Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 76
  1. #1
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,494
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4160

    New Hydrogen Engine

    OK, so we have to quit fossil fuels and do it now. One possible way forward is hydrogen power if we can make enough from renewable electric. It is a whole discussion in itself. But this popped up in my YouTube feed and I thought it worth sharing and having some discussion for all you petrol heads out there. Up to now my understanding has been the use of a fuel cell to convert hydrogen into power but this little chap is more interesting,

    I want one to put in a motorbike....

    https://astronaerospace.com/
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  2. #2
    Established TDF Member steelemonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Too far from the sea!
    Posts
    11,982
    Likes (Given)
    3613
    Likes (Received)
    6882
    There is a good cut away diagram, all you need is a 3D printer.
    Paul.
    If God had meant us to breathe underwater, he would have given us larger bank balances.
    Human beings were invented by water as a means of moving itself from one place to another.

  3. #3
    Established TDF Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    South of France
    Posts
    624
    Likes (Given)
    133
    Likes (Received)
    172
    Hasn't hydrogen been pretty much ruled out as a vehicle fuel due to its weedy volumetric energy density?

  4. #4
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,494
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4160
    Quote Originally Posted by shapeshifter View Post
    Hasn't hydrogen been pretty much ruled out as a vehicle fuel due to its weedy volumetric energy density?
    In part. You are correct that the energy density is lower than fossil hydrocarbons. The main argument against it is that it is explosive under too many conditions that might be considered a realistic risk for road transport. Also the fossil fuel companies are promoting it as green when they want to extract the hydrogen from fossil gas - so called "blue" hydrogen (which fixes nothing).

    If the engine - the combustion method - were more effective then the lower energy density is offset. Ergo if this machine can generate as much power as a 200Kg petrol engine the weight saving might (calculation needed) be more or less the same as the loss of energy from the fuel.

    The automotive industry and aerospace in particular really need another fuel from the fossil default. Without it flying will soon be a thing of the past, or at least flying within any kind of sensible budget.

    Also the problem of how to store energy when far far far too much is generated from solar power to use. The new solar station in Morrocco for example.

    Anyway I thought the engineering was awesome all other considerations aside.
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  5. #5
    Nicotine, valium, vicodin... notdeadyet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Room 531
    Posts
    7,649
    Likes (Given)
    1782
    Likes (Received)
    5891
    Engine technology is never going to be the limiting factor. It's going to be the availability of electricity. You can build all the engines you want, we don't have the infrastructure to either produce or deliver the energy in quantities to replace fossil fuels and there doesn't seem much appetite for changing that. Either in government or amongst the public. People want magic electricity. They want the lights to come on but they don't want anything that actually produces or transmits electricity anywhere near them. The general public has a lot of shit sandwiches to eat over then next few years.
    Caliph Hamish Aw-Michty Ay-Ya-Bastard, Spiritual leader of Scottish State in England

  6. #6
    Established TDF Member Steve Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Lancaster, UK
    Posts
    2,810
    Likes (Given)
    274
    Likes (Received)
    1828
    Quote Originally Posted by notdeadyet View Post
    Engine technology is never going to be the limiting factor. It's going to be the availability of electricity. You can build all the engines you want, we don't have the infrastructure to either produce or deliver the energy in quantities to replace fossil fuels and there doesn't seem much appetite for changing that. Either in government or amongst the public. People want magic electricity. They want the lights to come on but they don't want anything that actually produces or transmits electricity anywhere near them. The general public has a lot of shit sandwiches to eat over then next few years.
    If I had the choice, I'd build a house inside the fence of a nuclear power station. Armed guards, no crime, millions of kW of rejected heat providing unlimited free heating, nice beach, area of outstanding natural beauty or national park, loads of safety monitoring, no pollution, free annual medicals, generally a dual carriageway and rail link right up to the front gate and located miles from the masses of small minded idiots that populate our towns & cities.

  7. #7
    Happy atheist, despite the "evidence"...
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    None of your business, vbulletin.
    Posts
    1,579
    Likes (Given)
    3816
    Likes (Received)
    1213
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Clark View Post
    If I had the choice, I'd build a house inside the fence of a nuclear power station. Armed guards, no crime, millions of kW of rejected heat providing unlimited free heating, nice beach, area of outstanding natural beauty or national park, loads of safety monitoring, no pollution, free annual medicals, generally a dual carriageway and rail link right up to the front gate and located miles from the masses of small minded idiots that populate our towns & cities.
    The failure to build nuclear is yet another failure of political leadership in the west. In this country, for example, Blair and his massive majority had the opportunity to get a programme underway in '97, but chose to kick the unpopular can down the road.

    The whole way potential new nuclear power stations are being sourced and funded is ridiculous.

    The Fukushima tsunami was egregiously misinterpreted. There were two plants, each hit by the tsunami. The old one was damaged and leaked. The newer one, Daini, carried on working without issue. If you bear in mind that Japan is geologically unstable and that the Fukushima tsunami was triggered by the most powerful recorded quake in its history, yet the more modern of the two plants was effectively unscathed, geologically stable Germany's decision to ditch nuclear power looks deranged. When you look at Germany's increased reliance on Russian fossil fuel in the light of Putin's expansionism it looks doubly deranged.

    Talking of deranged, apologies for the fairly unhinged rant.
    Happy to be a woke* feminist SJ(K)W snowflake in a godless universe, no matter what some experts think. And Braun was a twat who's not missed. At all.

    * Had to add woke; couldn't resist.

  8. #8
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,494
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4160
    Quote Originally Posted by notdeadyet View Post
    ... People want magic electricity. They want the lights to come on but they don't want anything that actually produces or transmits electricity anywhere near them. The general public has a lot of shit sandwiches to eat over then next few years.
    I agree but the potential for renewables is huge. The middle east region could generate phenomenal amounts of electric from thermal solar (like the Morrocco plant) with very little environmental impact on the desert where the plant would be built. The problem then becomes how you get electric from Saudi Arabia to Surbiton. Oil is easy - you ship it and truck it anywhere you want, electric not so easy.

    Hydrogen is a possible way to avoid some of the unpleasant filling in your sandwich.
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.

  9. #9
    Happy atheist, despite the "evidence"...
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    None of your business, vbulletin.
    Posts
    1,579
    Likes (Given)
    3816
    Likes (Received)
    1213
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisch View Post
    The problem then becomes how you get electric from Saudi Arabia to Surbiton. Oil is easy - you ship it and truck it anywhere you want, electric not so easy.
    This is becoming less problematic as high voltage DC becomes the norm. The move away from AC is being enabled by emerging switching technology replacing transformers.

    High voltage DC is far more efficient than AC for transmission; the trouble was that there was previously no practical way of stepping DC up / down.
    Happy to be a woke* feminist SJ(K)W snowflake in a godless universe, no matter what some experts think. And Braun was a twat who's not missed. At all.

    * Had to add woke; couldn't resist.

  10. #10
    Established TDF Member Chrisch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Poole
    Posts
    9,494
    Likes (Given)
    984
    Likes (Received)
    4160
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkP View Post
    The failure to build nuclear is yet another failure of political leadership in the west. In this country, for example, Blair and his massive majority had the opportunity to get a programme underway in '97, but chose to kick the unpopular can down the road...
    The principle reason nuclear power is stupid is the price. Hinckley will generate the most expensive electricity in Europe and the UK consumer is committed to paying through the nose for it, making the UK uncompetitive as a venue to make anything. The safety aspect is possibly not really as important as the financial one in the short term, just as the waste created is the issue in the longer term. Nuclear waste makes today's cheap electric at a price to future generations, the same as climate change makes the rich boomers comfortable as they kill their grandchildren.

    There are some potential applications for small nuclear plants in the interim between now and full renewable (or catastrophic failure of hte climate - whichever comes first) and so complete dismissal of nuclear is a mistake, but it has no role to play as a significant provider of power. (Fission that is - fusion is another technogy completely)

    Since renewables are the best option as well as the cheapest option as well as the greenest option we already have the answer to the dilema. Energy storage is the bigest hurdle to overcome and one solution under discussion is hydrogen - hence my interest in it. Other methods are available

    Anyway; I want a motorbike with a 20Kg 160HP engine in it never mind the green issues and all that stuff.
    We give 350m a week to the EU. Let's give it to Dido Harding instead.


 
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •