Toyota Hydrogen

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

Only $10,000 for a battery to back up your solar system! Tesla has the software to use your EV car battery to power your house overnight and recharge from solar during the day, all the time keeping enough power in the battery to get you to work in the morning. But it has not been implemented yet. And of course is shortens the battery life in your Tesla.

Edited By Hopper on 13/06/2023 02:18:41

[Colin WhittakerParticipant @colinwhittaker20544]

Who knows which is the number one greenhouse gas? Methane? Carbon Dioxide? No. It's water vapour and is responsible for around 30 degC of warming. Most of the earth would be uninhabitable without it.

You can therefore argue that burning hydrogen creates the greenhouse gas "water vapour". A truth, but an insignificant truth designed to persuade the scientifically challenged.

I'll get my hat.

[Taf_PembsParticipant @taf_pembs]

I'd like to know how we are going to charge all these electric cars when we 'have' to have them..?

We currently either generate too much power (as has been said) so have to pay wind turbine owners / operators not to produce (but with this it would not meet the needs if everyone had battery cars) or we have to import power because there is no wind!

Nuclear is crazy expensive, especially long term and thanks to our culture of litigation and arse covering we have invented a whole industry for so called 'health and safety' people to think up ways to stop people doing anything.. Other countries round Europe don't seem to be in our position .. christ, a small archaeological group out in a field in the middle of nowhere with a paint brush and a pointing trowel.. fencing, safety boots, high viz and hard hats.. what the hell is going to fall on their heads .. the sky??!! but someone in an office (who invariably has never actually done anything but has an IOSH / NEBOSH and no common sense) has said they have to ware them for H & S reasons and to comply with company policy.. we really have gone mad and are now breeding stupidity into people.

Just look at Hinkley Point.. crazy over budget, miles behind schedule .. I know a few that work there. One of which was prevented from going on site (subcontractor) for 'H&S' reasons .. they had the wrong colour lanyards on their site passes (supplied by Hinkley) – took 2 days to to get right colour (whilst being paid).

If it spins round and looks like it will hurt – don't put your hand in it… sorry, going off on one there!!

 

If half the subsidies / investment was made into tidal power generation (there is beginning to be some, certainly where I live but most are experimental).

Tidal power turbines spaced around the country will always have some of them at peak tidal flow there for full power generation with all the others either reducing or ramping up (but still able to produce significant amounts of power).

More so, tidal flow is predictable hundreds of years into the future.. we know exactly how much we can generate and where.

Scale would be something of an issue but the energy in the moving tide means you need far fewer turbines per population than wind.

 

Back to electric cars, how are all these people who live on terraced streets going to charge them? Extension leads out over the pavement? who is liable when someone trips over the cable!

We are going to need dozens and dozens of charge points at service stations in order for everyone to be able to get where they are going in a reasonable time, only takes a couple of minutes to fill an ICE car up with juice and peoples convenience is what makes them go with something or not.. sales of EV's are dropping fairly rapidly if the news is to believed (sky news call in / survey) – cost of charging (more expensive than driving a diesel in some cases), unable to find enough charge points for journeys ..etc etc but the biggle they were quoting is resale value.. vast majority of people who responded who owned or had owned an EV (while I was watching – about an hour and a half) said EV were a massive White Elephant rather than the future.

I suppose we need technology – especially battery – to move forward a bit before it is truly viable.

What about the distribution network ? If every house in my village had a proper charge point fitted then Western Power would probably have to upgrade the whole overhead supply to the village and certainly from the transformer through the underground to the houses, it's on it's knees as it is.. and that's just 1 village.

 

I'm all for change for the better but lets get a grip of the real heavy polluters first..

China, India, US etc. I know they are beginning to change but they are the main issue.

 

As for carbon offsetting by planting trees.. what an utter joke. 78% failure rate for the new trees (from country file I believe)..

 

Sorry… I'll get mi coat.. Anyone what this box?

Edited By Taf_Pembs on 13/06/2023 08:36:12

Edited By Taf_Pembs on 13/06/2023 08:36:52

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

A few comments.

Not in any particular order.

Quite few years ago,a Hillman Imp was modified to run on Hydrogem.The cylinders took all the interior space except for the driver!

Times have moved on, but hyfrogen needs to be stored under high pressure (Wire wound cylinders and all that! )

Hydrogen does not occur naturally, so has to be generated, in some way, electyrically or chemically.

As said, it burns and is therefore likely to ,produce the NOx of which everyone wants to be rid.

