Hydriogen Cars SOON!
 

a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates power for
GM's New York fuel cell development facility.

a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack technology
has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased proportionately.

a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no internal
combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator pedals - but it
does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on hydrogen.

Note: this hydrogen car DOES HAVE WHEELS (and they're NOT square-shaped)

"Marco Licetti" > wrote in message
m...
> a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates power for
> GM's New York fuel cell development facility.
>
> a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack
> technology has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased
> proportionately.
>
> a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no internal
> combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator pedals - but it
> does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on hydrogen.
>
>


That all wonderful and good but.....

then we need an effective and ECONOMICALLY viable way to make usable
hydrogen that doesn't use outrageous amounts of energy to do so...
(rollseyes)

Marco Licetti wrote:

> a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates power for
> GM's New York fuel cell development facility.
>
> a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack technology
> has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased proportionately.
>
> a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no internal
> combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator pedals - but it
> does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on hydrogen.
>
>
>
So? There has long been a NUMBER of ways for vehicles to run on
hydrogen. Hydrogen Diesel goes back to about 1900. People made cars
that would run on hydrogen half a century ago. It is no problem coming
up with ways to use hydrogen if you have it. Problem is getting a good
source of hydrogen. In spite of some claims to contrary here, hydrogen
is not a viable SOURCE of energy. It is a legitimate transportation
fuel, if we can find a fuel source to power conversion of hydrogen from
hydrogen-containing compounds. But that is the big problem right now,
not how to use the hydrogen if you have it.

Don Stauffer in Minneapolis wrote:
> Marco Licetti wrote:
>
>> a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates power
>> for GM's New York fuel cell development facility.
>>
>> a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack
>> technology has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased
>> proportionately.
>>
>> a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no internal
>> combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator pedals - but
>> it does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on
>> hydrogen.
>>
>>
>>
> So? There has long been a NUMBER of ways for vehicles to run on
> hydrogen. Hydrogen Diesel goes back to about 1900. People made cars
> that would run on hydrogen half a century ago. It is no problem coming
> up with ways to use hydrogen if you have it. Problem is getting a good
> source of hydrogen. In spite of some claims to contrary here, hydrogen
> is not a viable SOURCE of energy. It is a legitimate transportation
> fuel, if we can find a fuel source to power conversion of hydrogen from
> hydrogen-containing compounds. But that is the big problem right now,
> not how to use the hydrogen if you have it.


Here's the starting point...gasoline/diesel requires petroleum. The job
is to develop a way to power vehicles that does not require petroluem.

Hydrogen fuel cell technology is one. Others are have been and are being
explored.

If you know that there is a better solution just sitting there waiting
to be plucked, you should give up your day job and go be a hero. Tell
Japan, tell Detroit, tell the world. I will honor you with a thank you
post in this newsgroup, PLUS you'll be rich beyond your wildest
expectations.

If you don't care to do that, then you'll just have to wait and see what
the thousands of experts come up with.

--
Joe

"Joe S" > wrote in message
news:f6D1e.32550$oa6.15933@trnddc07...
> Don Stauffer in Minneapolis wrote:
> > Marco Licetti wrote:
> >
> >> a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates
power
> >> for GM's New York fuel cell development facility.
> >>
> >> a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack
> >> technology has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased
> >> proportionately.
> >>
> >> a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no
internal
> >> combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator
pedals - but
> >> it does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on
> >> hydrogen.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > So? There has long been a NUMBER of ways for vehicles to run on
> > hydrogen. Hydrogen Diesel goes back to about 1900. People made
cars
> > that would run on hydrogen half a century ago. It is no problem
coming
> > up with ways to use hydrogen if you have it. Problem is getting a
good
> > source of hydrogen. In spite of some claims to contrary here,
hydrogen
> > is not a viable SOURCE of energy. It is a legitimate
transportation
> > fuel, if we can find a fuel source to power conversion of hydrogen
from
> > hydrogen-containing compounds. But that is the big problem right
now,
> > not how to use the hydrogen if you have it.
>
>
> Here's the starting point...gasoline/diesel requires petroleum. The
job
> is to develop a way to power vehicles that does not require
petroluem.
>
> Hydrogen fuel cell technology is one. Others are have been and are
being
> explored.
>
> If you know that there is a better solution just sitting there
waiting
> to be plucked, you should give up your day job and go be a hero.
Tell
> Japan, tell Detroit, tell the world. I will honor you with a thank
you
> post in this newsgroup, PLUS you'll be rich beyond your wildest
> expectations.
>
> If you don't care to do that, then you'll just have to wait and see
what
> the thousands of experts come up with.
>
> --
> Joe

The reality point is that the problem isn't with using hydrogen as a
fuel, the problem is producing the hydrogen, so posting about
advancements in hydrogen fuel cells is deceiving. Until there are
advancements in hydrogen production the rest is meaningless.

Ken

"Joe S" > wrote in message
news:f6D1e.32550$oa6.15933@trnddc07...
> Don Stauffer in Minneapolis wrote:
> > Marco Licetti wrote:
> >
> >> a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates
power
> >> for GM's New York fuel cell development facility.
> >>
> >> a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack
> >> technology has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased
> >> proportionately.
> >>
> >> a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no internal
> >> combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator pedals -
but
> >> it does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on
> >> hydrogen.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > So? There has long been a NUMBER of ways for vehicles to run on
> > hydrogen. Hydrogen Diesel goes back to about 1900. People made
cars
> > that would run on hydrogen half a century ago. It is no problem
coming
> > up with ways to use hydrogen if you have it. Problem is getting a
good
> > source of hydrogen. In spite of some claims to contrary here,
hydrogen
> > is not a viable SOURCE of energy. It is a legitimate transportation
> > fuel, if we can find a fuel source to power conversion of hydrogen
from
> > hydrogen-containing compounds. But that is the big problem right
now,
> > not how to use the hydrogen if you have it.
>
>
> Here's the starting point...gasoline/diesel requires petroleum. The
job
> is to develop a way to power vehicles that does not require petroluem.
>
> Hydrogen fuel cell technology is one. Others are have been and are
being
> explored.

