I digress. IMO, hydrogen as motor fuel extracted via electrolysis of hot brine
from solar (thermal or PV), wind or geothermal electricity sources is the only
way many people will be able to continue using private vehicles.

Spliting hydrogen & oxygen from water requires a minmum of 1.7 volts input, with
a return of 1.23 volts.Thus 0.47 volts consumed. So can be acheived through low
voltage equipment if need be, or desired. Heat (of the water) is a consequence
rather than requirement of the process, but does hasten the process
considerably.
While common knowledge, it's worth remembering water boils at 100 degrees C.

Extracting petroleum and dieseline from crude oil via thermal cracking requires
heating to just below boiling point of 600 degrees C. This can be acheived with
gas burners [apparently new refineries are converting to gas burners] but oil
companies recieve electricity subsidies, so prefer large electric resistors
acting as thermal heater elements instead. During California's 'power crisis'
semi regular blackouts were the norm, and the oil industry successfully lobbied
the Californian government to priorortise electicity supplies to refineries over
all other users.

So the argument that hydrogen production requires huge volumes of energy input
is less so than for its contemporary rival (petrol/diesel). And the argument
that hydrogen production via water electrolysis is dependent on
reliable/guaranteed supplies of electricity, applies equally [but in larger
volumes] to the current generation of oil refineries.

Realisically Joe & Mary Blo won't be able to afford the $50,000+ base model
hydrogen fuel cell car.
Current fuel cells contain platinum [which has gone from aprox $1,600 p/oz a few
months ago to $2001 p/oz ATM]. Fuel cells will make perfect replacements for
petrol/diesel powered farm generators ect, but still have poor power to weight
ratio problems in transport applications [fuel cell + batteries + electric motor
= lots of weight]. I think converting existing internal combustion engined
vehicles to run on hydrogen just like LPG/CNG conversions will be much more
affordable. And negates waiting a decade plus for the vehicle industry to tool
up properly while fuel cell vehicles to become mainstream.
BMW and Mazda have both released internal combustion engined vehicles which run
on hydrogen or petrol interchangeably. BP and Shell already both sell hydrogen
(albeit yet on a small scale) for IC engined and fuel cell powered vehicles.

The way I see it hydrogen is the only clean, practicle and affordable motor fuel
option. And over time most of the [motorised] world will adopt it through
necessity.




----- Original Message ----
From: Peter Bright <hobart_elf@...>
To: ClimateChangeAction@...
Sent: Sunday, 6 July, 2008 5:51:50 PM
Subject: [ClimateChangeAction] Is solar hydrogen feasible?


I thought solar hydrogen would be the best solution, but then I read
this article again:
http://www.thenewat lantis.com/ publications/ the-hydrogen- hoax
<http://www.thenewat lantis.com/ publications/ the-hydrogen- hoax> I
invite authoritive comment. Peter Bright Tasmania

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address.
www.yahoo7.com.au/mail

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]