View Full Version : Futuristic Fuels / Hybrids
the lost cause
2007-12-04, 20:58
The only types of "futuristic" fuels and hybrid technologies i know are below:
- Petrol + Electric
- Diesel + Electric
- Electric
- Hydrogen
- Hydrogen Fuel cell
Are there any more than these?
Also, Which of these new fuel types / hybrids, do you prefer and why?
Would you drive a hybrid / fuel cell powered car?
irresponsible activist
2007-12-09, 17:12
*pity post*
Prometheus
2007-12-09, 22:23
There's also methane.
Let's not forget biodesiel and ethanol.
I like hydrogen fuel cells. Super efficient and H2 can be made any number of ways. Transportable too.
Of course, a light, powerful, cheap, fast charging battery would be preferable. Good luck with that one.
nau06248
2007-12-11, 21:35
Hydrogen fuel cells are the future. The only proplem with it is storage.
It is incredible the amount of electricity you can generate with these things.
It is incredible the amount of electricity you can generate with these things.
:rolleyes: How do you make the hydrogen in the first place?
Prometheus
2007-12-14, 03:21
In industrial quantities, electrolysis. Run high voltage current through water (with a small quantity of hydrochloric or nitric acid to increase conductivity, the acid is not consumed in the reaction) and hydrogen bubbles out of the cathode, and oxygen bubbles out of the anode. I could go into the why, but not everyone is a chem freak like me.
In industrial quantities, electrolysis. Run high voltage current through water (with a small quantity of hydrochloric or nitric acid to increase conductivity, the acid is not consumed in the reaction) and hydrogen bubbles out of the cathode, and oxygen bubbles out of the anode. I could go into the why, but not everyone is a chem freak like me.
Thats not my point, where do you get the electricity from? Surely being a 'chem freak' you know the electrolysis of water takes more energy than you get from using the hydrogen (say in a fuel cell).
Hydrogen is not a fuel source, it's just a carrier of energy similiar to a battery. Hence you have to still find away of producing more than the total amount of energy you need from hydrogen.
And you say Hydrogen is easily tranportable? How? Existing NG infrastructure can't transport it, it's extremly dangerous under high pressures, it's hard to get enough to power a car for a reasonable time in a car, it's very hard to liquidise, it would be also require a total revamp of filling station infrastructure, it causes steel to become embrittled etc...
And just found this picture demonstrating how efficienct Hydrogen is. It also states that normal vehicles with IC engines are about 80% efficient
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8d/Battery_EV_vs._Hydrogen_EV.png
Prometheus
2007-12-14, 21:58
80%? You must be on crack to beleive that.
This is a pretty technical paper regarding fuels and engine types, and how they effect efficnecy. According to this, the most efficent internal combustion engines in existance (they are not auto engines) get just over 50%.
http://ecen.com/content/eee7/motoref.htm
Here's an easier to read source for the much quoted 15%.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml
Yes, hydrogen is an energy transportation system. It is a highly efficient energy transportation system. If you were to take the same gasoline that you use in your engine, and use it in a maximum efficiency generator, which then produced hydrogen for a fuel cell, you'd get much more movement for your gallon.
Then there is the benefit of being able to make hydrogen from whatever local source of electricity is most abundant, available, and/or cheapest. This could be oil, solar, coal, nuclear, etc...
And let's not forget about the energy economy of transporting the energy. It would be so much easier to run power lines to fuel stations than to keep having to truck petrochemicals all over the damn place.
Yes, flammability of the hydrogen is an issue, but gas has been known to burn too. Don't go worrying too much about it being explosive, it has to be mixed with a fair amount of oxygen first before it will explode. Otherwise it just burns. Watch the Hindenburg crash if you don't believe me.
80%? You must be on crack to beleive that..
80% in terms of total energy extracted that can be used. Eg if you get 100litres of petrol out of the ground (i know you don't but just as an example) then in the process of getting it, refining it, and transporting it you will use 20 litres of that petrol.
Don't go worrying too much about it being explosive
Definition of an explosion: The sudden release or creation of pressure and generation of high temperature as a result of a rapid change in chemical state
You have to store Hydrogen under high pressure, even with out it actually combusting if the tank ruptures then you have effectively a bomb.
