Nuclear Evacuation Zones

[patandchickens]

I'm not certain why you're off on the Hindenberg, except as free-association with the word "hydrogen".

Nobody has ever produced a car that CREDIBLY runs ONLY on water (although hoaxes and patents-that-do-not-actually-work are popular).

If you have one, you should market it and make a fortune whilst saving the world from the big mean oil companies and power companies. I notice you're not, though, so presumably *don't*

What does exist are very-experimental engines that use chemicals as fuel to run the electrolysis that produces hydrogen to fuel an engine; and the aforementioned not-especially-rare-now hydrogen-powered vehicles where powerplant electricity is used to electrolytically produce hydrogen from water, but you have to have refilling stations and a hydrogen tank in the vehicle.

Nobody has (at present) produced a car that can carry water as fuel and use a battery as the power source for electrolysis, because typically you wish your car to have noticeable acceleration and be able to go more than a couple miles I suppose it is not inconcievable that in the future some mega-new super-wow-powerful battery might be developed that DOES let ya do this but if you had that then why would you not just make it an ELECTRIC car and skip the whole carrying-water-around part of the exercise.

Pat

 

[KevsFarm]

I remember reading an article in " Popular Science" a few years back concerning hydrogen fuel/vehicles that had a very positive spin. Don't ask me what issue, etc..i don't recall...I think Icu4dzs has a valid point..I mean, what happened to the Geo Metro from back in the early eighties, that got 50 something miles to the gallon of gas,,???..I can't help but wonder if Exxon or the likes had something to do with its disappearance..
Come on people, get real...! The technolgoy has been around for a long time, big oil buys the patant and kilis it in its tracks...They can make a affordable hydro car, even a super efficient gas engine...I don't believe the tech is not out there to do it...Big oil calls the shots now, as they have for decades...IMHO...!

 

[patandchickens]

They can make a affordable hydro car, even a super efficient gas engine...I don't believe the tech is not out there to do it...Big oil calls the shots now, as they have for decades...IMHO...!

Oh absolutely, oil companies are *known for* buying up patents for alternative technologies just so they can sit on them. More-efficient gas engines etc.

However that does not mean there is a car that runs on just water, out there, nor ever was

Note that there ARE reasonably affordable hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the market, it's just that unless you live in one of a verrrrry small number of places, there are no *filling stations* thus you cannot *fuel* them. And I truly do NOT see the no-H2-filling-stations problem as being basically a big oil conspiracy... I mean, would you open one right now in your town with your money? No, b/c you would have zero customers and go bankrupt.

What it would take is for the gummint, which so many on this forum feel should not meddle in peoples' affairs ever , to either subsidize the supply end of H2 for fuel cell cars, or to just do it itself. Let's all hold our breaths shall we. But the free market economy is NOT going to get there all on its own, it is an "alternate stable states" problem.

(Me, I am not btw convinced that hydrogen powered cars (be they via fuel cells or via actual combustion of hydrogen in the engine) are necessarily the way to go, anyhow. For one thing, while they will reduce the demand for *gasoline* they would radically increase the demand for *electricity*, which unless you are going to take all the oil you're now using to make gas for cars and instead use it to fuel power plants, is just going to make EXTRA demand for electric power plants. See other current threads vis a vis Fukushima. Although I could see where hydrogen powered cars might be *part* of a partial solution to our current straits)

Pat

 

[KevsFarm]

I'm reading all the time recently how much natural gas is being/been discovered in the US.Natural gas would work well for electric poducing plants.It may even be a viable/safer subsitute for nuclear power plants.
I doubt though that big brother would do anything to keep big natural gas corps. from inflating prices, as demand increases,even with the huge reservese they say we have...!

 

[Icu4dzs]

They can make a affordable hydro car, even a super efficient gas engine...I don't believe the tech is not out there to do it...Big oil calls the shots now, as they have for decades...IMHO...!

Oh absolutely, oil companies are *known for* buying up patents for alternative technologies just so they can sit on them. More-efficient gas engines etc.

However that does not mean there is a car that runs on just water, out there, nor ever was

Note that there ARE reasonably affordable hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the market, it's just that unless you live in one of a verrrrry small number of places, there are no *filling stations* thus you cannot *fuel* them. And I truly do NOT see the no-H2-filling-stations problem as being basically a big oil conspiracy... I mean, would you open one right now in your town with your money? No, b/c you would have zero customers and go bankrupt.

What it would take is for the gummint, which so many on this forum feel should not meddle in peoples' affairs ever , to either subsidize the supply end of H2 for fuel cell cars, or to just do it itself. Let's all hold our breaths shall we. But the free market economy is NOT going to get there all on its own, it is an "alternate stable states" problem.

(Me, I am not btw convinced that hydrogen powered cars (be they via fuel cells or via actual combustion of hydrogen in the engine) are necessarily the way to go, anyhow. For one thing, while they will reduce the demand for *gasoline* they would radically increase the demand for *electricity*, which unless you are going to take all the oil you're now using to make gas for cars and instead use it to fuel power plants, is just going to make EXTRA demand for electric power plants. See other current threads vis a vis Fukushima. Although I could see where hydrogen powered cars might be *part* of a partial solution to our current straits)

Pat

As long as we can debate this in a harmonious and civil manner I wish to express my gratitude in keeping it that way to Patandchickens. Clearly she is adding a reasoned approach and is known to have a graduate degree which affords her excellent credibility. I appreciate her opinion and insight. I certainly hope she feels the same.

Despite the reasoned approach to "why this can't work" there are a significant number of folks who genuinely believe that it "can work". While the issues of "marketability and finance" make it nearly totally impossible/inconceivable to compete with the current market forces of fossil fuel, the truth may be somewhere in the middle or in the future.

No doubt, it takes significant energy to make energy from another source. I would be the hopefully one of the last to presume that we can violate the laws of thermodynamics...
1.) Everything interacts with everything and everything goes somewhere.
2) "There is no such thing as a free lunch"
3.) "You can't un-boil an egg."

Following are a number of websites which may or may NOT (depending on your personal belief system and knowledge of science) afford you some options to consider this topic of hydrogen power other than what the current "big industry" is telling us. And of course we know they would NEVER tell the American consumer anything that isn't 100% true... and yes, we know "Brutus IS an honorable man."

http://waterfuel.t35.com/
http://www.waterforfuel.com/
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/128967/water_as_fuel/
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Water_as_Fuel
http://www.waterfuelcell.org
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Running_Vehicles_on_Water
Directory: Hydrogen Hog by Future Energy Concepts, Inc. - feature page and official open source project page
Directory:Welton_Myers
Directory:Stanley_Meyer
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Freddys_Cell/ - official discussion list associated with the Freddy's Cell open source project.
Directory:Hydroxy_or_HHO_Injection_Systems
News:Hydroxy
Directory:Running Vehicles on Water
Directory:Water as Fuel
PowerPedia:Water as fuel
PowerPedia:Water gas
Directory:Hydrogen from Water
OS:Water Fuel Cell
Directory:Electrolysis
PowerPedia:Browns gas
Directory:Water-Powered Batteries
Directory:Water
More Stories by Sterling D. Allan


What IS important is that there are those people whose intellect (based on their scientific and engineering education) afford them the opportunity to rationally examine these questions rather than simply discount them. These backyard scientists are the guys who have changed our world on a number of occasions. This one is too revolutionary in scope because it challenges the current "establishment" of fossil fuel which we know controls the entire world right now. If you remember, Alexander Fleming had a cold and his nose dripped into a petri dish with bread mold in it...and then we got penicillin. That was one of the greatest additions to modern medicine ever.

We can look at the issues from another perspective. Why, if these options are so overwhelmingly either inaccurate (or preposterous) would the folks in big industry NOT want to pursue such an approach? We really do need to consider whether they think they could "MAKE A PROFIT" with such technology. If they can, it is clear in my mind that they WILL. The question then begs, WHEN will this happen? Perhaps what they are doing is researching it until they find a way to "market it" and thus keep complete control over the energy industry before they allow it to become ubiquitous in society. We DO have to consider their motivation, don't we?

If we consider the current investment in the fossil fuel market, it is clear that to invent something or market something that would put that investment in the proverbial "toilet tank" one can only assume that the profit from the new technology would have to appear so overwhelmingly appealing that they would abandon their current approach. IMHO, that isn't going to happen until it becomes absolutely OBVIOUS that the fossil fuel supply has reached such a dangerously low inventory as to be approaching extinction before anyone is "going to change horses in the middle of the stream".

