Hydrogen filling station in your home

[WhiteD3]

Honda FCX Clarity | Hydrogen re-filling station (http://smh.drive.com.au/green-motoring/fill-er-up--in-your-own-driveway-20100129-n346.html)

[Captain_Rightfoot]

Other than the pesky problem of making hydrogen with coal power it's a good idea.

I personally think they will be the way of the future... but over the horizon stuff - like 30+ years. We need to have a clean power infrastructure first and that would be a long way off...

[bee utey]

A boffin's book I read ("The methanol economy" can't remember the author just now) says it is not sensible to use hydrogen, liquid methanol carries more hydrogen by weight at room temperature that pure cryogenic liquid hydrogen!!! and can be used in fuel cells. Methanol can be synthesized from many souces, even from the atmosphere when renewable energy becomes very cheap.

[Hebe]

As to the most effective Hydrogen carrier I wouldn't know what to say. I am just looking into alternatives and the discussions can become very complex.

For me, the layman, lets keep it simple. Looking TV documentaries and Top Gear I understand that regular Hydrogen production can be done using solar energy.

This is mostly done by a regular temperature which isn't that efficient. 100% Solar energy creates 80% Hydrogen energy. However, recent discovery shows that when created at a high temperature (was it 1500 Celcius?) the process becomes more efficient. 100% Solar energy creates 140% Hydrogen energy.

I don't think that this is free energy yet, it is not breaking any natural law. It also takes energy to build/produce the power station and the system. How much energy goes into making the Solar Panels, the wiring, the concrete base, the containers, and all the parts. Probably more than the 40% left over. And then we still want to drive on this energy.

Thus it is not yet the Holy Grail of free energy.

However, as they like to repeat in Top Gear. This is one of the best alternatives out there. Once petrol stations start adding Hydrogen filling stations to the line the infrastructure would be there for people to continue using cars and transport as they are doing now.

It is probably one of the few ways to convince everyone to change. Unfortunately people don't like to change and give up their luxuries. Hydrogen allows you to tank and drive. Solar means recharging overnight and thus a limited range. And people can't wait that long for a refill/recharge.

In addition, I live in a small appartment in the city. No way my land lord will allow me to put a Hydrogen fueling station in the drive way. If there was the space for it, which there isn't.

I would recomend Honda and Toyota (and the others with Hydrogen prototypes) to push for it. Goverments, markets, and people will follow.

And governments should take an example on New Zealand and the Scandinavian countries. Get more public transport, and get that public transport to run on Greener energy.

Alas, as of today no scientist found the holy grail and free energy. But, we can certainly make use of the Greener energies.

I got a Series 1 from 1958 in all original state. And I would change its engine in no time if this would mean Greener driving.

This is what Land Rover should stand for... Green Driving.... That is why I love Land Rovers,... it gets me into the nature, into the green.

Specificly to the thread... Will such a station use the high temperature method? I think that would be unlikely... Dangerous system if so...

Are there any plans in Australia to implement Hydrogen petrol stations etc?

Nice to have a new Honda on Hydrogen. But what about me putting a Hydrogen engine in my old Land Rover? Possible?

Kris

[Casper]

As to the most effective Hydrogen carrier I wouldn't know what to say. I am just looking into alternatives and the discussions can become very complex.

For me, the layman, lets keep it simple. Looking TV documentaries and Top Gear I understand that regular Hydrogen production can be done using solar energy.

This is mostly done by a regular temperature which isn't that efficient. 100% Solar energy creates 80% Hydrogen energy. However, recent discovery shows that when created at a high temperature (was it 1500 Celcius?) the process becomes more efficient. 100% Solar energy creates 140% Hydrogen energy.Sorry but this can't happen in laymans or any terms, I would explain but it has been discussed in many other threads so if your interested in the whys and hows then do a bit of a search :D

I don't think that this is free energy yet, it is not breaking any natural law. It also takes energy to build/produce the power station and the system. How much energy goes into making the Solar Panels, the wiring, the concrete base, the containers, and all the parts. Probably more than the 40% left over. And then we still want to drive on this energy.

Thus it is not yet the Holy Grail of free energy.I agree, there is no free energy, thats just a buzz word as you always need some sort of infrastructure to harness any sort of energy.

However, as they like to repeat in Top Gear. This is one of the best alternatives out there. Once petrol stations start adding Hydrogen filling stations to the line the infrastructure would be there for people to continue using cars and transport as they are doing now.

It is probably one of the few ways to convince everyone to change. Unfortunately people don't like to change and give up their luxuries. Hydrogen allows you to tank and drive. Solar means recharging overnight Only problem with that is that solar relies on the sun and the sun aint out at night :cool:...Maybe you mean electric in general and thus a limited range. And people can't wait that long for a refill/recharge.

In addition, I live in a small appartment in the city. No way my land lord will allow me to put a Hydrogen fueling station in the drive way. If there was the space for it, which there isn't.

