Google Groups Home
Help | Sign in
Message from discussion YA Hydrogen article - positive this time
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
Karl Johanson  
View profile
 More options Mar 13 2003, 11:26 am
Newsgroups: sci.energy, sci.energy.hydrogen
From: "Karl Johanson" <karljohan...@shaw.ca>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 16:26:45 GMT
Local: Thurs, Mar 13 2003 11:26 am
Subject: Re: YA Hydrogen article - positive this time
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <f...@reverse-o-matic.com> wrote

> Neil Adams wrote:

> > That's the point: hydrogen is an energy store. You have to make it first
> > and the energy required to make it is always more than you get back.

> More thermodynamics from morons, for morons.

Wow. You called someone else a moron. That must mean you're really smart.
Wait, you used it twice in one sentence, you're doubly smart.

> > So what are you going to make it with?

> Ummm,   ... energy?

You need energy in specific forms. What you want is usable energy. When you
have usable energy, you have to make the case as to why you want to use it
to make hydrogen (to store a percentage of the energy) rather than to use it
directly. Then you have to make the case that using hydrogen will be a more
efficient, convenient and economical method of storing energy than other
storage technologies (batteries, flywheels, pumped hydro, compressed air,
boron/O2, etc.)

> > It's like saying that we're going to use batteries for energy.

> Actually we use batteries for energy storage and conversion just like
> hydrogen, only different, just like every other energy conversion and
storage
> process.

We also use pumped hydro and compressed air for storage as well. The point
is that storage isn't a primary energy source, it's a technology for load
levelling or for off grid applications.

>Energy is conserved, if you haven't noticed yet.

Yes, but converting usable energy from one form to another leaves you with
less usable energy. That's a physical law, not a technological shortcoming
of existing devices. The total amount of energy still exists, but much of it
is diffuse heat.

> > Even if the hydrogen cycle can be made a bit
> > more efficient than current batteries, you must first charge them or
> > manufacture the hydrogen using energy.

> So what.

So, referring to hydrogen as a 'source' of energy is wrong*. It's like
referring to buckets as 'sources' of water or refrigerators as 'sources' of
food.

(*Unless the conjectured 20 km deep pockets of free hydrogen turn out to be
real. It'll take us more than a decade to drill one test hole that deep
though.)

Karl Johanson


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2008 Google