View previous topic | View next topic

Hydrogen

Page 2 of 2
Goto page Previous  1, 2

Posital
607956.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:40 am Reply with quote

Did you see the hydrogen-cell driven car that James May played with?

It was cool - I want one. It was something like 92k.

Battery cars haven't got much better than milk floats.

 
Ian Dunn
607969.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:29 am Reply with quote

Yes I have. To be honest quite a lot of the information I've been using has come from Top Gear.

 
Peregrine Arkwright
607970.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:34 am Reply with quote

.

I suspect the argument that 'it takes as much energy to separate water (more in fact) as you get from subsequently burning the resulting hydrogen' is something of a red herring.

The energy required to explore for oil, drill for oil, transport the crude oil, refine it and then transport the product to some distant airport probably exceeds the energy extracted by the aircraft in flight.

Surely all fossil fuel cycles, especially those used in transport, are inately inefficient in that arithmetical sense?

Peregrine Arkwright

.

 
ColinM
607976.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:55 am Reply with quote

soup wrote:
Battery technology would need to advance to the stage where you could fully recharge a car drive sized battery in 3~4 minutes (currently in the 5~13 hours range) to compete with filling a hydrogen tank.

Unless you do something crazy like, I don't know, changing the battery. If they're designed with that in mind it could be done very quickly. This also helps with the problem with old batteries and battery recycling.

An obvious advantage of electricity is that we already have an enormous electricity generation and distribution industry.

Posital wrote:
Battery cars haven't got much better than milk floats.

I'm sure Tesla Motors will be distressed when they discover that their electrically powered sports car is little better than a milk float.

 
Posital
607979.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:08 am Reply with quote

ColinM wrote:
Posital wrote:
Battery cars haven't got much better than milk floats.

I'm sure Tesla Motors will be distressed when they discover that their electrically powered sports car is little better than a milk float.

Isn't that the car they (TG) said would take three days to get from lands end to john o'groats? And they managed to discharge a battery very quickly...

What would be good is if they could do a ready charged like-for-like battery swap at "petrol" stations.

 
Ian Dunn
607982.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:14 am Reply with quote

ColinM wrote:
Posital wrote:
Battery cars haven't got much better than milk floats.

I'm sure Tesla Motors will be distressed when they discover that their electrically powered sports car is little better than a milk float.


That car was also covered in the same episode of Top Gear as the one James May drove a hydrogen-fuelled car. Here is Jeremy Clarkson's review of it.

Also, here is May's review of the hydrogen fuelled car - the Honda FCX Clarity.

 
brunel
607994.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:54 am Reply with quote

Another consideration about the Tesla which they were using on the show is that it was a pre-production model, and Clarkson did point out that once there have been enough of them made, things such as reliability would improve.

The thing is, there was an article in the Times a few months back which pointed out that researchers at MIT had been developing a new coating for the electrodes of Lithium Phosphate batteries which resulted in dramatically reduced charging times. So, in the longer term, the issue of the recharging time could lessen.
http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article5891194.ece

And, as ColinM points out, if you designed the batteries unit so it can be removed and replaced quickly with a freshly charged unit, why worry about charging times if you can be on your way from a petrol station with a fresh battery pack in, say, 15 minutes or so.

And Posital, what about the possibility of burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine as an alternative to hydrocarbons? OK, you've got the major downside of the inefficiency of an ICE, but surely it would be worth considering as a short term intermediary between existing fossil fuel based cars and fuel cell cars, should they come to pass.

 
Posital
608005.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:03 am Reply with quote

I'd actually be happy with a g-Whizz.

Swapping out half a tonne of battery would be interesting to see - I think you'll find I suggested this above, not ColinM.

No doubt things will improve. I still want a Mr Fusion in my electric car - can't be bothered with flux-capacitors.

 
IronMonkey
608128.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:02 am Reply with quote

Hydrogen cars are also much more reliable because they don't have many movingparts in the engine.

 
Ian Dunn
608143.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:31 am Reply with quote

IronMonkey wrote:
Hydrogen cars are also much more reliable because they don't have many movingparts in the engine.


As they say in those Top Gear clips, there is in face just the one moving part.

 
Posital
608261.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:32 pm Reply with quote

Ian Dunn wrote:
IronMonkey wrote:
Hydrogen cars are also much more reliable because they don't have many movingparts in the engine.


As they say in those Top Gear clips, there is in face just the one moving part.
Is that a fact?

 
Davini994
608265.  Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:33 pm Reply with quote

Two I think - jaw and tongue ;)

 

Page 2 of 2
Goto page Previous  1, 2

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group