news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2880975.stm
Now then, what would the reason(s) be to tax this vehicle?
|
|
How about an ugly car tax
|
It's a Bond Bug with an extra wheel!
|
|
How is the hydrogen produced ?
|
There are 2 main methods to hydrogen production: reforming and electrolysis.
Electrolysis is the reverse of what happens in the fuel cell - electricity is applied to water which liberates hydrogen and oxygen. I very much doubt there is sufficient generating capacity in this country to produce any significant amount of hydrogen by this method. Most electricty generation is, in any case, \'non green\' and produces plenty of CO2 etc.
Reformation involves reacting down natural gas with steam to produce hydrogen and carbon monoxide (synthesis gas - which is what used to come to your house as \'town gas\' as opposed to natural gas we get now. Now, this reaction does not really want to happen - it needs to be heated to around 1000°C to make it go, and even then it absorbs A LOT of energy
For each ton of hydrogen produced by reformation approx TEN tonnes of CO2 are produced (from the heating, and by \'shifting\' the CO into CO2).
So, whilst a hydrogen car is locally \'clean\' - overall it is far from it - until we can produce enough power from renewable sources to generate all the hydrogen that would be required to run all these cars. Some hope......
In the same vein, the current push towards cleaner petrol and diesel has meant a big increase in hydrogen consumption on refineries, with the co-incident increase in C02 emmissions - the one key \'pollutant\' that the government sees fit to base car tax on (oh, except biasing it against diesels so their coffers don\'t suffer TOO badly)
Richard
|
How do bio-ethanol and bio-diesel compare in the pollution stakes with hydrogen per ton of fuel produced?
teabelly
|
I would have thought that bio-fuels were well better as they are almost CO2 neutral i.e. the growing plant absorbs CO2, burning the resulting fuel releases the CO2.
Hydrogen would be a good power source if and when fusion reactors 'take off' as they promise cheap electricity. But then they also said that about fission power didn't they?
|
|
|
|
Ah. Renewables.
As far as the grid is concerned renewables will mean generation which is only available when the wind blows or whatever, which as often as not will be when demand is down; at which times it would be handy to have a sink for the energy, such as a hydrogen producing plant. Very green indeed.
There would have to be, however, a punitive tax on hydrogen car fuel, the same as the rest!
Tomo
|
The thing about the forms of renewable energy you mention is that they don't just work when strong winds blow or when the day is sunny. First of all, days where there is truly no wind are extremely rare - I've lived on a hill with a windfarm at the top for the last six years, and I see them from my kitchen window every day, just half a mile away. Apart from occasional maintenance I've only seen the things stop turning about four or five times in that six years. As far as solar panels are concerned, they are affected by light, not warm sunshine, so the name is a little misleading. Recent developments in solar panel technology have brought very substantial increases in conversion efficiency, and these improvements are continuing. In reality it's perfectly feasible for a solar panel system to power a home even in the grey old UK.
The way these renewables work (on a small scale) is that battery systems are used to store the energy from turbines or panels to ensure that you don't run out of power. In fact, it would be impossible to use them otherwise - electrical appliances need a constant flow of power. Relying on the constantly fluctuating wind speeds or light intensity would mean that on a bright and breezy day, your fuses would blow! Battery systems can be trickle charged by even the faintest breeze, or the most overcast day.
I've read somewhere (but don't ask me where!) that if every house in the UK had a combination of solar panels and wind turbines with battery storage, there would be no need for the national grid to supply domestic power.
|
Re-reading my reply, I realise that I've moved a little off-topic in that the thread is really concerned with the viability of hydrogen for transport. I'm of the opinion that hydrogen as fuel is highly impractical unless that hydrogen is produced using renewable means. Even then, the energy-inefficiency of the process means that the same renewables would be better put towards fuelling our transport directly.
For a comparison of various options for fuelling transport, try this site:
www.biofuels.fsnet.co.uk/sustain.htm
(I must have posted this link over a dozen times by now!)
|
You can also have a read of this thread on another forum - there are two pages to it in total.
biodiesel.infopop.net/2/OpenTopic?q=Y&a=tpc&s=4650...1
|
|
|
|
Ordinary power plants have the same problem due to variations in demand. I believe they pump water to the top of a hill when demand is low and then use the water to drive turbines when demand is high.
I would guess that hydrogen and the storage tank has a higher power to weight ratio when compared with batteries charged from the mains. Batteries just don't seem to have the range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
