare cases where it might explode, its theoretical explosive power per unit volume of gas is 22 times weaker than that of gasoline vapor. It is not, as has been claimed, “essentially a liquid or gaseous form of dynamite.”

    Contrary to a popular misunderstanding, these safety attributes actually helped save 62 lives in the 1937 Hindenburg disaster. An investigation by NASA scientist Dr. Addison Bain found38 that the disaster would have been essentially unchanged even if the dirigible were lifted not by hydrogen but by nonflammable helium, and that probably nobody aboard was killed by a hydrogen fire. (There was no explosion.) The 35% who died were killed by jumping out, or by the burning diesel oil, canopy, and debris (the cloth canopy was coated with what nowadays would be called rocket fuel). The other 65% survived, riding the flaming dirigible to earth as the clear hydrogen flames swirled harmlessly above them. This would hardly be the case if an aircraft with only liquid hydrocarbons caught fire while aloft. It emphasizes that hydrogen is generally at least as safe as natural gas or LPG, and is arguably inherently safer than gasoline,39 although the character of their risks is not identical.
    Last edited by celticwar17; 05-01-11 at 04:08 PM.

  4. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Re: The fuel of the future

    UtahBill, how about this?

  5. #55
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,908

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    Your knowledge of physics and chemistry is about nil.....
    It takes more energy to produce H2 than you can get back out of it, source of the electricity means nothing. It is a net LOSS. You would be better off using your solar panels to charge batteries.

    Explain how gasoline, which is in liquid form, will burn.....you can run over a rock, rip a hole in your gasoline tank, and all it does most of the time is leak out. Been there, myself....
    Don't believe the stuff you see on TV, cars seldon explode in fireballs.. OTOH, ever see the footage of the Hindenburg Airship?
    H2 burns over a wide range of concentrations and temperatures, because it is already a gas.
    Gasoline needs to be vaporized first.
    -_- Batteries are not eco-friendly ....AT ALL.
    Electric cars cause just as much pollution because of the making of car batteries.
    The solar energy used to make hydrogen in your home is cheap and is really good at storing the solar energy, by electrolysis. Batteries arn't as efficient at holding their charge, but you can store hydrogen. And the sun's energy is basically infinite.
    Last edited by celticwar17; 05-01-11 at 04:16 PM.

  6. #56
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    What would be the primary (most used) fuel of the future?
    What's your say?
    Depends how far into the future we're talking. If we're looking maybe 30 years out, I think that solar energy will be the most common source of energy. Automobiles will primarily be electric, and therefore will feed off the solar grid as well. Fossil fuels will mostly be relegated to niche uses.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #57
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Hydrogen is useful if you want to simply store energy from a solar panel using electroylsis. It isn't particularly dangerous in metal hydride tanks. That still doesn't make it useful for cars. The cost and weight of fuel cells+hydride tanks is high enough that batteries are a better option.
    Last edited by rathi; 05-01-11 at 10:48 PM.

  8. #58
    is totally not a robot.
    Juiposa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Ontario
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 10:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,591
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Hydrogen fuel cell. Endless sources and supply, no emission (other than water) and with more research will be dirt cheap.
    "After all, you know, there are worse things in life than death. I mean, if you've ever spent an evening with an insurance salesman, you know exactly what I mean."
    -Woody Allen

  9. #59
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by Juiposa View Post
    Hydrogen fuel cell. Endless sources and supply, no emission (other than water) and with more research will be dirt cheap.
    As others have pointed out, first you have to get the hydrogen. Fuel cells don't really produce energy, they simply store it, and not that efficiently.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  10. #60
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: The fuel of the future

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    molten_dragon, you are lucky you are not made of salt.
    I don't get it.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •