Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

what the fuck is your problem dude? my point is that from my limited understanding commercially available hydrogen fuel will be produced by burning coal. do you have anything intelligent to add or do you just want to talk shit?

Posted

Based on the law of conservation of energy which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed from one form to another we must assume that to power a locomotive device some sort of fuel must be converted in order to accelerate. The question then, is which process collectivly produced the smallest amount of detrimental side effects. Hydrogen may require the burning of fossil fuels or natural gas, but do the negative side effects exceed the environmental impacts of all the cars on the road? Only time will answer this question, but I will assume that mass producing fuel that in turn produces water as it's by-product will be better than mass producing gasoline from crude oil which then produces more pollution. Either way something has to be refined; Hydrogen may just be the lesser of two evils.

Posted
Mr._Natural said:

what the fuck is your problem dude? my point is that from my limited understanding commercially available hydrogen fuel will be produced by burning coal. do you have anything intelligent to add or do you just want to talk shit?

For those of you who don't already know, hydrogen is produced by electrolysis of water. The electricity needed for this can be generated by any number of means, from fossil fuels such as natural gas or coal to solar wind farms, etc.

 

It would be great if fuel cells could use natural gas directly because it is more readily available. At one time the focus was on onboard reformer system to convert natural gas or methanol into hydrogen and CO2, but it now appears that the plan is to store compressed hydrogen produced in large stationary plants. As the lightest gas, it is one of the hardest to store because of the pratical impossibility of liquifying it as they do on the Space Shuttle. Instead it will be stored as a compressed gas at high pressures. There is potential danger in that.

Posted

Bunch of propaganda. Bush stated in his speech that 40 million would go to Hydrogen fuel research. What he didn't tell you is that to produce hydrogen fuel takes just as much natural gas to produce it as to run cars on oil and gas! GM says that they are working to develop hydrogen fuel produced by solar panels, but at the same time, they are pulling their electric cars market. Sounds a little fishy to me, but if they ever pull it off, more power to them. If Bush was really behind this, he would provide more tax incentives to folks using these cars/SUVs. GM is still producing the Hummer, aren't they? I have a big truck, so what can I say about it.....

Posted
catbirdseat said:

Mr._Natural said:

what the fuck is your problem dude? my point is that from my limited understanding commercially available hydrogen fuel will be produced by burning coal. do you have anything intelligent to add or do you just want to talk shit?

For those of you who don't already know, hydrogen is produced by electrolysis of water. The electricity needed for this can be generated by any number of means, from fossil fuels such as natural gas or coal to solar wind farms, etc.

 

It would be great if fuel cells could use natural gas directly because it is more readily available. At one time the focus was on onboard reformer system to convert natural gas or methanol into hydrogen and CO2, but it now appears that the plan is to store compressed hydrogen produced in large stationary plants. As the lightest gas, it is one of the hardest to store because of the pratical impossibility of liquifying it as they do on the Space Shuttle. Instead it will be stored as a compressed gas at high pressures. There is potential danger in that.

 

you mean like the potential danger of gasoline and match? yellaf.gif

Posted
COL._Von_Spanker said:

 

Whatever hippy. You been spending too much time in fairhaven with dem folks with patchwork dresses over courderoy pants and mangy dogs with hemp collars and rope leashes...

 

and cars... rolleyes.gif

 

Mr. Naturalr said:

 

my point is that from my limited understanding ...

 

While I'm not annoyed by Mr. Natural personally, the image that comes to mind when I read his posts grates. I went to WWU, now I'm in boulder (worse!) and both share a population of early twenties, middle class pseudo-itellectuals whos rhetoric reflects their ignorance.

 

Again, nothing personal Mr. Natural

 

And yeah, what CVS and cbs said....

167133-shrunk.jpg.a11ed8404c2ffd2931676c825a76c7c7.jpg

Posted
Mr._Natural said:

what the fuck is your problem dude? my point is that from my limited understanding commercially available hydrogen fuel will be produced by burning coal. do you have anything intelligent to add or do you just want to talk shit?

suck my dick asseyes. how's that?

Posted

Redusing polution in the air, adding to the pollution of the water system... masive inflation of the economy... changing the climate, although cooling down what has become warm, adding to the levels of persipation...

Posted
max said:

COL._Von_Spanker said:

 

Whatever hippy. You been spending too much time in fairhaven with dem folks with patchwork dresses over courderoy pants and mangy dogs with hemp collars and rope leashes...

 

and cars... rolleyes.gif

 

Mr. Naturalr said:

 

my point is that from my limited understanding ...

 

While I'm not annoyed by Mr. Natural personally, the image that comes to mind when I read his posts grates. I went to WWU, now I'm in boulder (worse!) and both share a population of early twenties, middle class pseudo-itellectuals whos rhetoric reflects their ignorance.

 

Again, nothing personal Mr. Natural

 

And yeah, what CVS and cbs said....

 

yelrotflmao.gif

Posted

Shrub's backing of alternative fuels is BS. It's a small amount meant to appease the middle ground.

 

In any event, electric powered cars have the potential to be very very cool. One thing you'll notice about that GM one is how all the weight is very low. This will be great for handling. All of you current SUV and truck owners will get the joy of driving a vehicle that doesn't handle like ass on a stick.

 

Also, trask, I think electric vehicles have the potential for very quick acceleration. They should be much lighter and electric motors are very torquey. the interal combustion engine has served us great for 100 years or more, but it's life span will end soon enough. It's aincient technology.

Posted
JoshK said:

Also, trask, I think electric vehicles have the potential for very quick acceleration. The interal combustion engine has served us great for 100 years or more, but it's life span will end soon enough. It's aincient technology.

 

yeah, yeah, but I'll miss the sound of a tricked V-8 with a lopey cam

Posted

Too bad GM just shut down their electric car department and have focused their entire enegery into hydrogen fuel cells. Even people with the electric cars already produced by GM are now having to turn their "leases" back in and the program is, according to GM, over. rolleyes.gif

Posted

'tis true, nothing like the sound of a nice V8. That's why I really want to smack around the dipshit riceboys and there coffee-canned POS civics. Worthless fucks. bbbaawwwwwww!!! For fuck's sake, your car sounds like a weedwhacker on crack, asswipe! madgo_ron.gif

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...