Hydrogen Economy Back On ?????

[Wade]

MIT Electrolysis

Seems Doc at MIT figured out a way to make hydrogen and oxygen from electricity very efficiently.

They use a indium tin oxide electrode in water mixed with cobalt and potassium phosphate. This mixture makes a very good catalyst for splitting oxygen and hydrogen. Numbers of around 90% efficient can be obtained. Pretty big jump from the 50% efficiency of today.

Anyway, maybe someone can actually build hydrogen powered cars that are somewhat efficient. Or a photovoltaic home system that stores energy as hydrogen and oxygen for use at night.

Yha I know, it's geek stuff. Won't make snowmobiles any better.

 

[ntdawg13]

I think that this is huge, the problem with wind and solar is that they are unpredictable. If wind and solar can be used in conjunction with an efficient electrolysis system to store energy as hydrogen alternative energy use could explode.

 

[Dogmeat]

MIT Electrolysis

Seems Doc at MIT figured out a way to make hydrogen and oxygen from electricity very efficiently.

They use a indium tin oxide electrode in water mixed with cobalt and potassium phosphate. This mixture makes a very good catalyst for splitting oxygen and hydrogen. Numbers of around 90% efficient can be obtained. Pretty big jump from the 50% efficiency of today.

Anyway, maybe someone can actually build hydrogen powered cars that are somewhat efficient. Or a photovoltaic home system that stores energy as hydrogen and oxygen for use at night.

Yha I know, it's geek stuff. Won't make snowmobiles any better.

Developments in the way of making the energy conversion process more effecient are always needed in order for a sustainable hydrogen economy, but, even with the catalyst providing a large bump in effeciency .... It still takes one hell of a lot of power, even at %100 effeciency, to produce hydrogen to be used in fuel cells.

But, obviously anything that can be done to make the process more effecient is a good thing.

 

[RMK7SledHead]

It still takes one hell of a lot of power, even at %100 effeciency, to produce hydrogen to be used in fuel cells.

nuclear power plants produce one hell of a lot of power at night that nobody uses....

 

[POLZIN]

nuclear power plants produce one hell of a lot of power at night that nobody uses....

There are also some amazing advances in solar technology being made! Hydrogen and solar should be where we spend energy reasearch dollars I think nuke is also a big part of the solution as well . The three in combination makes for a reliable and clean approach to solving the problems .Unlike biofuels which are a bandaid at best ...

 

[Dogmeat]

nuclear power plants produce one hell of a lot of power at night that nobody uses....

Precisley ..

The only way that any form of mass hydrogen economy is going to exist is if there is clean power to produce the hydrogen from water, and a lot of water

Two more things the greenies are up in arms about

Can't have nuclear power because it's icky, and you can't dam rivers to keep water because then the fishies and racoons go "Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwww! A DAM!!! Ick ick ick I am going away from my natural habitat ick!" and then all the rednecks start shooting them.

So, the answer is, to build a rocket, put all the greenies on it, and shoot it into the Sun

 

[POLZIN]

Precisley ..

The only way that any form of mass hydrogen economy is going to exist is if there is clean power to produce the hydrogen from water, and a lot of water

Two more things the greenies are up in arms about

Can't have nuclear power because it's icky, and you can't dam rivers to keep water because then the fishies and racoons go "Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwww! A DAM!!! Ick ick ick I am going away from my natural habitat ick!" and then all the rednecks start shooting them.

So, the answer is, to build a rocket, put all the greenies on it, and shoot it into the Sun

exellent plan!

 

[Ex-Member]

yeaaaapppp.... Hydrogen and nuclear are two things I'd really like to see a lot more being done with.

I'm no nuclear scientist, but there's two types of reactors, one with a positive reaction and the other's negative.... positive one increases the reaction with heat, negative reduces reaction with heat. When a reactor goes wrong, the positive ones explode and the negative ones shut down. USN subs use negative-reactions, chernobyl used the positive one.

If anyone knows what i'm talking about, would you please post more info... can't seem to find the right terms for it and would love to refresh my memory on that topic.

Problem with hydrogen cars is producing the hydrogen. A car will burn the hydrogen faster than a generator/separator that will fit in the vehicle can produce it. Then there's the safety issue, storing the compressed gas is rather hazardous. It can be stored in a nickel-metal slurry, that'll release stored hydrogen when it heats up. that's a lot safer for vehicles, but requires energy to release the hydrogen.

 

[Wade]

A pebble bed reactor is an example of a passively safe reactor. They don't heat up if coolant is lost, and the absorber is removed (pebble is broken).

Pebble Bed

The old reactors use an absorber rod, and high pressure water as the coolant. If either was lost, you had a major problem. Coolant for 3 mile island, rods were removed at Chernobyl.

Other new reactors use liquid metals, the metals can conduct enough heat to keep the fuel cool. Metals such as sodium or lead or mercury work. But, what happens when sodium meets water, remember chemistry class? Lead bad, mercury bad.

Reactors

As with everything no matter what they tell you, there's no such thing as a safe reactor. Every reactor has a weak spot. If nothing else, critics ask, what will happen if a bunker buster hits the containment vessel?

 

[Dogmeat]

well ****, that and aliens....

we should all just kill ourselves now

 

[Ex-Member]

A pebble bed reactor is an example of a passively safe reactor. They don't heat up if coolant is lost, and the absorber is removed (pebble is broken).



As with everything no matter what they tell you, there's no such thing as a safe reactor. Every reactor has a weak spot. If nothing else, critics ask, what will happen if a bunker buster hits the containment vessel?

Yep, that's what I was going for. And yeah, sodium as a primary coolant and water as a secondary probably isn't the best idea. A pinhole leak can become a big problem real quick.

 

[Wade]

Yep, that's what I was going for. And yeah, sodium as a primary coolant and water as a secondary probably isn't the best idea. A pinhole leak can become a big problem real quick.

Yep, sodium in the primary loop is highly radioactive, so they transfer the heat to a secondary sodium loop (not radioactive), then transfer the heat high pressure water to make steam. Supposably, hot sodium hitting concrete makes an explosion, without water present.

I'm not opposed to Nuclear at all. They can be operated safely, as long as the design is solid. I still like wind, solar, geothermal, and wave generation better, But, it's just because I think it's cool that your fuel is free.