Quite rightly, engines, or electric motors, generators, wind or tidal turbines will need lubrication; so mineral oils or their synthetic lookalikes, will still be needed. (And that needs energy! From where does that come? )

Which does more damage to the environment as a whole, making an electrically powered car, with its battery, or the old "fashioned" ICE

Anyone thinking that they haven't improved much needs to compare fuel efficiency, oil consumption, emisions and durability of an ICE of the 1920s with what we run today. :

Air Standard Efficiency depends on compressiion ratio. 1920s 4 or 5:1, currently 10 or 11:1.

Oil Control / emissions?

Cars no longer need to be serviced, oil changes and adjustment every 1,000 miles. Modern vehicles will run for 10,000 miles between services (Some 20, 000 ) and use almost no oil in that interval.

Q E D ?

Battery technology will benefit from less than a century of development. It needs to!

If you brim the tank of a 1 litre naturally aspirated Euro 6 compliant petrol car it will cover very nearly 500 miles before needing refilling. EVs need further development to match / surpass that.  It may well come, in time.

Next, as mentioned, we might well be concerned about Pm 2.5 particulates from tyres or brakes, (friction materials and discs / drums) , rather than tailpipe emissions.

Things are never simple or straightforward.

Howard  Typos removed I hope

Edited By Howard Lewis on 13/06/2023 13:19:55

[paul Longley 1Participant @paullongley1]

Just seen an update from an electrical channel I follow regarding electric cars charging, the insurance companies are now saying commercial ( non domestic) ve chargers must be 7.5 meters away from buildings. Yes, seven and a half meters, that makes in town business difficult if not impossible for employees and visitors to top up their electric vehicles 🤔🤔🤔🤔. If that’s the case for batteries in cars, how far away will they want hydrogen parked??

[John Doe 2Participant @johndoe2]

@Taf_Pembs: All common questions, but all a bit defeatist.

In WW 2; did we say "Oh blimey" we haven't got enough aircraft or resources to fight and repel the Nazi air force, so we will just have to surrender"?

Nope, we just got on with it and worked out how to defeat them, and built what we needed.

Yes, there are – and will be – problems, but we won't solve them by saying how challenging it might be.

Just a quick example might be to lift the kerbstones along each pavement and replace them with purpose made blocks designed to carry electrical cables and have inbuilt charging sockets, for electric cars parked in the street. Yes, that will be disruptive but roads have been dug up for gas, water, sewerage, telecoms, cable television supply etc. and we all got over it.

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

[Graham MeekParticipant @grahammeek88282]

My Son-in-Law has a massive solar array on his roof. It stopped sending electricity to the Grid early in May. Apparently a component has failed. When he enquired last week he was told it would be 6 weeks to get the part. As they need to get the part from China. It seems a post on Facebook yesterday brought the delivery date forward to this morning. They are currently fitting the unit.

It seems the theory of a renewable energy is one thing but the practice is a different matter.

I don't think matters are helped by the UK taxation no longer giving companies tax relief for their stock. It is simple really no tax relief, no stock.

Of course there is no compensation for the lost energy production. There is also the added insult that even though the energy prices have risen dramatically in recent months. The amount he receives per unit for his electricity has stayed at a pittance.

This reminds me of the saga about "a Horseshoe Nail"

Regards

Gray,

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

As usual nobody is taking a look at the greater picture just finding alternatives to the current process. The real solution is to reduce the population by 75%. There will be both fewer vehicles needed and more land available to grow fuel crops,

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Posted by Bazyle on 14/06/2023 14:15:12:

As usual nobody is taking a look at the greater picture just finding alternatives to the current process. The real solution is to reduce the population by 75%. There will be both fewer vehicles needed and more land available to grow fuel crops,

Are you first in line for the carousel then? See Logan's Run, everyone over 30 gets the chop. I bet that covers most of us.

[blowlampParticipant @blowlamp]

Posted by Bazyle on 14/06/2023 14:15:12:

As usual nobody is taking a look at the greater picture just finding alternatives to the current process. The real solution is to reduce the population by 75%. There will be both fewer vehicles needed and more land available to grow fuel crops,

Which "greater picture" is that and what is the problem that needs a "real solution"?

Martin.