I would recomend Honda and Toyota (and the others with Hydrogen prototypes) to push for it. Goverments, markets, and people will follow.

And governments should take an example on New Zealand and the Scandinavian countries. Get more public transport, and get that public transport to run on Greener energy.In many areas around Australia you see bus's running on natural gas, ethanol and Bio Diesel so it's cathing on

Alas, as of today no scientist found the holy grail and free energy. But, we can certainly make use of the Greener energies.

I got a Series 1 from 1958 in all original state. And I would change its engine in no time if this would mean Greener driving.In my opinion, the fact you are driving a car from 1958 means that you do not contribute to poluting the planet with cars made from plastics and other polutants and not contributing to the energy used to produce newer cars so in that way, us Landrover owners who keep rebuilding our cars are much greener than the average Prius owner by far regardless of what comes out of the tail pipe.:o

This is what Land Rover should stand for... Green Driving.... That is why I love Land Rovers,... it gets me into the nature, into the green.

Specificly to the thread... Will such a station use the high temperature method? I think that would be unlikely... Dangerous system if so...

Are there any plans in Australia to implement Hydrogen petrol stations etc?

Nice to have a new Honda on Hydrogen. But what about me putting a Hydrogen engine in my old Land Rover? Possible?

Kris

I like your thinking Kris and I don't ever expect to see Hydrogen in my local Caltex, Shell or BP as they are Petro based companies who make their money by debunking alternative energies and making it hard for them to succeed as with Bio Diesel and Ethanol in fuel.

Unless the gov decides to get serious and make it law that they need to spend a % of gross profit into alternative energy, nothing will happen quickly.

Cheers Casper

[cartm58]

The technology won't happen till the oil companies have exhausted all the available recoverable petrol from the world as they have too much money tied up in investments for its discovery, exploitation and distribution.

As you need an extensive distribution network before it becomes a viable power source don't expect the cost of the new fuel whatever the source to be cheaper than petrol no matter how freely available it is or clean it is either

[wrinklearthur]

Hi All

Going for Hydrogen as a fuel is going the extreme wrong way, as it not a friendly fuel to use.
For one, the storage of Hydrogen as a fuel is a problem, as Hydrogen being the smallest atom, a container that holds, say LPG safely, is porous to Hydrogen.

Looking at naturally home grown fuels, in my opinion, is the only way forward and releases us, as a Nation, from vested overseas interests.

Cheers Arthur

[Casper]

Hi All

Going for Hydrogen as a fuel is going the extreme wrong way, as it not a friendly fuel to use.
For one, the storage of Hydrogen as a fuel is a problem, as Hydrogen being the smallest atom, a container that holds, say LPG safely, is porous to Hydrogen.

Looking at naturally home grown fuels, in my opinion, is the only way forward and releases us, as a Nation, from vested overseas interests.

Cheers Arthur

The problem with Bio Fuels is that we would quickly run out of room to grow enough for our fuel supply which may then put our food supply at risk due to farmers converting to fuel oil crops over food oil/food crops.

There is also the question between weather or not the energy involved in producing the fuel oils is commercially viable at reasonable fuel cost.

Hydrogen is a very good source of energy if you can extract the hydrogen from the source at a reasonable cost in energy consumption and infrastructure costs.

Once the infrastructure is there, the hydrogen fuel supply would take up only a small fraction of the area that Bio fuels would need, a fraction of the on going cost in dollars and emissions to manufacture and only H2o as an emission once used in a fuel cell to run an electric car apposed to comparable emissions from petro or bio fueled vehicles.

I'm not knocking Bio fuels, they are also going to have to be part of the near future but I would hate to see Hydrogen dropped as it can be stored in relative safety and can be produced from Gio Thermal electricity rather than burning coal which is tried and tested technology which makes it cost effective and can be shipped in a similar way to natural gas or LPG.

Cheers Casper

[PhilipA]

Just to add another dimension.
Perth operated a fleet of Hydrogen buses in Conjunction with BOC before Air Liquide took BOC over.
A friend was at the time the MD Asia Pacific for BOC and he told me that the program was one of those "seemed like a good idea at the time"ideas as BOC had terrible difficulty producing Hydrogen pure enough to be used in hydrogen fuelled engines and spent heaps of money trying to satisfy the requirements of the Perth Buses.
Apparently the purity required for fuel cells is far higher at 99+% than for industrial purposes.
So although hydrogen is made at the moment, there are enormous difficulties producing pure gas and distributing it.
Another issue is that the energy density per litre is far lower than petrol, so would need to carry 3.5 times as much volume, although its light!
Regards Philip Ahttps://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/09/50.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Energy_density.svg)other

[bee utey]

Hydrogen is a very good source of energy if you can extract the hydrogen from the source at a reasonable cost in energy consumption and infrastructure costs.