The question is also up as to whether electrical grids could handle having (say in the US) 10mbd powered through them you would need the additional capacity of 700 GW of electricty, and thats alot.
curly the pig
2007-12-15, 13:19
There is also the work being done in Europe on pneumatic vehicle for inner city use, compressed air is a technology well within our reach and a lot of work is being done on efficient "motors" to run off it.
The short term future is in biologicaly sourced equivelants to fossil derived hydrocarbons (eg ethanol and biodiesel). Personally I prefer Biodiesel as a fuel source, and this coupled with either an electric or pneumatic hybrid system could result in a very efficient vehicle.
I work at a mine site, and all our power generation, heavy and light vehicles run off of biodiesel (100% not blends)
Sean
Real.PUA
2007-12-17, 10:55
There are highly porous storage systems that are being developed for hydrogen and methane storage. BASF (and german chemical company) is actually getting ready to start production soon. Storage wont really be an issue if hydrogen is chosen as our new fuel. Personally, I have liked methanol instead, mainly because it's a liquid and thus the existing infrastructure can be used. It works basically the same as hydrogen (methanol is a hydrogen carrier) and it can be combusted or used in a fuel cell.
DarkMage35
2008-01-22, 06:47
There are highly porous storage systems that are being developed for hydrogen and methane storage. BASF (and german chemical company) is actually getting ready to start production soon. Storage wont really be an issue if hydrogen is chosen as our new fuel. Personally, I have liked methanol instead, mainly because it's a liquid and thus the existing infrastructure can be used. It works basically the same as hydrogen (methanol is a hydrogen carrier) and it can be combusted or used in a fuel cell.If youre going with an alkanol, try butanol (http://www.butanol.com/).
Real.PUA
2008-01-22, 07:21
I can make butanol from methanol if need be.
irresponsible activist
2008-03-28, 12:00
Lol at clean tech being the 'hot topic'
H a r o l d
2008-04-03, 07:09
http://www.switch2hydrogen.com/
:confused:
hydrogen storage technology got better with "buckeyballs", and some dudes have a new more efficient fuel cell membrane (ceramic based, not gold. cheaper, operates better at higher temps, moisture is less of an issue). I'd say hydrogen is going to be our new "battery", the only problem is getting the actual ENERGY. If only we could get fusion under control... then we wouldnt have to worry about what we'd cool our fuel cells with haha
vazilizaitsev89
2008-05-19, 14:50
compressed air
natural gas
wolfy_9005
2008-05-19, 15:36
:rolleyes: How do you make the hydrogen in the first place?
nuclear power plant.
cheap/easy/safe(no matter what the greenies say)
then hydrogen is easy
Well not exactly easy.
The biggest problem is the time it takes to construct new power plants - what is going to fill the gap for 20+ years until large numbers of plants come online? Plus they are not exactly cheap to build
Opposition from various groups, even if governments fully supported new plant building there are alot of people which will go along way to stopping construction.
Waste disposal, this issue still hasn't really been solved.
We should not be looking to divert all our effort into moving over to one new source of energy, that is what got us into this mess, we became to dependent on a single source. What we should do is diversify and use a range of methods and sources to at least partially replace what already exists.
killuminated
2008-05-23, 11:05
Well once we perfect solar power, we'll have the mass of evil (but green) cyborgs to worry about.
nau06248
2008-05-26, 15:36
nuclear power plant.
You are forgetting that fision-able fuels are not renewable. It is a finite resource that will infact run out.
The problem with supplying electricity grids with souces such as wind, solar etc is that a constant power supply becomes much harder to obtain when it reaches about 40%(it is a long time since i have read up on this, so may be a little out). It is impossible to supply a entire countries fuel from these resources.
Hydrogen can be produced from renewable sources.
If you used these methods to create hydrogen you can build a reserve. In effect a hugely efficient 'battery'. You could have every energy user with fuel cells, and hydrogen supplied on demand, or even produced on site.
Runaway_Stapler
2008-06-02, 21:52
You are forgetting that fision-able fuels are not renewable. It is a finite resource that will infact run out.
Exactly, and faster than you'd think. We have less than 100 years worth of uranium left at current rates, so fission is down the drain soon enough. Plus spent fuel rods fuck shit up royally.
