The reactors are not so much the question in my mind. As you point out, there are many U.S. naval ships powered by nuclear reactors. Although the economic feasibility is a bit of a question in my own mind, at least. That something can be done by the military doesn't necessarily mean it will scale well for domestic use. Not that I am saying it won't wiork, it's just that I have no idea. My real question is the fuel cell technology. The last presentation I saw on hydrogen fuel cells indicated it wasn't yet ready for prime time, but I do not claim to be an expert on that technology, either. Hydrogen combustion would obviously be very "green," as the by product of the combustion is simply H20. Some day we will make it work. Or at least we will make something work that is even better. . . .
Men Portrayed As Morons
- Thread starter Geico266
- Start date
The reactors are not so much the question in my mind. As you point out, there are many U.S. naval ships powered by nuclear reactors. Although the economic feasibility is a bit of a question in my own mind, at least. That something can be done by the military doesn't necessarily mean it will scale well for domestic use. Not that I am saying it won't wiork, it's just that I have no idea. My real question is the fuel cell technology. The last presentation I saw on hydrogen fuel cells indicated it wasn't yet ready for prime time, but I do not claim to be an expert on that technology, either. Hydrogen combustion would obviously be very "green," as the by product of the combustion is simply H20. Some day we will make it work. Or at least we will make something work that is even better. . . .
Here's some reading for you, there's a bunch more there. The economic feasability is there, they hydrogen can be produced with current electrolysis equipment at a price equivalent to that of gasoline. The basic comparison is 1kgH2=1gal gas, and that was almost $2 a gallon ago.
View attachment 20110418_deliverable_13_preparh2.pdf
View attachment 20110630_preparh2_deliverable_2and4_final.pdf
View attachment Hydrogen Electrolysis Units.pdf
View attachment Wind to Hydrogen.pdf
And I have the impression fuel cells aren't ready for prime-time either. There's several technologies for fuel cells that use either hydrogen or a hydrogen-rich fuel (such as methanol). Some need careful control so the electrolyte isn't damaged; others need platinum and there's not enough of this material to go around. All of these issues are being studied, and fuel cells are being used now to power cell phone towers.
Those references show a desire to make hydrogen or the ability to do so. That's been there a long time.
You are correct the the energy content of 1000 g hydrogen is roughly the same as a gallon of gasoline, but you fail to note that 1000g hydrogen is 14 liters or 3.72 gallons as a cryogenic liquid at 20 K (-423 °F). It takes a much higher volume as a compressed gas. In an automobile, you have the ability to drive across town before you need to refuel. Fuel cells work better in a fixed installation with the gas piped in like natural gas, or using a liquid fuel with higher energy density (methanol is common).
You still need to get rid of the nuclear waste (more technological).
Just as we don't now use a single fuel source (we use natural gas, propane, gasoline, and diesel for road transportation now), there will probably be several energy sources (biodiesel, biodiesel derived fuels, including gasoline) that we'll use in the future.
John Baker
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2008
- Messages
- 7,471
- Location
- San Diego, California
- Display Name
Display name:
John Baker
It's OK, were here to have fun, wherever that might lead us. Just start a new thread about your new subject if you feel you have completely changed the course of the yada yada. Not a big deal at all. Another option is not do anything, see where it goes.
-John