....no, not that it's ...er EXPLOSIVE! Nope, I'm not really concerned about that at all.
Maybe you engineer-types can help me, a lowly programmer-type with some high and mighty energy concepts. I would greatly appreciate any assistance you could offer.
Let's see, as I understand it, hydrogen comes from one of two main sources:
1) Petroleum. It gets removed from oil as part of the refining process.
2) Water. We "split" the water molecule, to produce hydrogen and oxygen.
In either case, the hydrogen, when used in a "fuel cell" car to generate energy for electricity, only produces electrical energy by way of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms bonding. And water is the only byproduct. Sounds like utopia!
Okay.....help me understand something. If it generates energy when bonding, then....doesn't it follow that it requires energy when breaking that bond (ie; when "making" the hydrogen via #2 above)?
Are we using great quantities of electricity to "make" hydrogen? If so, are we spending more energy to "make" the hydrogen than the hydrogen offers in electrical power in our hydrogen fuel-cell cars?
My concern is this:
What's the biggest fuel source for electrical power in the United States? Isn't it....oil? And then coal? And maybe a smattering of natural gas and nuclear? But mostly, it's oil, right?
Okay, if my logic is right, would I be correct to posit that the dirty little secret of hydrogen-powered vehicles is that they would continue to require the same (or possibly a greater) amount of fossil fuel as the cars they're supposedly going to replace?
I'm sure there's an engineer out there who could explain this little problem to me, and authoritatively tell me that I'm wrong, and that in fact, nirvana does exist, and the road to it is through hydrogen technology.
Thanks!
Maybe you engineer-types can help me, a lowly programmer-type with some high and mighty energy concepts. I would greatly appreciate any assistance you could offer.
Let's see, as I understand it, hydrogen comes from one of two main sources:
1) Petroleum. It gets removed from oil as part of the refining process.
2) Water. We "split" the water molecule, to produce hydrogen and oxygen.
In either case, the hydrogen, when used in a "fuel cell" car to generate energy for electricity, only produces electrical energy by way of the hydrogen and oxygen atoms bonding. And water is the only byproduct. Sounds like utopia!
Okay.....help me understand something. If it generates energy when bonding, then....doesn't it follow that it requires energy when breaking that bond (ie; when "making" the hydrogen via #2 above)?
Are we using great quantities of electricity to "make" hydrogen? If so, are we spending more energy to "make" the hydrogen than the hydrogen offers in electrical power in our hydrogen fuel-cell cars?
My concern is this:
What's the biggest fuel source for electrical power in the United States? Isn't it....oil? And then coal? And maybe a smattering of natural gas and nuclear? But mostly, it's oil, right?
Okay, if my logic is right, would I be correct to posit that the dirty little secret of hydrogen-powered vehicles is that they would continue to require the same (or possibly a greater) amount of fossil fuel as the cars they're supposedly going to replace?
I'm sure there's an engineer out there who could explain this little problem to me, and authoritatively tell me that I'm wrong, and that in fact, nirvana does exist, and the road to it is through hydrogen technology.
Thanks!