k wrote:
] flynn23 wrote:
] ] Firstly, manufacturing hydrogen cleanly and at low cost is
] ] ridiculous. Today's technology is already cleaner and at
] lower
] ] cost than the current fossil fuel system. I'm producing it
] ] today and my total investment (minus time) is about $200.
] ] There's no way in hell that I could've produced and refined
] ] fossil fuels on my own for an equivalent price. The only
] thing
] ] that has not been attempted is to manufacture hydrogen at
] ] scale. So until someone is willing to pony up the investment
]
] ] to do that, shut the hell up, because the numbers prove that
]
] ] it is superior in comparison to current and most importantly
]
] ] previous fossil fuel acquisition systems.
]
] [ You have a hydrogen production apparatus? How's yours work?

I've been messing around with this for a few years now. I was toying with the idea of starting a business somehow involved in fuel cell production or design or something. Anything to help move this paradigm shift along. But I wanted to experiment with it first and learn as much as I could before making that kind of commitment.

I've set up several production systems. Some using house current to drive electrolysis. Some using solar. Some using 'other means'. My current system uses solar, and I'll probably stay with that as it's totally sustainable and involves nearly negligable environmental impact. I've toyed with the idea of creating a solar/hydrogen powered car. I've got a 1996 Saturn SL2 that has a leaking front gasket in the engine which might be a great project car to try this out on, but my time is extremely limited these days.

] I'm interested in your results... what kind of efficiency are
] you finding?

It depends. I don't have highly accurate means of measuring that, but generally it's impressive given the ersatz nature of putting this stuff together with literally duct tape and surplus wood. I don't have my exact figures with me at the moment, but I've routinely gotten ~50% efficiency with solar with absolutely no doping or efficiency engineering. I know that with some moderate investment (couple hundred bucks) I could get towards 70%. If I were willing to invest a few thousand, I could push that close to 80%. The idea inspired by the NYT article I may pursue is to try and put the water into a heated and pressurized state and see if that boosts my efficiency any. Obviously the design would be flawed, since I'd need grid electricity to drive both pressure pump and heater, but it might be a neat birdwalk of an experiment. But frankly, I'd rather look at other things to tweak.

] As for the article, it wimps out at the end, mostly. I think
] it's obvious that a hydrogen economy is pointless, at best,
] until we're getting our hydrogen from a root fuel which is not
] a hydrocarbon. Which means nuclear, really. Given the
] resistance people have to the word nuclear, I'm concerned.

Not necessarily. While I think it's highly likely that there would be some kind of 'transition' period, where we're using hybrid means of energy (both fossil fuels and sustainable), that's certainly not a requirement. In fact, the end result is completely sustainable infrastructure, and so that means solar, wind, or hydro-electric. It is easy to conceive that investment in any of these technologies could reap significant changes in our methods of producing energy to the point of nullifying fossil fuels as a source. It doesn't necessarily require that much 'last mile' infrastructure changes per se. With the exception of automobiles, you could easily power most other energy users with these methods directly (instead of burning coal or natural gas to generate electricity). Automobiles only account for just shy of half of the polluting factor. You could attack the problem either way, but the easier path is to migrate power plants to a sustainable and clean platform. Autos can come later. There's more hurdles involved and more investment necessary, even though the market is much larger.

RE: Hydrogen Production Method Could Bolster Fuel Supplies