WRONG. Hydrogen is NOT a fuel source. It is made from other sources.
Currently 99 percent of it is made from TADA --- Petroleum, AKA LPG and
Natural gas. NO other source to produce it from for lower cost in large
enough quantities to even be useful. ALL other methods take more energy
and money to produce the Hydrogen than the Hydrogen can ever return.

>
> If you know that there is a better solution just sitting there waiting
> to be plucked, you should give up your day job and go be a hero. Tell
> Japan, tell Detroit, tell the world. I will honor you with a thank you
> post in this newsgroup, PLUS you'll be rich beyond your wildest
> expectations.
>
> If you don't care to do that, then you'll just have to wait and see
what
> the thousands of experts come up with.
>
> --
> Joe



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Steve W. wrote:
> "Joe S" > wrote in message
> news:f6D1e.32550$oa6.15933@trnddc07...
>
>>Don Stauffer in Minneapolis wrote:
>>
>>>Marco Licetti wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>a.. GM's prototype stationary fuel cell unit already generates
>
> power
>
>>>>for GM's New York fuel cell development facility.
>>>>
>>>>a.. In only two years, the power density of GM's fuel cell stack
>>>>technology has increased tenfold, while costs have decreased
>>>>proportionately.
>>>>
>>>>a.. GM's revolutionary fuel cell vehicle, Hy-wire, has no internal
>>>>combustion engine, instrument panel, brake or accelerator pedals -
>
> but
>
>>>>it does have ample power supplied by a GM fuel cell that runs on
>>>>hydrogen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>So? There has long been a NUMBER of ways for vehicles to run on
>>>hydrogen. Hydrogen Diesel goes back to about 1900. People made
>
> cars
>
>>>that would run on hydrogen half a century ago. It is no problem
>
> coming
>
>>>up with ways to use hydrogen if you have it. Problem is getting a
>
> good
>
>>>source of hydrogen. In spite of some claims to contrary here,
>
> hydrogen
>
>>>is not a viable SOURCE of energy. It is a legitimate transportation
>>>fuel, if we can find a fuel source to power conversion of hydrogen
>
> from
>
>>>hydrogen-containing compounds. But that is the big problem right
>
> now,
>
>>>not how to use the hydrogen if you have it.
>>
>>
>>Here's the starting point...gasoline/diesel requires petroleum. The
>
> job
>
>>is to develop a way to power vehicles that does not require petroluem.
>>
>>Hydrogen fuel cell technology is one. Others are have been and are
>
> being
>
>>explored.
>
>
> WRONG. Hydrogen is NOT a fuel source.

Wrong what? I didn't say "Hydrogen is a fuel source". I said that
hydrogen fuel cell technology is one way to power vehicles that does not
*require* petroleum.

> It is made from other sources.
> Currently 99 percent of it is made from TADA --- Petroleum, AKA LPG and
> Natural gas. NO other source to produce it from for lower cost in large
> enough quantities to even be useful. ALL other methods take more energy
> and money to produce the Hydrogen than the Hydrogen can ever return.

Is it your contention, then, that billions of dollars are being spent on
research without viable plans for production and distribution of
hydrogen by the expected to-market date of 2012?

If you know otherwise, what's your source? I'd love to read about how
all this exhaustive R&D that's going on that will be of no use at all
(because you don't personally know how they plan to provide the fuel).


--
Joe

Joe S wrote:
>I didn't say "Hydrogen is a fuel source". I said that
>hydrogen fuel cell technology is one way to power
>vehicles that does not *require* petroleum.

>Is it your contention, then, that billions of dollars are
>being spent on research without viable plans for production
>and distribution of hydrogen by the expected to-market date
>of 2012?

The automotive business is so unprogressive that it develops new
technology at just a snail's pace, and hydrogen is too big a leap from
gasoline to be implemented in just 7 years. Look at how 10 years
passed before the industry reduced auto emissions by 90-98%, and that
was under federal government order, something the current regime
greatly dislikes.

At best the majority of autos will be hybrids in 15 years, and fuel
cell cars that run from gasoline, methanol, or alcohol may just start
to be introduced. But direct use of hydrogen as fuel won't occur until
hydrogen extraction becomes far, far less dependent on hydrocarbons,
either as the source material or as the source of energy for it.

Joe S wrote:
>
>
> Here's the starting point...gasoline/diesel requires petroleum. The job
> is to develop a way to power vehicles that does not require petroluem.
>
> Hydrogen fuel cell technology is one. Others are have been and are being
> explored.
>

But the point I am trying to make is that we don't NEED fuel cells to
burn hydrogen. The existing IC engine can burn it with some simple
modifications. There are a lot of cars running around burning natural
gas. Almost the same mods that enable that can also be used to burn
hydrogen. Now, hydrogen is a very low octane, so the compression ratio
may need to be lowered, or spark severely retarded. But it seems to me
that these mods are minor compared to developing affordable fuel cells
(they are quite expensive right now).

Further, whether it is fuel cells or modified IC engines, the REAL
problem is how to produce hydrogen economically and in an
environmentally friendly way. THIS is the problem that folks should be
spending the R & D dollars on.