FrankBullitt05

yea, and I'm an Art major, so imagine how I feel spewing that stuff

future9er24

lol. i dont have a major...at all...yet

twincamfxd

I am really interested in this technology. What can be done to get things in motion if anything? Are there major movements toward this, or are the majority of americans against it?

FrankBullitt05

Write your Reps and support companies that research and manufacture the technology(like FoMoCo, so buy a Mustang, the Earth will thank you)

Man, that sounded like a Public Service Annoucment(brought to you by the Ad Council)

200mphcobra

I tell you what, all you hydrogen guys, go ahead and buy the kit that makes hydrogen in your garage. After it dosen't work, go to college and take some mechanical engineering. Study the laws of thermodynamics. Learn about pumps and BTUs per lb/mass. Then mabey some research on high pressure tanks. Find out how much energy its going to take to pump that stuff up to 3000- 6000 psi. Explore the range your going to get if you don't cool it to a liquid state.

Right now the majority of hydrogen is created from natural gas. Its a fact. If it was eaiser or cheaper this horrible capitalist society (sarcasm) would find a way to make money on it by selling you some.

In 1974 they said we have 30 years of fuel left. Colleges were teaching solar energy classes. How to heat your home from solar, how to cool your house from ground water.

I'm not putting the quest for clean energy down. I believe its going to be needed in about 50 years. But the truth is closer to what V10 is saying than what Decipher is portraying.

Do some research for yourself.

FrankBullitt05

In terms of cars, the hydrogen would not be compressed, it would be stores in solution in a hydrite compound...so no need for high-pressure

and in terms of production...here's a qoute from my encyclopedia

So, there are already several ways to seperate the hydrogen, not all as efficient as others...but yet it is still viable...

Okay, maybe we should get this thread back to topic and off politics and science :geek:

twincamfxd

I'm still convinced.

ManEHawke

I see more pros than cons on hydro powered multi cylinder engine. On the fuel itself i am more than confident there will be efficient ways to mass produce it. We still got a couple of decades to fiddle around on how to get it and storage it. The engines are ready, but the fuel source isnt quite there yet. Storing it in a solid state is by far the most efficient way.

future9er24

^ this guy knows what he's talkin about

twincamfxd

I agree. I would like to see a hydro car in my garage by 2010, with a gas station within reach. I am ready for an alternative to paying $300 a month in gas while killing off future generations. I want it. We have the ingenuiety to design a means of doing this, and I dont think it is impossible. People thought the wright bros. were crazy, now we have planes flying all over the world.

This is a very renewable resource that is virtually harmless. It needs to be persued.

future9er24

:rock: :headbang:

twincamfxd

future9er24

btw everyone, is there any way for me to change my title to "hydrogen hitman"? that sounds pretty cool

Decipher

Yes. Maybe at THIS point. The problem with your's and V10's logic is that you're not thinking ahea - and if you are, it's a very pessimistic outlook. If the technology wasn't possible, then WHY does it exist today? Essentially what I get from what you two have said is that if's it's not efficient or cost-effective NOW then it's not worth it. "I want instant gratification and I WANT IT RIGHT NOW!!!" in a nutshell.

All this talk about how inefficient it is to produce hydrogen is obsolete. Fuel cells, used in reverse, take water and electricity and produce Hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen is used as fuel, the oxygen used as fuel in living beings when released into the air. YES, it takes a lot of electricity, but if you saw just how much "energy" goes into mining crude oil, what with all the huge trucks, refinement plants, etc, you'd realize that it's really no different in that aspect. The main thing is, though, is that there are clean ways of getting electricity. Sure, most now is produced through coal and oil, but there ARE alternatives. The only reason these alternatives aren't in wide use is how tight the oil companies have our countries by the *****.

Now compare the two. One takes burning oil to get oil and electiricity and chokes the world to death. The other, though less efficient AT THIS POINT due to the publics lack of understanding and thus lack of demand, is 100% clean. It gets electricity from the tides, wind, hydro dams. It gets water from the environment. Then it combines them to produce a less efficient, granted, but totally clean source of fuel. Hmm.... Which makes more sense? Saving a buck or two and killing off every living thing slowly but surely, or investing that money into something that in the end will mean that the human race will be able to live beyond a few generations from now.

This is a REAL issue people. Efficiency and cost effectiveness are great, I admit, but when it's used as an excuse to essentially kill our future, then it just doesn't add up to me. Sure, you most likely won't be alive when the problems from all this go beyond just cancer, asthma, allergies, and other diseases and conditions that get increasingly worse over the years at a rate that medical technology can't keep up. But your children, grandchildren, and their children will.

It's like treating your Mustang like absolute crap to the point where it's beyond repair, then giving it to your son and saying "Here. This is your car now. It's the only car you can ever drive." You're forcing your descendants to deal with your mess. Some parent you are.

