This is a video project that I did with my friends for our physical science class. Our credible resources: www.nytimes.com abcnews.go.com automobiles.honda.com www.cnbc.com www.autobloggreen.com
{ 0 comments }
and the electric (electrolysis) produced by coal/oil/nuclear/etc why not just have electric cars with a nice clean electric motor.
Batteries could be swapped at petrol stations so no need to wait.
Electricity also comes from solar.
I think industry is tooled up for the internal combustion engine petrol or hydrogen and are unwilling to change
Originally posted 2008-12-24 09:31:06.
{ 0 comments }
It is expensive to produce Hydrogen (H2) from… fossil fuels. Other possible primary sources of energy would be even more expensive.
So how is it done ? Hydrocarbs are split into their basic elements: Carbon (C) and Hydrogen (H2)
So here´s the deal:
Try to pretend you´re not going to use the carbon why we´re mining coal in large quantities ??? Isn´t that an illusion ?
why not directly burn regular fuel then ? Doesn´t it seem more logical ?
Especially, the cheapest option for hydrogen is to produce it from natural gas. But we can already power cars with natural gas LNG (Liquified Natural Gas) using actual technologies and it´s very clean… so ?
Hydrogen is a carrier energy carrier like electricity and a not a source of energy (sun, wind, coal, etc…). It can´t naturally be found in large quantities in the environment. A carrier can only be produced with a source.
What´s your opinion ?
I just feel that since wind and photovoltaic produce directly a very good and useful energy carrier (electricity) using it to create hydrogen with an efficiency of 50% would be wasting taxpayers money.
Originally posted 2009-04-07 13:55:35.
{ 9 comments }