Hydrogen is not a source of energy as it does not exist in a useful state until it is formed by industrial processes. It is a medium where one type of primary energy is transformed to hydrogen and then transformed to energy again. This process is wasteful and inefficient. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, methanol is a better transfer medium, one litre of methanol at room temperature contains more hydrogen/energy than cryogenically cooled liquid hydrogen. And it is easy to make and store. It can be used in conventional engines and there are fuel cells designed to use it. Forget hydrogen, it's a pipe dream. You are better off improving sources of primary energy, solar, geothermal etc. The transfer medium is secondary.

[Casper]

The problem with Bio Fuels is that we would quickly run out of room to grow enough for our fuel supply which may then put our food supply at risk due to farmers converting to fuel oil crops over food oil/food crops.

There is also the question between weather or not the energy involved in producing the fuel oils is commercially viable at reasonable fuel cost.

Hydrogen is a very good source of energy if you can extract the hydrogen from the source at a reasonable cost in energy consumption and infrastructure costs.

Once the infrastructure is there, the hydrogen fuel supply would take up only a small fraction of the area that Bio fuels would need, a fraction of the on going cost in dollars and emissions to manufacture and only H2o as an emission once used in a fuel cell to run an electric car apposed to comparable emissions from petro or bio fueled vehicles.

I'm not knocking Bio fuels, they are also going to have to be part of the near future but I would hate to see Hydrogen dropped as it can be stored in relative safety and can be produced from Gio Thermal electricity rather than burning coal which is tried and tested technology which makes it cost effective and can be shipped in a similar way to natural gas or LPG.

Cheers Casper


Hydrogen is not a source of energy as it does not exist in a useful state until it is formed by industrial processes. It is a medium where one type of primary energy is transformed to hydrogen and then transformed to energy again. This process is wasteful and inefficient. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, methanol is a better transfer medium, one litre of methanol at room temperature contains more hydrogen/energy than cryogenically cooled liquid hydrogen. And it is easy to make and store. It can be used in conventional engines and there are fuel cells designed to use it. Forget hydrogen, it's a pipe dream. You are better off improving sources of primary energy, solar, geothermal etc. The transfer medium is secondary.

Hey Beeutey,

I'm not arguing with you, and if you can run a fuel cell off Methanol then that would definitively be the way to go.

As in the sections highlighted in red, I did not say what the medium was and I said that "hydrogen was a source of power once it was extracted from the source " meaning that you could extract it from what ever you wanted.

Regardless of the semantics, I personally have seen machinery which has been converted to run on Hydrogen fuel cells but was told just what I have said here, it's not viable as yet but is something that is may become more possible in the future.

It was a bit of a strange feeling driving a golf cart with 40 odd Kg's of Hydrogen right under the seat.

They told us all it was safe but the Hindenburg still runs through your mind.

Cheers Casper

[PhilipA]

I'm not arguing with you, and if you can run a fuel cell off Methanol then that would definitively be the way to go.



Already happening but tres expensive.
Fuel Cell Instaltion in Kimberley Karavan (http://www.eco-camper.com/testimonials/fuel-cell-installed-in-kimberley-karavan.html)

Mobile homes- benefits of EFOY Fuel Cell - EFOY (http://www.efoy.com/en/mobile-homes-benefits.html)
Regards Philip A

[bee utey]

Hey Beeutey,

I'm not arguing with you, and if you can run a fuel cell off Methanol then that would definitively be the way to go.

As in the sections highlighted in red, I did not say what the medium was and I said that "hydrogen was a source of power once it was extracted from the source " meaning that you could extract it from what ever you wanted.

Regardless of the semantics, I personally have seen machinery which has been converted to run on Hydrogen fuel cells but was told just what I have said here, it's not viable as yet but is something that is may become more possible in the future.

It was a bit of a strange feeling driving a golf cart with 40 odd Kg's of Hydrogen right under the seat.

They told us all it was safe but the Hindenburg still runs through your mind.

Cheers Casper

Hi Casper its a minor quibble about hydrogen being a "source" but none the less an important one. The thing is to produce hydrogen from any source takes energy, lots of it. The big question is, what is a better way to use this original energy? Make hydrogen and store it? Use it directly, say in battery cars or electric trains? Make something easily portable like methanol? Run huge low temperature DC transmission cables across whole continents?

Most hydrogen in industrial use today is produced from natural gas. Isn't it then a better thing to burn the natural gas directly in vehicles, industrial plants or power plants rather than waste energy transforming it into another fuel? While technology may improve the hydrogen storage ability sometime in the future, there are already better ways to drive vehicles. Hydrogen power is a bit like fusion power, seen as the clean and green future but forever needing just a few more development billion$ to make it safe and economical.:)

[THE BOOGER]

I think the future will be something like a prius with a fuel cell in the boot rather than a battery, converting an internal combustio0n engine would not be ecomomic.
heres a good read didnt know how long fuel cells have been around:)

Fuel cells in Australia — EcoGeneration — The magazine for Australia's clean energy industry (http://ecogeneration.com.au/news/fuel_cells_in_australia/001348/)