Personally I'd opt for biodiesel derived from algae coupled with a pneumatic system that captures energy from braking. Completely renewable, fairly cheap, infrastructure can stay; whats not to love?
Oh one thing- biodiesel Engines are hard to start in cold weather because the fuel gels up, but that's not a huge obstacle.
All the technology for this already exists, and simpler things are less likely to break, so our current diesel engines are fine. Distilling oil from algae is still in progress; it's not hard, but the process to derive it is expensive enough right now that it cant compete with gas. But judging by current oil price trends, that shouldn't be a problem for much longer.
nau06248
2008-06-02, 22:41
Oh one thing- biodiesel Engines are hard to start in cold weather because the fuel gels up, but that's not a huge obstacle.
All the technology for this already exists, and simpler things are less likely to break, so our current diesel engines are fine. Distilling oil from algae is still in progress; it's not hard, but the process to derive it is expensive enough right now that it cant compete with gas. But judging by current oil price trends, that shouldn't be a problem for much longer.
I have a friend that has just started making his own biodiesel from vegatable oil. £1000 for all the kit and people will give you the oil as it cost them to get rid of it(kitchens that use friers etc). He is £0.15 a litre... Truely insane.
To be honest, constant massive price increases in fuel is what we need to get the general public's ass into gear...
Ventured
2008-06-05, 15:09
Hemp oil.
I have a friend that has just started making his own biodiesel from vegatable oil. £1000 for all the kit and people will give you the oil as it cost them to get rid of it(kitchens that use friers etc). He is £0.15 a litre... Truely insane.
To be honest, constant massive price increases in fuel is what we need to get the general public's ass into gear...
Where'd he buy his kit from? I was thinking about doing this. Also, does his car smell like the food that was fried in the vegetable oil? I heard when you use vegetable oil as your biodiesel your car stars to reek of the smell...I wouldn't be able to do that as im always high and would constantly get munchies, therefore I would make up my savings in gas just by buying food lulz.
thekingfish911
2008-07-05, 21:03
I just skimmed this so I'm not sure if this was mentioned but can't we use a radio frequency to break the H bonds in water and cause it to ignite. I don't understand why this isn't a bigger deal. If we can burn saltwater cleanly why isn't it powering anything? Ive seen saltwater power a small motor. i mean global warming = solved amiright.
80% in terms of total energy extracted that can be used. Eg if you get 100litres of petrol out of the ground (i know you don't but just as an example) then in the process of getting it, refining it, and transporting it you will use 20 litres of that petrol.
Definition of an explosion: The sudden release or creation of pressure and generation of high temperature as a result of a rapid change in chemical state
You have to store Hydrogen under high pressure, even with out it actually combusting if the tank ruptures then you have effectively a bomb.
The question is also up as to whether electrical grids could handle having (say in the US) 10mbd powered through them you would need the additional capacity of 700 GW of electricty, and thats alot.
Explosive decompression in tanks does not exist. It will turn into a rocket. Also, there are kits you can buy online that allow you to turn your gasoline powered internal combustion engine into a hydrogen powered internal combustion engine. Going from internal combustion to total fuel cell will be easier if we mass produce the conversion kits and over time have the companies introduce fuel cell vehicles.
Prometheus
2008-07-06, 09:15
I just skimmed this so I'm not sure if this was mentioned but can't we use a radio frequency to break the H bonds in water and cause it to ignite. I don't understand why this isn't a bigger deal. If we can burn saltwater cleanly why isn't it powering anything? Ive seen saltwater power a small motor. i mean global warming = solved amiright.
Watch Keanu Reeves movies much?
Even assuming that you could decompose water at 100% efficncy (we can get just over 90% with our best tech currently) you still need to get that energy from somewhere.
Explosive decompression in tanks does not exist. It will turn into a rocket.
Does not exist? It is defined as a sudden marked drop in the pressure of a system that occurs in less than 0.1 seconds. I presume your opinion is based of the foundation of modern science that is Mythbusters? And as far as I am aware having a rocket suddenly go of in the car is not exactly a much safer option.
But none of this matters because you still have to get the energy to make the hydrogen.
