I was thinking, without crude oil, Hydrogen would be the ultimate fuel of the future... Is it possible?

Question

I was thinking, without crude oil, Hydrogen would be the ultimate fuel of the future... Is it possible?

Answer 1

Hydrogen may be the most economical alternative when gasoline goes to, maybe, $15 per gallon.

Answer 2

Hydrogen has two big problems. It has to be made, which costs energy, and it's difficult to store. Until both of those problems are solved, h2 will remain just a pipe dream.

Answer 3

Looking forward to several options to regular gas.

One of the problems with hydrogen and natural gas is that they run so "dry" that they don't provide lubrication for the working parts.

Mileage is still an issue as is the source of the hydrogen. It still must be made with electricity.

Answer 4

Yes it will be in time.

Answer 5

Jarden

Hydrogen is a great option for the concept of free energy.     I built my first hydrogen cell about 5 years ago and now currently run 2 trucks, my home hot water heater, home stove and home generator on hydrogen for free with caught rain water and the help of a $10 solar panel.  I offer a step by step DIY guide to walk anyone interested threw the process. You can find it at www agua-luna com or you can email me.

There are basically 3 safe ways to make and use it... chemically, electrically and molecularly, the first 2 being easier so I'll only discuss them here. The fallowing steps were taking directly out of a DIY guide I offer to those who would like to run their vehicles or home on hydrogen safely. The entire guide is available at www agua-luna com

    On demand h2 generators are a bit different from the Hollywood versions like seen Chain Reaction with Keanu Reeves, that tend to explode violently every time a film is being made. However when used in an on-demand system there is no storage of hydrogen and oxygen in its gas form, only liquid (water) and is only transformed into gas “on-demand” in small cylinder size amounts. It’s actually safer then gasoline as it doesn’t evaporate, creating explosive fumes in the tank like gas.

    Chemically

    1. You’ll need a 6inch x 1ft schedule 40 pvc pipe. With pvc cement glue a cap on the bottom and use a s***w on cap for the top. Drill a small hole (1/4inch or so) in the side close to the top, s******g in a small copper shut off valve. Place a few feet of stranded (food grade is good) flex hose to the valve and into the air intake of your engine (carburetor or fuel injections).

    2. Now crunch up a couple aluminum cans (beer cans, soda cans etc) and drop them into the pvc pipe, along with a couple cups of lye (Red Devil drain opener has lye in it, some Clorox and Drano’s do to).

    3. Then simply add water, s***w on the top and wait a few minutes.

    What happens in simplicity is that aluminum and lye don’t really get along so they battle, and as always the innocent civilians (water H2O) that the most casualties, by giving up its hydrogen and oxygen. This then builds up in the void of the pipe and is ready to be vented into your engine, by opening the valve. You may need to start your engine on gas then switch it off after the hydrogen starts burning.

    Electrical is a bit easier then Chemically.

    1. Simply take a small solar panel 1.5 amps is what I use ($9 at harborfreight.com), connect the 2 wires from the panel +- to 2 conductors (carbon cores of batteries work well, just be careful removing it from the jacket), but any conductive material will work ie. Copper, aluminum, steel, etc.

    2. Drop the wires into a water tank (I use 55gal drums), make sure they don’t touch each other.

    3. Drill a small hole (1/4inch or so) in the side close to the top, s******g in a small copper shut off valve. Place a few feet of stranded (food grade is good) flex hose to the valve and into the air intake of your engine (carburetor or fuel injections).

    4. Then simply add water, s***w on the top cap and wait.

    After a few hours tiny bubbles will form and rise off one conductor (that’s hydrogen) and even smaller bubbles that just looks like foam will rise off the other (oxygen). I don’t remember which likes the positive and which likes the neg hydrogen or the oxygen.

    The third method is more complicated and is what I use for my vehicles. It’s just a modified Joe’s Cell, there’s a step by step DIY guide available to walk you threw the process here www agua-luna com

It also covers the other 2 methods described in more detail.

www agua-luna com

Honda has just released their first Hydrogen car (FCX Clarity).

http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity...

"The FCX Clarity is a next-generation, zero-emissions, hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicle based on the entirely-new Honda V Flow fuel cell platform, and powered by the highly compact, efficient and powerful Honda V Flow fuel cell stack."

http://world.honda.com/news/2007/4071114...

It definitely has potential for "future car technology". In fact Honda just gave the first Individual Customer from Las Angeles a 2 year lease on the FCX.

http://world.honda.com/news/2005/4050629...

Hope this helped, feel free to contact me personally if you have any questions if you’d like assistance in making your first self sufficient steps, I’m willing to walk you step by step threw the process. I’ve written several how-to DIY guides available at  www agua-luna com on the subject. I also offer online and on-site workshops, seminars and internships to help others help the environment.

Dan Martin

Living 100% on Alternative & Author of How One Simple Yet Incredibly Powerful Resource Is Transforming The Lives of Regular People From All Over The World... Instantly Elevating Their Income & Lowering Their Debt, While Saving The Environment by Using FREE ENERGY... All With Just One Click of A Mouse...For more info Visit:  

www agua-luna com

Stop Global Warming, Receive a FREE Solar Panels Now!!!

Answer 6

it's possible, but I think it could be a lot better if cars were fueled by water.

Answer 7

Come on guys, Hydrogen is just a way of moving energy around, like a battery. You still need to create the energy, hopefully from renewable sources.

Answer 8

No,mine burns wvo.

Answer 9

I think it's a combo of hydrogen and solar.