Having said that, we can at least see that no one in control of the fossil fuel industry is going to let that happen any time soon. I mean, c'mon here folks. Is big oil going to allow some little nobody inventor to market something that would completely negate their existence? Not likely. What then will happen? Well, once the patents (bought up by "whoever") expired, the opportunity to introduce such technological advancements will begin to appear on the scene.

Isn't that what we are currently seeing? My guess is that the answer again lies somewhere in the middle. If your "drug" patent expires and it is now able to be made "generic" wouldn't it seem probable that the same approach becomes somewhat viable in the fuel industry? What happened to the communication industry when the "monopoly laws" closed a number of major companies and split it into a huge number of them? Again, the market forces will have to resolve this question.

OK so these may seem like the ramblings of an old man but they at least cause one to think about the future in a more practical manner.

At least it does to me.

We still need to protect OUR interests in keeping our water sources free of the danger of nuclear waste contamination which is the reason for this entire string if I remember right.

I do again, apologize for the length but adequate discourse is often achieved by thorough and logical debate which I personally endorse and appreciate.
//BT//
Trim Sends

 

[patandchickens]

Despite the reasoned approach to "why this can't work" there are a significant number of folks who genuinely believe that it "can work".

Look, my basic point is simply: you have said that water-powered cars already exist.

But, no, they do not -- not ACTUAL water-powered (as opposed to fuel-cell or H2-combustion) cars, that is. Empty claims/schemes/hoaxes/hype, there's plenty of *that*.

Go show me one. A working model. That runs only on water, not any other consumable.

(e.t.a. - and because fuel-cell and H2-combustion technology basically requires large sources of electricity to split water to get yer H2 in the first place, it is *far* from a solution to the problem you pose at the end of your post i.e. reducing demand for nuclear power plants)

Pat

 

[Icu4dzs]

Despite the reasoned approach to "why this can't work" there are a significant number of folks who genuinely believe that it "can work".

Look, my basic point is simply: you have said that water-powered cars already exist.

But, no, they do not -- not ACTUAL water-powered (as opposed to fuel-cell or H2-combustion) cars, that is. Empty claims/schemes/hoaxes/hype, there's plenty of *that*.

Go show me one. A working model. That runs only on water, not any other consumable.

(e.t.a. - and because fuel-cell and H2-combustion technology basically requires large sources of electricity to split water to get yer H2 in the first place, it is *far* from a solution to the problem you pose at the end of your post i.e. reducing demand for nuclear power plants)

Pat

We aren't disagreeing here. I don't believe there are any cars you pour water in the tank and burn it (as yet) until electrolysis becomes more efficient. I did see Stan Meyer's car run though. It was a dune buggy. It was sophisticated but it did run.
I was describing H2 combustion that will work in our current engines. That to me IS water powered as it were.
I'm not meaning to conceal that point. So in essence, we are in agreement.
I didn't say we need to reduce our demand for nuclear power. I don't see much of a viable option if we don't reduce our insatiable demand for personal luxury items that consume electrical power.

We do need to ensure safety though. Fortunately, the situation in Japan was NOT the result of any misconduct or unsafe design...it was a natural disaster. Can't prevent everything but need to be prepared for how to prevent having it deteriorate into global destruction.

 

[patandchickens]

So in essence, we are in agreement.

OK.

We do need to ensure safety though. Fortunately, the situation in Japan was NOT the result of any misconduct or unsafe design.

A plant whose absolutely-vital backup generators are located pretty much *at* sealevel with the protective seawall designed to prevent only a 6.5 m tsunami, despite historical record of 10+ m tsunami there, seems to me like it would qualify as "unsafe design".

But maybe that's just me. Well, me and a lot of the international nuclear-power-plant-design community, but what do they know


Pat

 

[Dunkopf]

Gee, I would love to be able to comment. I don't have any significant degrees though, so I just don't feel qualified to be able to think objectively. Sure am glad I practiced tying my shoelaces a lot. At least I have some value. :/

 

[FarmerChick]