Nitrogen51
2008-07-09, 01:45
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=585906
Watercar runs on water.
steel211
2008-07-09, 20:50
how about anti matter
wolfy_9005
2008-07-12, 10:47
Just go back to horses. You can collect their dung and use it to make methane which you can burn to produce power, and the horses can be used for transport. Use trains for heavy machinery, and just relocate the places that manufacture it to place which are close to the train and people.
Problem with solar/wind/geothermal is they are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too expensive. solar panels need silicon which is hard to extract and melt(ie. uses lots of resources), wind needs aluminium for the main supports and blades, and high carbon steel for the gearboxes inside them. geothermal needs water, steel for the piping/turbines and a place with hot rocks. Hydroelectric is viable, as all you have to do a wack a turbine in between the dam and the output and gravity will do the rest.
Just go back to horses. You can collect their dung and use it to make methane which you can burn to produce power, and the horses can be used for transport.
How do you feed them, back at the turn of the 20th C 1/4 of all grain grown was used to feed horses, could we supply that much more food?
Use trains for heavy machinery, and just relocate the places that manufacture it to place which are close to the train and people.
Just relocate the entire industrial infrastructure of the world? Not much then...
Hydroelectric is viable, as all you have to do a wack a turbine in between the dam and the output and gravity will do the rest.
Problem with hydroelectric is almost all of the best spots for dams have already been taken and these big dams are not without consequence for the ecology of the rivers as well as climate change effecting the amount of water in river systems meaning many dams may become useless for lack of water. There is a possibility to add lots of micro hydro systems though.
Mc. Black
2008-07-17, 15:27
- The president of Venezuela + an electric blender.
The result should be distilled and burned with a catalytic filter to disarm the potentially dangerous Brain Retardoxide gas produce.
Prometheus
2008-07-25, 04:12
That was uncalled for.
FullMetalJacket
2008-07-29, 16:00
Hydrazine.
http://www.magneticpowerinc.com/
^^If I had the cash i'd probly invest a lot of money in this company...
The Methematician
2008-08-08, 03:36
The only viable alternative is nuclear powered vehicle, with a tiny nuclear reactor generating heat to make steam to drive the car. Yeah ! back to the steam car era.
nau06248
2008-08-15, 18:19
Where'd he buy his kit from? I was thinking about doing this. Also, does his car smell like the food that was fried in the vegetable oil? I heard when you use vegetable oil as your biodiesel your car stars to reek of the smell...I wouldn't be able to do that as im always high and would constantly get munchies, therefore I would make up my savings in gas just by buying food lulz.
Some internet site based in england somewhere. It was about £1500, a cost that will quite easily pay for itself. And the only time you smell anything is when you start up the car. Well, I couldn't smell it, but there was a very slight smell supposedly.
Richard Branson is offering a prize of 25m USD for the best way of removing CO2 from the atmosphere, deadline is 2010 I believe... Get thinking totse!! Think of what we could do with the money...
http://www.virginearth.com/
granite erection
2008-08-17, 16:19
The only types of "futuristic" fuels and hybrid technologies i know are below:
- Petrol + Electric
- Diesel + Electric
- Electric
- Hydrogen
- Hydrogen Fuel cell
Are there any more than these?
Also, Which of these new fuel types / hybrids, do you prefer and why?
Would you drive a hybrid / fuel cell powered car?
you forgot propane
and fart powered cars(methane)
granite erection
2008-08-17, 16:20
some internet site based in england somewhere. It was about £1500, a cost that will quite easily pay for itself. And the only time you smell anything is when you start up the car. Well, i couldn't smell it, but there was a very slight smell supposedly.
Richard branson is offering a prize of 25m usd for the best way of removing co2 from the atmosphere, deadline is 2010 i believe... Get thinking totse!! Think of what we could do with the money...
http://www.virginearth.com/
zero point energy
nau06248
2008-08-17, 17:18
zero point energy
Explain yourself...
telecomnerd
2008-08-20, 04:07
I should fuel my car with road rage.
I have a feeling bicycles will be getting very popular very soon.
The Methematician
2008-08-20, 11:38
I should fuel my car with road rage.
I have a feeling bicycles will be getting very popular very soon.
Yeah,...like once upon a time...in China...