Con's and por's for hydrogen?

Question

Con's and por's for hydrogen?

Answer 1

Pros:  

-costs 25 cents per mile to use vs gas at: 75 cents a mile

-Most abondant supply in iniverse

-Only side effect is water vapor

-Fuel cell gets 60 mpg

-It is the future of alternative energy

-It is a growing business

Cons:

-The business is not really started yet... there is no real demand for it.  Who ever gets started in the hydrogen business=========$$$$$$$$$$$$

Answer 2

hydrogen = good.

its a component in a water molecule, which is essential.

i dont know what you are asking about?

Hydrogen as a fuel source?

Answer 3

Pro's- Cleaner emissions, Smoother gear shifting, greater mileage, less engine maintenance.

Cons: Expensive if you buy one, Paying people to install it can cost 8k

BUt you can do it yourself can buy guides that can teach you how to convert your own vehicle into a water powered hybrid goto http://run-your-car-on-water.blogspot.co...

Answer 4

Pro clean burning

Cons

Not energy efficient to produce, if you use solar power you lose about 34% of the energy you put in creating hydrogen.

The other methods of creating hydrogen are very dirty, using natural gas etc.

No refueling stations. Prohibited cost of build such station until there are sufficient number of car on the road that demand hydrogen.

Answer 5

Pro: it's potentially 100% clean if you get the hydrogen from water using renewable energy to power electrolysis.

Cons: The pro is the same for electric vehicles, which are more efficient.

Most hydrogen currently comes from fossil fuels.

Hydrogen fuel cells use platinum (extremely expensive).

No transportation and storage infrastructure.

See the link below for further details.

Answer 6

one presumes you mean, for use as a fuel, in place of gasoline.

keep in mind, there isn't any "free" hydrogen -- you have to make it, and it's fairly expensive to do that.

since there's none free, it not really a fuel, it's a storage medium, much like a battery.

unlike gasoline, you cannot just pour it into your tank.

you have to have a very strong tank, to maintain the pressure.

if there's a leak, and it starts burning, you cannot see the fire.

when you see a normal fire, it's orange-yellow.

that's unburned carbon.

a pure hydrogen fire is invisible.

but (A) really hot, and (B) sort of like a flame thrower, because it's source is a punctured tank, and the hydrogen is squirting out, like a blowtorch.  it's very dangerous.

today, producing hydrogen often puts carbon (CO2) into the atmosphere, which defeats the purpose of using it.

on the other hand, it does pack a lot of energy into very little weight (ignoring the weight of the tank).

it burns completely cleanly, producing only water.

compared to a battery, it's nearly as fast as gasoline to put energy into your car, whereas charging a battery is quite slow.

Edit: i disagree with cmplnts on several points.

-costs 25 cents per mile to use vs gas at: 75 cents a mile

+++  where is that substantiated?

-Most abondant supply in iniverse

+++  maybe, but we only have access to what's on the earth, and that's tied up in water.

-Only side effect is water vapor

+++  yep, we agree.

-Fuel cell gets 60 mpg

+++  kind of depends on what car -- ie, the specific implementation.  in fact, i think there's a 100 mpg gasoline car available.

-It is the future of alternative energy

+++  no.  it's not a "source" of energy.  is a storage medium, like a battery.  you can only get out, somewhat less energy than you used creating the hydrogen in the first place.

-It is a growing business

+++  that it is.

- It's the future of energy.

+++  i think we don't know that yet.  clearly it's an efficient storage medium.  just as clearly, there are major problems with it.  it's my guess that we really don't know what storage medium will come out on top, and it may not be anything we've seen yet.  it will, however, not be an energy source.  that is, unless we eventually get hydrogen fusion going, in a big way, and we're a long way from that.

Answer 7

pros actually.