Think about fusion and fission - opposite processes (creating bonds/breaking bonds) but both release energy. This one is somewhat circular - water to hydrogen to water - it certainly smacks of a perpetual motion machine - but not to worry, as you have read there are many losses in the system. No generation system is very efficient.
Think about nuclear reactors (or gas or coal) - we cause radioactive material to fission at a controlled pace which heats water flowing through a series of pipes which flashes to steam and expands which turns the blades of a turbine which causes a coil to rotate inside another coil which creates and collapses a magnetic field which causes electricity to flow in a wire. Think about all the energy losses in THAT chain. Yes we are a far far way from something that will be as universal as the gas car, but with any luck we'll get there before we run out of gas
And TRM Replies
I would think most informed people, and that includes those people who read this blog, understand about the inefficiencies of engines, and that includes hydrogen devices. My question concerned the relative efficiency of the three step process that the water car uses (water-> hydrogen->water) versus the two step process (hydrogen->water) of a car loaded with hydrogen. Which one is a more efficient system overall? Does the commercial process of creating the hydrogen gain efficiencies in scale? If your water car already has enough electricity to perform electrolysis, why not use that directly instead of losing the overall power through another step in the process. It seems the concept comes awfully close to that of a perpetual motion machine, and we all know that is impossible.
You can bet the oil companies will try to throttle a water car because there is no money for them there. On the other hand, they probably can more easily move into a hydrogen based economy because they currently have a distribution system in place. The same holds true for an electric powered vehicle, as I can see them trying to become a part of the electricity production cycle. But until those companies gain control of our water supplies, I don’t see them backing a water car. You don’t have to go to the local Exxon station to stick a garden hose into your gas tank.
What is certain is that we need to find reasonable alternative fuel sources quickly. Not only are petroleum products used for transportation, but they are also used for hundreds of products that our civilization depends upon.
Fuels
Further information: alternative fuel
* Ethane and other short-chain alkanes which are used as fuel
* Diesel fuel (petrodiesel)
* Fuel oils
* Gasoline
* Jet fuel
* Kerosene
* Liquid petroleum gas (LPG)
* Natural gas
Generally used in transportation, power plants and heating.
Other derivatives
Certain types of resultant hydrocarbons may be mixed with other non-hydrocarbons, to create other end products:
* Alkenes (olefins) which can be manufactured into plastics or other compounds
* Lubricants (produces light machine oils, motor oils, and greases, adding viscosity stabilizers as required).
* Wax, used in the packaging of frozen foods, among others.
* Sulfur or Sulfuric acid. These are a useful industrial materials. Sulfuric acid is usually prepared as the acid precursor oleum, a byproduct of sulfur removal from fuels.
* Bulk tar.
* Asphalt
* Petroleum coke, used in speciality carbon products or as solid fuel.
* Paraffin wax
* Aromatic petrochemicals to be used as precursors in other chemical production.
A partial list of products made from Petroleum (more than 6000 items)
One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest (over half) is used to make things like:
Solvents
Diesel
Motor Oil
Bearing Grease
Ink
Floor Wax
Ballpoint Pens
Football Cleats
Upholstery
Sweaters
Boats
Insecticides
Bicycle Tires
Sports Car Bodies
Nail Polish
Fishing lures
Dresses
Tires
Golf Bags
Perfumes
Cassettes
Dishwasher
Tool Boxes
Shoe Polish
Motorcycle Helmet
Caulking
Petroleum Jelly
Transparent Tape
CD Player
Faucet Washers
Antiseptics
Clothesline
Curtains
Food Preservatives
Basketballs
Soap
Vitamin Capsules
Antihistamines
Purses
Shoes
Dashboards
Cortisone
Deodorant
Footballs
Putty
Dyes
Panty Hose
Refrigerant
Percolators
Life Jackets
Rubbing Alcohol
Insect Repellent
Oil Filters
Umbrellas
Yarn
Fertilizers
Hair Coloring
Roofing
Toilet Seats
Fishing Rods
Lipstick
Denture Adhesive
Linoleum
Ice Cube Trays
Synthetic Rubber
Speakers
Plastic Wood
Electric Blankets
Glycerin
Tennis Rackets
Rubber Cement
Fishing Boots
Dice
Nylon Rope
Candles
Trash Bags
House Paint
Water Pipes
Hand Lotion
Roller Skates
Surf Boards
Shampoo
Wheels
Paint Rollers
Shower Curtains
Guitar Strings
Luggage
Aspirin
Safety Glasses
Antifreeze
Football Helmets
Awnings
Eyeglasses
Clothes
Toothbrushes
Ice Chests
Footballs
Combs
CD's
Paint Brushes
Detergents
Vaporizers
Balloons
Gasoline
Well, you get the idea.
It makes no sense to burn this valuable resource.
All in all, it is pretty remarkable that we are so dependent on oil. We really became dependent on oil beginning in the late 1800, and then our use exploded in the early 1900s. So we are talking about a revolution that is between 100 years and 150 years old, depending on how you are counting. This is an incredibly short period of time in the history of mankind.Take a look at this chronology of petroleum and this Wikipedia entry.
Some other thoughts on the subject. Some of the more radical proponents of alternative fuels maintain that we should not permit offshore drilling. Their catchy phrase is “this is a crisis we can’t drill our way out of.” That may be true, but perhaps we can drill our way through to an alternative fuel age. If we can make the transition to another fuel, or fuels, with a more limited amount of social disruption, I think we need to seriously consider this course of action. Then there is the case to be made for coal, our most plentiful energy resource. Can there be a clean-coal process that does not pollute? And what of its costs?
Wind? Solar? The former creates environmental pollution of other types, such s noise, and wind farms aren’t the most attractive things. But I have seen them in Oklahoma and it makes sense there. Solar is another developing technology that will be used in various ways, from huge solar farms to smaller solar panels and heaters for individual homes. Finally, what about nuclear power? Is this a reasonable alternative? Can we harness the power of nuclear materials without creating hazardous waste that lasts for tens of thousands of years.
I believe the answer lies in a mix of these possible solutions: wind, solar and hydro power where they are practical, nuclear where needed, and hydrogen where possible.
This truly is the end of the world as we know it. But it is not the end of the world.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment