Tumbleweed_Tex wrote:For the record…
It was not THAT long ago…if you had one of the following far fetched ideas, you were seen as strange:
A lightweight, handheld, electric drill with no cord that will drive several hundred screws into a solid oak board without recharging.
A device the size of a credit card which will allow you to find and talk to virtually anyone, anywhere in the world, within a few seconds.
A camera that will fit in your pocket, has no film, and will store a thousand high resolution pictures, not to mention 10,000 of your favorite songs…with viewing and playback capabilities.
A small camping trailer made of FOAM.
And perhaps the most far-fetched idea of all…a Man who walks around claiming His Father is God…
In light of these things, I personally have no problem seeing a small, internal combustion engine-powered generator which uses a hydrogen/oxygen mixture as fuel, with water vapor as a combustion conditioner, and generates more than enough electricity to produce its own fuel by electrolysis.
And there are enough people, scattered all over the world who claim they have done it (and who have absolutely no reason to lie about it), that I refuse to continue to believe the world is flat. Maybe, just maybe, it’s not…
I want one of those generators, because yes, there is a teardrop application…it’s called plugging in the power cord.
Yes you can absolutely build a generator to run on hydrogen. We, currenly, understand the physics and chemistry regarding the use of hydrogen as a fuel and it simply consumes more energy to make it than you get out when you use it as fuel. This "fact of life" is never,ever, in a bazillion years or more, gonna change. So, the limiting factor is the ability to produce hydrogen with energy that is far cheaper than any energy today. The focus of our efforts to produce hydrogen should be improving the technology to produce hydrogen using other forms of energy and finding ways to produce energy that will be used for hydrogen production for less (solar, wind, fusion, etc).
There are even more issues around storing both liquid hydrogen and gaseous hydrogen (as in hydrogen embrittlement of storage containers causing failures of the containers/pipelines and explosions). It ignites over a very wide range of concentrations and can be very dangerous. Liquid hydrogen takes up four times as much room as gasoline to produce the same amount of energy. So, my van with a 24 gallon tank would require a 96 gallon tank to go just as far as it will on gasoline. That is one big tank. The tank is storing liquid hydrogen at −423.17 °F/−252.87°C which is darned cold. The tank wall will have to be thicker to insulate, and if you'er in an accident and the tank ruptures you may turn into a humansicle (a human popsicle) and then be shattered into a gazillion little pieces when the hydrogen explodes because it can do so in such a wide range of concentrations.
These are facts, they ain't gonna change, and as they say: "that is that".
So, if you want to play around with hydrogen, fine, but you ain't gonna save any money, yer gonna spend a lot more for the energy you do get out of the hydrogen, and you may blow you and others up if you don't do it right.
I'm not sure if this is a "hoax" of sorts but it's time to face the facts/music and move on to something with potential in the foreseeable future for use while teardropping.
Cheers,
Gus
The opinions in this post are my own. My comments are directed to those that might like an alternative approach to those already espoused.There is the right way,the wrong way,the USMC way, your way, my way, and the highway.
"I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it." Klaatu-"The Day the Earth Stood Still"
"You can't handle the truth!"-Jack Nicholson "A Few Good Men"
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. The Marines don't have that problem"-Ronald Reagan