The Rebirth of Wool
Casey, write a post here about retro woolitude etc.
How about, instead of that, I write about how hydrogen fuel cells are retarded, why, and what the solution is?
ok then:
Hydrogen takes more energy to produce hydrogen than it yields
hydrogen is an excessively low-density medium for storing chemical energy
Hydrogen needs an entirely new multi-billion-dollar fuel distribution infrastructure would have to be created to support hydrogen vehicles before any could be sold.
sounds smart right? yeah it burns clean, but so does alot of other already availible fuel alternatives, that dont need a new fuel delivery system, and are effectively recycled waste, as we will see:
Methanol is commonly known as “wood alcohol” because it can be produced from wood; it can also be made from coal, natural gas, methane hydrates, any type of biomass, or urban waste.
It can be used as fuel for internal-combustion engines, and eventually in fuel-cell vehicles. It can also be used as feedstock for producing dimethyl ether, an excellent fuel for non-polluting diesel engines. In short, it is a convenient medium for storing energy and is easily transported and dispensed as a fuel.
Methanol could also be used to produce plastics, synthetic fabrics, and many other non-fuel products currently made from petroleum.
Importantly, methanol can also be produced (in conjunction with an auxiliary electricity source, like nuclear power) by chemically recycling carbon dioxide, which can be found naturally in the air or readily captured from atmosphere-polluting industrial emissions. The methanol produced can, in turn, be used to produce synthetic hydrocarbons and other products now obtained from fossil fuels. If successfully tapped, methanol “has the ability to liberate mankind from its dependence on fossil fuels for transportation and hydrocarbon products,” while reducing the amount of carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere.
methanol is currently selling—without any subsidy—for about $0.80/gallon. Given that methanol’s energy content is about half that of gasoline, that price is the equivalent, in energy terms, of gasoline for $1.60/gallon. In other words, we can produce a useful and economically viable vehicle fuel, using a huge domestic and Western hemispheric resource base, at prices lower than gasoline.
methanol is soluble in water and readily biodegradable by common bacteria, so spills of methanol, whether from defective pumping stations or shipwrecked tankers, would have no long-term environmental impact.
lastly: Unlike gasoline, methanol is not a carcinogen or a mutagen, and the pollutants and other emissions from methanol-powered internal combustion engines are far more benign than emissions from their gasoline-driven counterparts. (Automobile emissions could even be reduced to zero with methanol-based fuel cells.) And if methanol is produced from carbon dioxide or from biomass, its use in place of petroleum acts to counter man-made global warming as well. “Compared to gasoline or diesel fuel,” the authors conclude, “methanol is clearly environmentally much safer and less toxic.”
ok i stole all that from the new atlantis, again.
Wikipedia is the shit. It’s easier to read (bullet points for my ADD), and it listed the disadvantages.
Not saying that I don’t enjoy a cold glass of methanol to dull the pain, just playing devils advocate. Plus I have $42 invested in the hydrogen game.
Theoretical methanol economy disadvantages
* high energy costs associated with generating hydrogen (when needed to synthesize methanol)
* generation in itself not clean
* presently generated from syngas still dependent on fossil fuels (although in theory any energy source can be used).
* energy density (by weight or volume) one half of that of gasoline
* corrosive to aluminum, importantly aluminum parts in engine fuel-intake systems
* hydrophilic: attracts water, which can create solid jelly-like obstructions in fuel-intake systems (in cold weather), which is corrosive, and which can separate into a non-combustible component
* methanol, as an alcohol, increases the permeability of some plastics to fuel vapors (e.g. high-density polyethylene). [2] This property of methanol has the possibility of increasing emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from fuel, which contributes to increased tropospheric ozone and possibly human exposure.
* low volatity in cold weather: methanol-fueled engines can be difficult to start, and they run inefficiently until warmed up
* Methanol is generally considered a toxin but methanol toxicity is actively researched [3]
* methanol is a liquid: this creates a greater fire risk; unlike hydrogen and other gases, methanol leaks do not dissipate
* methanol accidentally released from leaking underground fuel storage tanks may undergo relatively rapid groundwater transport and contaminate well water, although this risk has not been thoroughly studied. The history of the fuel additive methyl t-butyl ether (MTBE) as a groundwater contaminant has highlighted the importance of assessing the potential impacts of fuel and fuel additives on multiple environmental media
ok, hydrogen costs exponentially more to make, isnt already in exsistance, ie shit fumes are free and in abundance, gas is a liquid, so is just as hazardous in that respect, diesel engines take some warming, all you need to do is get some sort of warming block. blah blah, all i am saying really is that the govt is ignoring a potentially lucrative use for people poop, hog shit, and landfill gases. completely unfunded. hydrogen, which by all accounts, is at least a decade to two decades away, is pretty impractical when it comes to addressing current environmental issues.
Disadvantage 1: “high energy costs associated with generating hydrogen (when needed to synthesize methanol)”
Hydrogen needs to be used to make methanol. We can just drive around driving cars powered by pig farts (methane). You have to convert that methane to methanol. I don’t know if there are great sources of naturally occurring methanol.
I also like how the guy in that article nonchalantly mentions using nuclear power and C02 to create methanol. what the shit? When did nuclear power become ok? Talk about a lasting legacy of pollution, if global warming wipes us out today, the earth will probably equalize to proper greenhouse gas levels in a fraction of the time that it will take for nuclear waste to stop being hazardous.