Answer 10

I dont agree this hydrogen maddness in this eco-car matter. Th electric cars are sufficient enaugh to fulfill average persons commuting needs, and hydrogen is costly technic, dangerous in accidents etc.

take for example "Think nordic"; speed 100 kmh, distance 180 km

I say it is electric car that would be in use, as it was dominant car type in beginning of the 1900; all new york city`s taxis were electric cars.untill the mass production of gasoline cars started.

Answer 11

Hydrogen has a lot of pluses but I believe we can achieve an almost entirely solar eclectric grid by the end of this century.  then we could have entirely electric cars and trucks.

While ultimately we may see a mix of energy resources in the future, the potential of solar is huge, clean, needs absolutely no fuel ever.

Check out this article in Scientific American about how to achieve this solar electric grid.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-so...

This plan calls for spending public money partially to build a HV DC distribution network of major trunks to bring the solar powered electricity from the southwest to other parts of the country.

I say we might spend some public money. Before you react to that, you might want to look at this information about the real costs of oil and gasoline and other forms of energy including nukes.

From a 1996 article by Jenny B. Wahl

Based on the studies reviewed, our best-guess estimate of the subsidies received

by petroleum each year is $84 billion per year

US Defense Department spending allocated to safeguard the worlds’ petroleum resources total some $55 to $96.3 billion per year.

When the price of gasoline is so drastically underestimated in the minds of drivers, it

becomes difficult if not impossible to convince them to change their driving habits, accept alternative fuel vehicles, or consider progressive residential and urban development strategies

while the amount of damage that automobile fumes cause is certainly very high, the total dollar value is rather difficult to quantify. Approximately $39 billion per year is the lowest minimum estimate reckoned by researchers in

the field of transportation cost analysis, although the actual total is surely much higher and may exceed $600 billion

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a federal government entity designed to supplement

regular oil supplies in the event of disruptions due to military conflict or natural disaster, costs taxpayers an additional $5.7 billion per year.

When you consider that researchers have

conclusively linked auto pollution to increased health problems and mortality, the CTA report’s estimate of $29.3 to $542.4 billion for the annual uncompensated health costs associated with auto emissions may not adequately reflect the value of lost or diminished human life. Other costs associated with localized air pollution

attributable to gasoline-powered automobiles include decreased agricultural yields ($2.1 to $4.2 billion), reduced visibility ($6.1 to $44.5 billion), and damage to buildings and materials ($1.2 to $9.6 billion). Global warming ($3 to $27.5 billion), water pollution ($8.4 to $36.8 billion), noise pollution ($6 to $12 billion),

According to estimates by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), federal

corporate income tax credits and deductions result in an effective income tax rate of 11 percent for the oil industry as compared to a non-oil industry average of 18 percent

The average effective tax rate on integrated

oil operations has fallen from 21.5 percent in

the early 1980s to only 8.7 percent in the 1990s (both figures are significantly below the statutory rate of 35

And here's what the proponents of nuclear energy aren't telling you.

from Encyclopedia of Earth

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Ten_most_...

NUKES

Civilian nuclear power producers benefit greatly from shifting a substantial portion of their liability for radioactive releases from accidents or attacks away from owners and investors and onto the taxpayer and the surrounding population.

These costs, both through higher insurance premiums and higher cost of capital,

would properly be reflected in the price of nuclear electricity. This subsidy has never been quantified comprehensively, but affects not only reactors, but nuclear fuel cycle facilities and nuclear materials transport as well. On a global level, the

subsidy is likely to be well in excess of $10 billion per year.

In the United States, current surcharges on nuclear power too low to cover expected disposal costs. In addition, the US government foolishly absorbed all risk for an on-time opening of a repository for commercial nuclear waste -- despite longstanding technical and political challenges associated with making this happen.

Taxpayers are now paying the industry millions per year for the delays, a figure that could rise sharply in years to come. Between inadequate fees, payments for delays, and most importantly, the shifting of disposal risks away from investors,

subsidies to nuclear waste management likely run into the billions of dollar per year.

Answer 12

Hydrogen is good enough for the Sun, so it's good for me too.  Think.......hydrogen fuel cells.

Answer 13

Why do u say with out crude oil?? the earth is recycling it from the CO2 as fast as it can. The plants are the fossil that gives us our future fossil fuels.

   Hydrogen burns so hot that if nitrogen is present it will generate huge amounts of NO2 , or photo chemical smog.

Answer 14

No... Hydrogen is a terrible choice.  I wish people would forget about it and just move on!!!

Okay, let's look at the facts.

Hydrogen requires more energy to create than the fuel contains.  In other words, you have to produce stupidly large amounts of power to produce enough hydrogen to satisfy our energy demands in transportation.  At best, the production of hydrogen is 20% efficient.  Which means if we want to get one wind turbine worth of energy stored in Hydrogen, we have to build 5 turbines!!!

Secondly, hydrogen burned in a traditional internal combustion engine still has some emissions... true, it's less than gasoline, but still they are there.

If we wanted to make good use of all the green energy production, we should just stick that power into batteries.  At least they are 80-90% efficient.

If you want a viable alternative fuel... look at bio-methane.  Fact:  A honda civic GX driving in rush hour in LA, will have less pollution coming out the tail pipe than went in the intake!

Natural gas, be it from ground or bio-methane... it's a really good option.  It's everywhere, it's practical, the infrastructure is practically in place.  And, if we just let it go... it's 20 times worse of a greenhouse gas than CO2.

Now please... can we stop talking about Hydrogen!!!!

-Senior student, Engineering technology - vehicle design

     -specializing in alternative fuels research.

Answer 15

IT IS THE FUTURE ! BUT OIL COMPANYS WONT ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN YET!

Answer 16

I gotta agree with Storm Hydrogen is the future, but big oil is stopping it. Look at poor Stanley Meyer. They killed him. Eventually they will regulate it, and force everybody to buy from them.