[Chris MateParticipant @chrismate31303]

Oil & Coal provided us with a certain lifestyle over generations and most countries managed to grow and developed well with those however bad they turned out to be. My point is will any "new" power for transport or electrical AC selution be feasable in the sense that it would not cripple & bancrupt us eventually in the process trying to achive or keep current lifestyles given the resources available from the planet as a whole. Money the medium we trade with is related deep down to availability of resources where a world power can only be as rich as its ability to aquire resources from over the world and other minor countries as rich as the help they receive in the process. If the relationship between money or any other medium replacing it to resources from Earth like water metals etc and manmade like electricity sources are not cheap, the whole monetary building blocks colapses exponentially over time as everything get loaded in price from the base, so it grinds to a halt as your income gets more but your movement gets less.
Imagine living on an island and you have to come up with everyything without help from outside and you dont have the resources, not much would be able to happen indeed, no matter how intelligent you are or how much money you print…Now at 8 Billion souls the Earth seems to be that Island for most……So as a specie, I feel we must be carefull in our future choices…….The Earth is a closed system to us, and the new bad maybe worse in totality than the old bad at 8 Billion plus……using it.

[VicParticipant @vic]

I watched this video the other day and it rather suggests that not obtaining the majority of our energy needs from the Sun relegates us to being a rather primitive species.

**LINK**

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Going back a bit to points about burning hydrogen with air still produces Nitrous Oxides, would engines / exhausts fitted with 'AdBlu' equipment work, as it does with diesels (and I think petrol)?

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Good question, Nigel … and I don’t know the answer

This page is one on the more informative that I found: **LINK**

AdBlue Fluid: The Facts, the Myths & its Usage

Although the second paragraph did make me smile:

”AdBlue is a non-toxic, non-flammable and odourless solution that contains 32.5% of high purity water and 67.5% of deionised water.”

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 15/06/2023 05:41:26

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

Michael's last post suggests that AdBlue is just water.

My understanding that AdBlue is merely a trade name for urea, a solution of mouse droppings.

Some engine and vehicle manufacturers have their own brand name for what is effectively the same product.

Water injection, as such was used to reduce tempertaures in the combustion chmamber, when the engine was under heavy load. In otgher instamces it was used so the combustion nheat turned intomsteam which exoanded with the products of combustion and improved engine efficiency. If it did, srely every car manufacturer would mhave include it in the engine specification?

used to excess, water did find its way intomn the sump and emulsified the oil, so not all gain!

Howard

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Howard Lewis on 15/06/2023 07:31:04:

Michael's last post suggests that AdBlue is just water.

.

Only the quoted text, Howard

The technical detail there, and many places elsewhere, states otherwise.

MichaelG.

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

Thankyou Michael.

An interesting site though one or two parts of it are a bit badly-written.

I see filling-stations are beginning to install bulk AdBlue tanks, at least where they cater for HGVs as well as cars.

.

Sorry Howard but I think you have mis-read the site, and made two mistakes yourself.

Yes, 'AdBlue' is a trade-name, and maybe other brands are available, but I was very surprised to read it is not made in the UK since there is nothing magic about its two chemicals – urea and water. Perhaps other brands, are.

.

No, 'AdBlue' is not "just water", but its description is not very well written, as if its own author has not really understood what the technical people had told him or her; hence the rather confusing percentages.

Read it again and it becomes more clearly a solution of urea in pure water at about 37% to 63% v/v.

.

It is not a "solution of mouse droppings", (your mistake) and urea is not formed in their – and our – bodies' digestive systems (National Fuel's mistake).

Its own name – urea – is a clue. I think urea is a metabolite, one of the by-products or waste products from normal cell function. Those are made in the cells and excreted via the kidneys removing it from the bloodstream.

.

Nor is an AdBlue-catalytic system any sort of water-injection system! Those basically just added water to the fuel; and might have helped the combustion in some old, inherently inefficient engines. Otherwise they were probably no more useful in reality than those fuel-line magnet gadgets; and were soon rejected. Some manufacturers might have claimed water-injection to work as you quote, by conversion to steam, but a simple consideration of the physics shows the flaw.

The site Michael points us to, clearly explains that –

– the urea solution is used in an exhaust catalyser, not the engine;

– it treats the exhaust gases, not the engine's performance.

.

What National Fuels do not tell us, is whether 'AdBlue' also works with petrol and hydrogen, which would both also produce Nitrous Oxide. It may be that it has not been tested properly with these fuels, but I have an idea some petrol-engine exhausts do now use urea-catalyst exhausts.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Good summary, Nigel

One more brief quote from that link, which might be worth investigating:

• Check for “AdBlue according ISO 22241” on the container or dispensing system

… So it appears there is a specific ISO standard available

and indeed there is: 

 https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:22241:-1:ed-2:v1:en

 

MichaelG.

 

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 15/06/2023 08:39:23

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Nigel Graham 2 on 15/06/2023 08:13:11:

…

What National Fuels do not tell us, is whether 'AdBlue' also works with petrol and hydrogen, which would both also produce Nitrous Oxide. It may be that it has not been tested properly with these fuels, but I have an idea some petrol-engine exhausts do now use urea-catalyst exhausts.

