"First hydrogen fuel-cell powered cars now being commercially produced"

**a swansong 4 europe** · 18-06-2008 04:26 PM

Hydrogen production will only be of any importance in those countries which have a highly developed Hyrdro-electric power industries, capable of producing relatively cheap and abundant electricity necessary to produce hydrogen from water by electrolysis. The only states/regions capable of doing this for domestic/local use and possibly export, are places like Norway, Iceland, New Zealand, Tasmania and British Columbia to name the obvious.

Iceland has every intention of becoming the first hydrogen state within the next couple of decades converting its public transport and fishing fleets to hydrogen power, and presumably - eventually - its private motor vehicles. Iceland, by the way, as it stands, is not likely to ever become a member of the EU within the foreseeable future as currently no political party in Iceland is even advocating talks for membership, as its fishing industry would be devastated by membership. Long live Iceland, Faroe and Greenland (and for the time being Norway).

**The Bear** · 18-06-2008 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Popeye

I thought water vapour was one of the main causes of global warming?

No.

Water vapour reacts with some of the CO2 in the air producing carbonic acid as H2CO3. This weak acid then reacts with some rocks and produces salts as carbonates which lock the CO2 as a part of the solid.

As for fuel cells, they don’t actually burn the hydrogen in the conventional sense of the word, they combine it with oxygen across a membrane such that the subsequent released ions can be swept up and it’s the released ions as a result of the chemical reaction that takes place that provide the electricity.

Funny temperamental damm things when I first met them 40 years ago.

Inclined to explode if you just looked at them the wrong way, difficult to deal with, never delivered what they should, and always seeming to want to do anything but work.

Come to think of it these days I’ve got quite a bit in common with them!

**Baron von Lotsov** · 19-06-2008 01:53 PM

Here is something on the maximum efficiency of these fuel cells. It seems they are more efficient than combusting it. 83% vs. 60% for combustion. Mind you that is still on top of the waste in producing hydrogen in the first place.

Fuel cells are not constrained by the maximum Carnot cycle efficiency as combustion engines are, because they do not operate with a thermal cycle. At times this is misrepresented by saying that fuel cells are exempt from the laws of thermodynamics, because most people think of thermodynamics in terms of combustion processes (enthalpy of formation). The laws of thermodynamics also hold for chemical processes (Gibb's free energy) like fuel cells, but the maximum theoretical efficiency is higher (83% efficient at 298K [11]) than the Otto cycle thermal efficiency (60% for compression ratio of 10 and specific heat ratio of 1.4). Of course, comparing limits imposed by thermodynamics is not a good predictor of practically achievable efficiencies. Also, if propulsion is the goal, electrical output of the fuel cell has to still be converted into mechanical power with the corresponding inefficiency. In reference to the exemption claim, the correct claim is that the "limitations imposed by the second law of thermodynamics on the operation of fuel cells are much less severe than the limitations imposed on conventional energy conversion systems".[12] Consequently, they can have very high efficiencies in converting chemical energy to electrical energy, especially when they are operated at low power density, and using pure hydrogen and oxygen as reactants.

Fuel cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

**Wowbanger TIP** · 19-06-2008 08:25 PM

Actually oil is subject to seasonal fluctuation, particularly with the American "driving season" and their need for enormous quantities on heating oil in the winter.

Moreover an examination of the total production figures for oil reveals that production has been broadly stable for the last three or four years. This is quite an achievement in itself as several major producers are in steep decline, the UK being one notable example. All OPEC countries except Saudi are pumping the stuff at capacity according to them. The only theoretical surplus production on Earth is held by the Saudis. However there are those, by no means all fools, who believe that the House of Saud has overestimated its production capability for its own ends and that this surplus production does not in reality exist. There are even dark tales muttered in far flung oil installations of the mighty Ghawar field pumping sea water rather than oil.

For all intents and purposes it does not actually matter if the Saudis have the spare production or not, if they aren't going to pump it the question is academic.

The critical force driving up the price is that while supply is stable demand is increasing. This means that demand has outstripped supply and the laws of economics have raised the price accordingly. Although no doubt a serious situation is being exacerbated by speculation (particularly in an environment where capital is desperately searching for an increasingly hard to find safe bet), by the machinations of people who stand to benefit from high prices, I'm thinking Gazprom and by the collapse of the dollar (which is both a cause and effect of the oil shock).

The way markets work is that there is either too much demand or too much supply. If I have 100 apples and 99 purchasers they are all going to get a good deal and I'm getting an apple, if I have 101 purchasers 1 is going without and everyone is paying a much higher price (until the poorest or least apple dependent drops out of the bidding). This is the case with oil and why a relatively small increase in demand has resulted in a massive increase in price. The tipping point has been unequivocally passed.

The serious question is who is going to be the people going without and how badly screwed everyone else is going to be? The Chinese and Indians buy oil as States and subsidies it out to their populations, they are hugely cash rich and even the current price has not "destroyed demand" in these nations. Indeed demand in still increasing exponentially in them. The terrifying possibility raises it head at this point, that OPEC begin to accept Yen instead of demanding dollars for there oil, thus by-passing the West entirely.

Note this argument is not about "peak oil", that is an entirely different issue.

**Wowbanger TIP** · 19-06-2008 08:36 PM

Originally Posted by Popeye

I thought water vapor was one of the main causes of global warming?

Water vapor condensed into "con trails" by high flying aircraft have been implicated in a phenomenon known as "global dimming" reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the planets surface. In effect counter acting the greenhouse effect. Following the grounding of aircraft over the US on 9/11 a one degree rise in average temperatures was recorded.

Global dimming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Incidentally one of the most powerful green house gases is methane, reckoned 30 times more effective than carbon dioxide. Incredible amounts of this stuff are set to be released from the Siberian tundra due to global warming creating an intriguing positive feedback loop.

**Besoeker** · 20-06-2008 02:19 PM

Another take.
Four days at the wheel of a hydrogen car | Reuters

**C_steam** · 20-06-2008 05:27 PM

re Oil supply, someone with more knowledge than I in this field suggested one of the current major issues is refinery capacity rather than base supply.

**Baron von Lotsov** · 20-06-2008 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by C_steam

re Oil supply, someone with more knowledge than I in this field suggested one of the current major issues is refinery capacity rather than base supply.

Yes I heard some statistic on the number of new refineries, which seemed to concur. This has been their game since the 70s, cut supply and watch the price skyrocket. Now with global warming the regulator of last resort, the government and EU can just sit back and watch their CO2 targets being met with ease. No wonder the oil companies have agreed to global warming, they will make far more money cutting supply. It's their payoff.

**Britannist** · 20-06-2008 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Four days at the wheel of a hydrogen car | Reuters

Besoeker

: Thank you for posting the link to the above article - I notice its author refers (at the end of the article) to the car's appeal.

**Hartlepool** · 20-06-2008 06:44 PM

Less than 1% of the earths surface is used to produce oil.

We, on Earth, have plenty,and the powers that be know it too WELL.

Thread: "First hydrogen fuel-cell powered cars now being commercially produced"

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Thank you

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions