If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Note: this hydrogen car DOES HAVE WHEELS (and they're NOT square-shaped)
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"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) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"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 =---- |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Joe S wrote:
> > 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). > > I am not sure if it was Steve's contention or not, but that indeed is MY contention. A lot of folks are doing this R & D 'cause they got someone to fund it. They are hoping someone ELSE will work out the production of hydrogen. In the case of the car companies, they are doing it 'cause they have the expertise in vehicle related technologies but not in fuel supply infrastructure. Further, they can point to it in their institutional advertising, saying, "hey, look how green we are." The congressmen are funding it 'cause people in their district are coming to them and saying, oink, oink, feed me some of those fed R & D funds. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Patrick's Agenda -- CJ Explains It All | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 14 | February 27th 05 04:26 AM |
American cars | Dave | Antique cars | 6 | February 13th 05 04:27 PM |
Vintage Cars Get Hot with Makeovers | Grover C. McCoury III | Ford Mustang | 2 | December 5th 04 04:13 AM |
European Cars Least Reliable | Richard Schulman | VW water cooled | 3 | November 11th 04 09:41 AM |
FS: 1991 "Classic Cars" (Of The World) Cards with Box | J.R. Sinclair | General | 0 | May 27th 04 07:31 AM |