Honda plans hydrogen fuel cell car in 3 to 4 years
jenneylist
http://www.automotive-scoop.co.cc/2009/10/honda-plans-hydrogen-fuel-cell-car-in-3.html
Don Stauffer
> Honda plans hydrogen fuel cell car in 3 to 4 years
> http://www.automotive-scoop.co.cc/2009/10/honda-plans-hydrogen-fuel-cell-car-in-3.html
I'll repeat my previous objection that Honda spend more effort finding a
green way to produce hydrogen then on cars that can run on hydrogen.
People have been making cars that would run on hydrogen for many decades.
jim
There are already known green methods of producing hydrogen in a
beneficial way. One method is for farmers to process field stover. The
carbon can be separated from the hydrogen in farm plant residue. That
has 2 positive impacts. The hydrogen is an excellent fuel and the carbon
in the form of bio-char is an excellent soil amendment. The effect would
be to reverse several millenia of damage caused by farming and other
human land use practices that have removed more carbon from the soil
than all the carbon that has been added to the environment from fossil
fuels.
The effect of depleted soil carbon may in the long term be worse for
man's future than loading the atmosphere with excess carbon. The main
difference between arable soil and desert soil is the amount of carbon
it contains. Soil depletion of carbon reduces the capability of plant
growth. Plants remove carbon from the atmosphere. In other words
hydrogen as a fuel could be a part of a process of reversing what has
really has been a trend over the last 3000-5000 years of turning the
entire land mass of the globe slowly into a desert by removing carbon
from the soil.
-jim
AZ Nomad
>There are already known green methods of producing hydrogen in a
>beneficial way. One method is for farmers to process field stover. The
>carbon can be separated from the hydrogen in farm plant residue. That
>has 2 positive impacts. The hydrogen is an excellent fuel and the carbon
>in the form of bio-char is an excellent soil amendment. The effect would
The only problem with any of those methods is that hydrogen extracted
has less than 5% of the energy put into the process.
Just pressurizing the hydrogen into useful form only yields 50% of the
energy put into the process.
jim
AZ Nomad wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:57:11 -0600, jim <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m> wrote:
>
> >There are already known green methods of producing hydrogen in a
> >beneficial way. One method is for farmers to process field stover. The
> >carbon can be separated from the hydrogen in farm plant residue. That
> >has 2 positive impacts. The hydrogen is an excellent fuel and the carbon
> >in the form of bio-char is an excellent soil amendment. The effect would
>
> The only problem with any of those methods is that hydrogen extracted
> has less than 5% of the energy put into the process.
Where did that fairy tale come from? There is zero energy "put into the
process". Unless maybe you are talking about the energy from the sun.
>
> Just pressurizing the hydrogen into useful form only yields 50% of the
> energy put into the process.
Typically on a farm the hydrogen is used directly to produce electricity and
what isn't used locally would go into the grid. But I'm curious how you arrived
at a 50% loss by " pressurizing the hydrogen".
-jim
hls
"jenneylist" <jenne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1ffe1b1d-1218-4237...@l35g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
> Honda plans hydrogen fuel cell car in 3 to 4 years
> http://www.automotive-scoop.co.cc/2009/10/honda-plans-hydrogen-fuel-cell-car-in-3.html
I plan to win the Lotto and Power Ball within that same timeframe. Anybody
want to buy
some stock?
Don Stauffer
>
> There are already known green methods of producing hydrogen in a
> beneficial way. One method is for farmers to process field stover. The
> carbon can be separated from the hydrogen in farm plant residue. That
> has 2 positive impacts. The hydrogen is an excellent fuel and the carbon
> in the form of bio-char is an excellent soil amendment. The effect would
> be to reverse several millenia of damage caused by farming and other
> human land use practices that have removed more carbon from the soil
> than all the carbon that has been added to the environment from fossil
> fuels.
> The effect of depleted soil carbon may in the long term be worse for
> man's future than loading the atmosphere with excess carbon. The main
> difference between arable soil and desert soil is the amount of carbon
> it contains. Soil depletion of carbon reduces the capability of plant
> growth. Plants remove carbon from the atmosphere. In other words
> hydrogen as a fuel could be a part of a process of reversing what has
> really has been a trend over the last 3000-5000 years of turning the
> entire land mass of the globe slowly into a desert by removing carbon
> from the soil.
>
> -jim
What is the reaction that seperates the hydrogen from the carbon and
other materials, and in what form (graphite?) is the released carbon?
jim
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar
The reaction is called pyrolysis. The carbon produced from plant
residue is a spongy charcoal that is nowadays given the name "biochar".
But there is nothing new about the process. Basically you just heat the
plant residue to 550F and you get C + CO + H2. There are simple
processes for separating those components. I know of at least one
commercially available system that uses CO output as the energy source
for the heating and the H2 and carbon are the products.
The charcoal can be used as an energy source also. But as a soil
amendment it may be far more valuable. When added to soil it has been
shown to significantly increase yields and reduce need for fertilizer,
water and energy inputs. Plus it also has the effect of reducing CO2,
NO2 and CH4 emissions from farmed soils. Agriculture (tilling the soil
in particular) is a leading sources of the release of those gasses into
the atmosphere.
-jim
Don Stauffer
>
> Don Stauffer wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar
>
> The reaction is called pyrolysis. The carbon produced from plant
> residue is a spongy charcoal that is nowadays given the name "biochar".
> But there is nothing new about the process. Basically you just heat the
> plant residue to 550F and you get C + CO + H2. There are simple
> processes for separating those components. I know of at least one
> commercially available system that uses CO output as the energy source
> for the heating and the H2 and carbon are the products.
>
>
>
> The charcoal can be used as an energy source also. But as a soil
> amendment it may be far more valuable. When added to soil it has been
> shown to significantly increase yields and reduce need for fertilizer,
> water and energy inputs. Plus it also has the effect of reducing CO2,
> NO2 and CH4 emissions from farmed soils. Agriculture (tilling the soil
> in particular) is a leading sources of the release of those gasses into
> the atmosphere.
>
>
> -jim
But using CO as fuel- what do you do with the CO2 that generates. I
suppose in a properly designed reactor one could minimize the heat
required, but it would still need a certain minimum energy just to do
the pyrolysis. Any idea of the ratio of the energy content from the
hydrogen produced compared to the energy equivalent of the CO burned?