HP3000-L Archives

May 2002, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Tom Emerson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Tom Emerson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 21 May 2002 06:31:56 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (84 lines)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Gordon
> At 01:33 PM 5/21/2002, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> >Shawn asks:
> >
> > > so I guess we have Lindberg and the Wright Brothers to
> > > thank for all this global warming.
> >
> >To small degree, that's correct, ... But if
> >I were to say just one whispered bit of advice, as that given in the
> >"Graduate", it's "fuel cells."
>
> I've been dying to see this take off.  I test drove one of those Honda
> hybrid cars a couple weeks ago, it was darn cool, but
> considering I drive about 10k miles a year, I don't have a huge need
> for fuel efficiency, but I don't drive an SUV either, just a good old
> family mini-van.

I bought a Toyota Prius just over a year ago -- I'm getting a pretty
consistent 45+ miles to the gallon, and [as of january] my driving needs
have dropped through the floor [I fill up about once a month now...]  The
thing that is "counter intuitive" for these cars is that you get BETTER
mileage from the "city" driving conditions than you do from "highway"
conditions -- (nearly) every time you stop, the motor shuts off, so you
don't "waste" fuel idling (see note).  Pulling away when the light changes
is done by the electric motor, so you don't exert the gasoline engine at
it's worst "efficiency" point (low revs).

note: Somewhere I heard that if you expect to be stopped for more than 30
seconds [like at a train crossing...], you should kill the engine (i.e.,
starting a car uses as much gasoline as idling for 30 seconds)  Since the
engine is started electronically (you don't "pump" the gas pedal) AND often
starts after you've started rolling (from battery power...) the "startup"
cost is more like 5 seconds of idle time...

> The best part about fuel cells would be watching OPEC's jaws
> drop (well maybe not the best part, let's not forget about saving the
> planet and all that)

Actually, if you look at the direction "so-called" fuel cell vehicles are
taking, the oil companies are still exerting a rather strong grip on the
situation: the first few "commercially" available FC vehicles will use an
on-board conversion process that extracts hydrogen from petroleum products
(there is a reason they're called "hydrocarbons"...)  Since this won't
actually "burn" the gasoline, you won't have as many airborn pollutants, but
there will still be some pollution (see
http://www.auto.com/industry/iwiri10_20020410.htm, specifically the part
that talks about "reformers" -- devices that extract hydrogen from gasoline
or other sources...)

> >This technology is not very far off [...]
> >Regardless of whether or not you're for or against global
> warming, [...] your opinion almost doesn't count. [...]
> >While "saving the planet" has obviously little appeal to the
> >general masses, having to not walk will be undoubtedly be a great
> >incentive to develop clean new sources of energy.

This is why I call the current gas/electric hybrids and the first generation
petro-fuel-cell vehicles a "foot in the door" solution -- something that
will allow the common consumer to understand the benefits of a true "fuel
cell" vehicle and at the same time not "fear" the spectre of "raw hydrogen"
(*).  The next big hurdle is what everyone refers to as "infrastructure" --
converting millions of "gas" stations to "hydrogen" stations is not an
overnight task...  [directly rechargable vehicles are facing the same
difficulty -- the various "charging stations" are too few and far between,
tend to be vandalised, or worse -- non-electrics taking up their "reserved"
spaces...]

Tom Emerson

(*) To avoid the "stigma" associated with raw hydrogen due to the
Hindenburg, scientists and investigators are coming to the conclusion the
paint used to seal the cloth was far more volatile than the hydrogen
itself -- after all, hydrogen actually burns "clear" or "blue" at best, yet
nearly everyone described the fireball as "brilliant yellow/orange" -- the
coating used was a mixture of aluminum powder (for reflectivity) and a
cellulose nitrate dope; in effect, rocket fuel :)
(see http://www.hydrogenus.com/advocate/ad22zepp.htm,
http://www.clean-air.org/hindenberg.htm, or do a search on "hindenburg
aluminum" and pick your favorite hit...)

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2