erm the supply isn't a problem (given that we're surrounded by water!) - its obtaining the hydrogen from it which requires lots of energy....
Breakthrough promises $1.50/ gallon synthetic gasoline, no carbon emissions
- Thread starter Greg0986
- Start date
erm the supply isn't a problem (given that we're surrounded by water!) - its obtaining the hydrogen from it which requires lots of energy....
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 9,515
- Location
- The Motor City
Hmm. I wonder when this was written...
The Wiki on Electrolysis said:
This is Series 12, I believe:
Not completely true, although tax is high, the tax on a litre of unleaded is currently just under 59p a litre. The controllers of middle-eastern oil fields have started to make noises sounding suspiciously like threats to turn the taps off if they don't start getting $110 per barrel. Bearing in mind it costs roughly $8 per unit to produce, I think a lot of it is also down to greed.
It seems that you can't build snowdomes in the desert for nowt..
Don't forget to add the VAT on it all too Tex. It's about 40p a Litre Fuel costs for petrol, around 5p to the Forecourt, rest is all Tax.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 5,365
- Location
- West Sussex
Even if it is true and viable, the Goverment will put $7 a gallon tax on it so we will be back to square one. Even at present fuel is relatively cheap it is the tax, the Government will never let us fuel for less than $7 a gallon.
That in itself will make it not viable and put back in to the storage cupboard.
That in itself will make it not viable and put back in to the storage cupboard.
A journalist claims that at some unforeseen point in the future under unspecified circumstances it might become possible to devise a viable way to transport hydrogen at reasonable cost.
I'm not going to start jumping with joy just yet.
Hydrogen is a very inefficient energy carrier. It's not an energy source and it won't become one without radical advances in means of obtaining it. The best case scenario mentioned so far is that we might in the future be able to massively over-produce electricity and use the excess to wastefully obtain and transport hydrogen to later use it to generate far less electricity than we started with.
I'm not going to start jumping with joy just yet.
Hydrogen is a very inefficient energy carrier. It's not an energy source and it won't become one without radical advances in means of obtaining it. The best case scenario mentioned so far is that we might in the future be able to massively over-produce electricity and use the excess to wastefully obtain and transport hydrogen to later use it to generate far less electricity than we started with.
We have that italian fusion reactor to take care of any electricity generation so no worries! We'll be knee deep in cheap fuel in no time
I heard we'll have fusion cracked within the next week. Two at the latest.
I'm with this guy, the most likely source for hydrogen at present is hydrocarbons.
On a serious note, fuel cells & electric motors are probably the way to go for cars. Progress is being made with the fuel cells, but they're not viable yet. Perhaps they'll be finished at the same time as fusion.
Ummmm. No.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 May 2005
- Posts
- 1,782
H2O (a lot of heat energy + iron catalyst) => H2 + 1/2 O2
We heat the water into steam @ 1500C by burning fossil fuels which produce enormous amounts of CO2.
Last edited:
it helps pay for our wars and people who cannot be bothered to work...
It can be done without fossil fuels though.
This is why we need Hover Cars, no need to worry about pot holes, declaring SORN (since it's off the road anyway, problem???!).
Lol.. there has to be a meme for that, if not, I may just have to make one
Lol.. there has to be a meme for that, if not, I may just have to make one
Go on make one.
Last edited:
No you can't, so stop making sweeping statements.
RE: the article. When i see it, i'll believe it. My guess is that it's very very expensive at the moment and it'll be 50 years before it's anywhere near $1.50 a gallon.