I can't see why the chemistry wouldn't work on any exhaust gas containing Nitrogen Oxides. The reaction uses Ammonia generated by decomposing the Urea, which isn't ideal, but Urea is an innocuous solid, whereas Ammonia is nasty stuff. It works.

How much NOx is made by an engine depends on what exactly happens during the bang part of 'suck, squeeze, bang, blow'.

The 'bang' is carefully controlled for several reasons.

• Only enough fuel is provided to produce the required amount of energy per stroke. Too much and too little fuel are both bad. The quantity required depends on the load, air temperature, and air pressure, the latter doesn't matter to road cars but is vital to aircraft engines.
• Ideally, the 'bang' is rather slow with the burning gas expanding only as fast as necessary to accelerate the piston, and with the burn ending well before the 'blow'. Fast bangs damage the engine by creating a pressure pulse that shocks the engine rather than smoothly moving the piston.
• The bang has to start at the time. Too early will damage the engine, or it won't run. Too late wastes fuel, reduces power output, increases pollution, and burns the valves.
• The temperature inside the cylinder should not overheat the lubrication or metalwork. If it does, the engine will wear rapidly or seize. Temperature is partly related to the fuel and partly by cooling effects, for example the Nitrogen in air cools IC engines down by absorbing heat in the cylinder.

These factors mean that an IC engine has to be considered as a chemical reactor as well as a simple mechanical device. At all stages – petrol is not a random mix of hydrocarbons – it's carefully purified and blended to burn properly inside IC engines. It contains additives such as Lead Tetraethyl, aromatics, or Ethanol to control 'knock' – premature or high-speed burning. Then the engine alters the fuel-air mix and ignition timing to match the load on the road: older engines crudely, compared with modern ones which have more sensors and a microcontroller. For example, a modern engine might get better performance and fuel economy by advancing the ignition until a knock is detected, and then backing backing off slightly – the burn is controlled dynamically. Very old engines required the driver to adjust ignition manually, not entirely a bad thing, but inconvenient, so most car engines were set to suit average driving. As racing and urban cycle requirements are different, enthusiasts spent many happy hours 'tuning' engines. Modern engines also adjust the burn on the fly to minimise pollution, some car makers getting into deep poo by doing this dishonestly.

Burning oil isn't simple. Maximum energy is achieved by converting all the carbon into Carbon Dioxide, but it turns out to be impractical. The engine performs better if oil is only partly consumed to Carbon Monoxide, and this is achieved by altering the fuel / air mix. Unfortunately, Carbon Monoxide is poisonous, and connecting a hose from the exhaust to the inside of a closed car was once a popular way of voluntarily leaving this cruel world. Modern cars deal with Monoxide and other nasties with a catalyser, which finishes the burn reaction outside the engine.

In a way Hydrogen is just a fuel like any other, but it's not as straightforward as feeding it into an existing IC engine. (Filling a diesel car with petrol doesn't go well either!) The control parameters have to be rethought. Hydrogen burning at a higher temperature than petrol is likely to create more NOx than a petrol engine would, but maybe less than a high-compression diesel. Might be possible engineer the engine to consume NOx inside the cylinder, or it might be easier to process it with something like AdBlue on the way out. No catalyser needed to clean up Carbon Monoxide and mangled Hydrocarbons though – the main output of a Hydrogen IC engine is water.

Other problems might stop Hydrogen vehicles becoming common, but I don't think pollution is a blocker.

Dave

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Does modern unleaded petrol really contain lead? You can't buy leaded petrol in any of my local service stations.

[John Doe 2Participant @johndoe2]

No. As I read it; Dave gave three options for controlling 'knock', one of which was a lead containing chemical.

I think leaded petrol might still be available for old piston aircraft engines?, but no longer used for road vehicles, owing to its toxicity.

[VicParticipant @vic]

Posted by duncan webster on 15/06/2023 11:03:58:

You can't buy leaded petrol in any of my local service stations.

A good thing no doubt.

**LINK**

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Posted by John Doe 2 on 15/06/2023 11:26:46:

No. As I read it; Dave gave three options for controlling 'knock', one of which was a lead containing chemical.

I think leaded petrol might still be available for old piston aircraft engines?, but no longer used for road vehicles, owing to its toxicity.

Yes, Standard "100LL" aviation gasoline still has lots of lead in it dispite the LL meaning low lead

There is a recent lead free alternative but not approved for many engines and not widely available.

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

So if cars can have hard valve seats fitted to cope with unleaded why not puddle jumpers?

[Author]

Posts