ManEHawke

only admins and moderators.

future9er24

oh crap
oh well

ManEHawke

Yes. Maybe at THIS point. The problem with your's and V10's logic is that you're not thinking ahea - and if you are, it's a very pessimistic outlook. If the technology wasn't possible, then WHY does it exist today? Essentially what I get from what you two have said is that if's it's not efficient or cost-effective NOW then it's not worth it. "I want instant gratification and I WANT IT RIGHT NOW!!!" in a nutshell.

All this talk about how inefficient it is to produce hydrogen is obsolete. Fuel cells, used in reverse, take water and electricity and produce Hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen is used as fuel, the oxygen used as fuel in living beings when released into the air. YES, it takes a lot of electricity, but if you saw just how much "energy" goes into mining crude oil, what with all the huge trucks, refinement plants, etc, you'd realize that it's really no different in that aspect. The main thing is, though, is that there are clean ways of getting electricity. Sure, most now is produced through coal and oil, but there ARE alternatives. The only reason these alternatives aren't in wide use is how tight the oil companies have our countries by the *****.

Now compare the two. One takes burning oil to get oil and electiricity and chokes the world to death. The other, though less efficient AT THIS POINT due to the publics lack of understanding and thus lack of demand, is 100% clean. It gets electricity from the tides, wind, hydro dams. It gets water from the environment. Then it combines them to produce a less efficient, granted, but totally clean source of fuel. Hmm.... Which makes more sense? Saving a buck or two and killing off every living thing slowly but surely, or investing that money into something that in the end will mean that the human race will be able to live beyond a few generations from now.

This is a REAL issue people. Efficiency and cost effectiveness are great, I admit, but when it's used as an excuse to essentially kill our future, then it just doesn't add up to me. Sure, you most likely won't be alive when the problems from all this go beyond just cancer, asthma, allergies, and other diseases and conditions that get increasingly worse over the years at a rate that medical technology can't keep up. But your children, grandchildren, and their children will.

It's like treating your Mustang like absolute crap to the point where it's beyond repair, then giving it to your son and saying "Here. This is your car now. It's the only car you can ever drive." You're forcing your descendants to deal with your mess. Some parent you are. [/b][/quote]
yeah, do people even know how the car evolved. Things take time. There is not going to be a single guy who figures things out.It will eventually evolve and one final guy will take all the credit for piecing it all together.

TampaBear67

I just Remembered Dennis Weaver, "Mc Cloud" Is A Very Big Proponent of Hydrogen Fuel, He was interviewed on the Show I saw on TV, Look around on the internet and I'm Sure you will find more than enough evidence to change your mind if you are Against Hydrogen. I was untill I saw this documentry.

It just Makes Sense! Why keep using up resources we know we are depleting, and are on the verge of running out of, when we can use the most plentiful rescource in the Universe to accomplish the same things?

Oh and for some reason, all this talk about the Hindenburg keeps forgeting that the frame of the hindenburg was made of Magnesium, I believe, which is a very volitile and flamable metal, Not positive about this but it keeps poping in my brain that this was another reason it burned so hot and fast.

twincamfxd

Now that you mention it, I think I remember something about that. Maybe on the history channel....

WaveMan2k3

blah u people are also forgetting the latest way of creating electricity... it was discovered last spring by a professor and he helpers here at the University of Alberta here in Edmonton... it involves water... but its not water moving a turbin or anything... its push a really fine screen that has holes in it the size of H2O particles through it... it can produce more power then burning coal... the professor and his helpers that discovered this is touring thw world showing people this new process of creating electricity. the contraption they made was the size of a shoe box and created enough power on its own to power a 3000 square foot house and then some. and thats without the need for anything huge and its the closest thing to cold fusion that we've gotten and if u've takin physics 30 ud know that in fact fusion at this point or for a long time wont ever happen because fusion isnt possible yet. fission is... but this is a step in the right direction because when the water is forced through the screen (or membrain is u will) the water molecules are compressed so much that their electrons actually create a powerful negative electric charge which produces electricity and its entirely safe too because its just water it cant explode or anything.

something like that can also be used to power the lil hydro stations in peoples garages so that the hydrogen atoms can be stored in the hydrides withing the tanks so that it can be used on our vehicles. everything that i just mentions is a "CLEAN" process in creating electricity and amperage and volts. its also all technology we have NOW peoples... so as far as i see it companies can and should just use all this technology now... heck it would theoretically even clean up our ozone too... (yes i know it wont replenish the O-3 {ozone for those that never took chemistry} that has already been burned away). see what im talking about is all things that i learned in high school... i took all the sciences then and i was honours in them all so i know what im talkin about and thats just the basics too

oh and to answer the who wants to change to the "Hydrogen Hitmen" nick name... im in if we can get a mod to do it for us :headbang: