The Book Of THoTH

Hi everyone

What does everyone think of hydrogen fuel cell in terms of environmental damages? Is this the ultimate answer to new source of energy to counter CO damages? Is hydrogen just replacing petrol economy to further clamp the hold on societies by TPTB?

Background:
The next decade will be dominated by hydrogen technology. They are being pioneered right now to be the new replacements to combustion produce energy. GM last year announces its going to discontinue petrol (gas) engines and more likely transition using hydrogen in the next 5 years. Pres. Bush is lobbying for this as his centrepiece of his legacy environmentally friendly energy plan (budget of $3 billion to start on research on its economy studies alone). He claims that it will not only clean earth, it will propel US economy beyond present economy and global influence. BMW and Audi are going to mass produce hydrogen cars by next 5 years and dramatic reduction on combustion engines. Daimer-Chrysler and Honda are in the forefront of this already, follow suit by Toyota and Nissan. Therefore it’s just a matter of time the world follows. They’re even viewed to replace current coal or fuel and even nuclear (more political agenda) electricity plants. This means an increase of manufacturing plant of H2 productions; in short hydrogen economy would be replacing petrol economy, along with politics and structured economy.

In principle, a perfectly efficient system of hydrogen production, transport, and oxidation would involve no H2 emissions (it would all be oxidized to H2O). In that case, the evolution from fossil fuel combustion to hydrogen fuel cells would actually result in a reduction of anthropogenic H2 emissions, because fossil fuel combustion is a source of H2 (with CO by-product). And most hydrogen is made from natural gas (natural gas exploration and mining would increase) through a process known as reforming. Reforming separates hydrogen from hydrocarbons by adding heat. Hydrogen can also be produced from a variety of sources including water and biomass.

The hydrogen energy question is not the bi-product of H2O (waste produce from hydrogen (might have an impact if too many as well???)) but the manufacturing of H2 (repackaging the petroleum refineries to hydrogen) method and its photochemical reaction in the atmosphere. And producing H2 has more possible danger in distributing and stockpiling huge amounts of hydrogen, which is highly pressurized and explosive, it would ignite easier than gasoline. Fuel cell is not very good at lower temperatures, so they recommend not starting the fuel cell system on public roads at the moment. Also hydrogen can cause brittleness and corrosion in some materials by atmospheric reaction, for example metals; it can generate electrostatic charges and sparks through flow or agitation as well. So in a global sense a widespread use of hydrogen fuel cells would have possible unknown environmental impacts due to unintended emissions of molecular hydrogen, including an increase in the abundance of water vapour in the stratosphere (plausibly by as much as 1 part per million by volume). This would cause stratospheric cooling, enhancement of the heterogeneous chemistry that destroys ozone, an amassing increase in rain clouds, and changes in troposphere chemistry and atmosphere-biosphere interactions.

Base on some researchers would this scenario happen: With the emergence of hydrogen economy would result in cooling of the lower stratosphere and the disturbance of ozone chemistry? Would this mean help further deplete the ozone layers into bigger and longer-lasting ozone holes in both the Arctic and Antarctic regions? Are the world leaders barking up on a wrong tree to commit the whole world to another planetary disastrous decision? Also would this be a possible conspiracy where petroleum companies are countering the production of H2 to be harmful? Would the emergence of a hydrogen economy redefine the strongholds or importance of a global region base on economical importance to western political policy?

......HYDROGEN ECONOMY

...........COUNTER HYDROGEN IDEOLOGY

..............PRES. BUSH PRIORITIES TO HYDROGEN

............(1) CAR MANUFACTURERS TRANSITION TO HYDROGEN

............(2) CAR MANUFACTURERS TRANSITION TO HYDROGEN

................(1)HYDROGEN IMPACT TO ENVIRONMENT

................(2) HYDROGEN IMPACT TO ENVIRONMENT

................(3) HYDROGEN IMPACT TO ENVIRONMEN

........................(1) HYDROGEN POLITICAL SCENARIO

.........................(2) HYDROGEN POLITICAL SCENARIO

cheers for reading

Edited to remove extraneous links. SS

it will put a huge stress on already stressed fresh water supplies. just bioethanol has put a huge stress on food supplies.

Hello, it sounds like more of the same, of what we already have. Eco impacts, manufacture monopoly, haz-mat disposals........etc. Imo, there are better ways, maybe not so profitable to industry and, I would guess not being profitable makes those options not in consideration.

An ethanol additive was another good idea to dilute oil base fuel to keep living in a petroleum dependency. But the real agenda behind it was to create money for agriculture, due to not being competitive against cheaper imports – a government restructuring of this industry should have been the solution by balancing import and export as well as encouraging the co-ops, instead of handing the entire industry to the multi-national corporations who decides the government control.

They have again misled the masses by falsifying scientific propaganda. From the start they have known that it takes more energy and raw materials just to create a litre of ethanol where it cost more to produce than to gain anything from it. Second it’s not going to help the consumer end but helps the manufacturing and distribution end by reducing import and export schedules; and also reduce the petrol content with the same profit or more as no additive content. The way this works is they pass the cost to the consumer via now further complex motor-fuel supply chain. Scientifically there is no known efficient technology to reduce the amount of energy to produce ethanol. Therefore one wonders where is all the money went for tax payers to subsidise this industry since mid 90’s to present where it’s in the hundreds of billions been poured into without anything to show as the government not telling us about. The solution created just another problem for the masses not to mention ecological and for the common petrol engine which are known to be harmful as well.


The problem of letting go of control and wealth to redistribute it for better mankind is a very hard concept to live for most people. The world has been sold out to a few populations whose agenda is still in the master and servant ideology (now known as elitism) and by suppressing the free-energy technology at all cost including immoral solutions is to be expected. Therefore the masses' future is already being decided for us without any say to it and blindly accept the manipulations that is being done to our directions in lives just lik being sacrificial pawns to protect and give control and wealth to the kings and queens of the elitist.

cheers

UPDATE ON THE HYDROGEN ECONOMY

The European Fuel Cell Forum is the foremost authority in the world with regards to SOFC (solid oxide fuel cell) through international collaborative sharing of studies, experiments, research and development from private industrials and governments. The forum conference is to discuss data and information of technologies on application for scientific and industrial solutions for SOFC. An economical and ecological impact study is also included with the conference.

The latest of this forum is at Lucerne, Switzerland European Fuel Cell Forum 2008 30 June – 4 July; there would be in attendance by the world’s leading universities, industrial manufacturers from most leading manufacturers from the fields of automotives, energy, materials, mining, from various governments, economist, finance and banking and etch.

One of the key speakers would be the controversial Dr. Ulf Bossel, who is a leading engineer scientist and authority on fuels as well as major official of this forum organisation. He is rallying about the fallacy of hydrogen economy and how it is a waste of direction to our lives to gamble into as the immediate use and commitment to replace petroleum dependence to hydrogen.

He is persuading the world not to follow suit to push on a one tunnel direction (in his view is a wrong direction) to convert from petroleum base economy for hydrogen base. He is not only persisting to highlight the technological disadvantages and limitation for small scale adoption for the masses but it will result in a negative repercussion to plundering of valuable resources. In short a very wasteful economic venture and outcome. The most use of hydrogen in his studies is not into mass production that is being focus on but in practical niche application with the likes of submarines, spacecraft or even mass energy source storage.

Dr. Ulf Bossel proposes an ‘Electron base economy’ instead. The principle of high efficiency distributing electricity to the shortest route in an existing infrastructure could be taken. The efficiency of an electron economy is by pass any wasteful conversions from physical to chemical and from chemical to physical energy. Compare to hydrogen economy that is based on two such conversions - electrolysis then fuel cells and use of hydrogen engines.

[quote="Ulf Bossel"] “An electron economy can offer the shortest, most efficient and most economical way of transporting the sustainable ‘green’ energy to the consumer,â€

Lucerne, Switzerland European Fuel Cell Forum 2008 30 June – 4 July have wrapped-up their convention for educating the world’s governments and the global corporations of new developments to the hydrogen technology with the focus on the most common application and method of harnessing the SOFC (solid oxide fuel cell), yet PEFC (polymer electrolyte fuel cell), DMFC (direct methanol fuel cell) and MCFC (molten carbonate fuel cell) are also being discuss.

Concerns: U.S.-EU Summit Cooperation on the Development of a Hydrogen Economy - On June 25, 2003, the United States and the European Union agreed to collaborate on the acceleration of the development of the hydrogen economy. Both President Bush and European Commission President Prodi have made the development of a hydrogen economy a major priority. President Bush's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, announced on January 28, 2003, envisions the transformation of the nation's transportation fleet from a near-total reliance on petroleum to steadily increasing use of clean-burning hydrogen. Combined with the FreedomCAR (Cooperative Automotive Research) initiative, President Bush is proposing a total of $1.7 billion over the next five years to develop hydrogen-powered fuel cells, hydrogen infrastructure and advanced automotive technologies.Through partnerships with the private sector, the hydrogen fuel initiative and FreedomCAR will make it practical and cost-effective for large numbers of Americans to choose to use clean, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles by 2020.

The convention’s conclusion – is to seriously reconsider about fully commit the world into a ‘Global Hydrogen Economy’ which are taking place currently for a critical mass application to replace petroleum base economy. It is being sold relentlessly to the masses of misinformation about the truth of its capability for mass energy source for transport and electricity. The very dismissal of government lobbyist to concentrate into investing for a ‘Sustainable Energy Economy’ or transcend into a ‘Renewable Energy Economy’ which are being encourage and lobbied by the very highest authorities of the hydrogen technology should be concern to the citizens of the world of what agenda are really being put in here.

[quote]
The Future of the Hydrogen Economy: Bright or Bleak?
Final Report
Ulf Bossel, Baldur Eliasson and Gordon Taylor
European Fuel Cell Forum, 15 April 2003, (studies concluded since been revised 26 February 2005)

Lucerne, Switzerland European Fuel Cell Forum 2008 30 June – 4 July, excerpt from Final Report: (titled) ‘The Future of the Hydrogen Economy: Bright or Bleak?’
The analysis shows that an elemental "Hydrogen Economy" for road transport would have a low well-to-tank efficiency and hence a low environmental quality. In particular, if the electrical energy were generated in coal-fired power plants, the well-to-tank efficiency might fall below 20%. Even if the hydrogen were used in fuel cells, the overall energy efficiency would be comparable to that of steam engines in the early half of the 20th century, while the CO2 emissions would have significantly increased due to the growth of overall energy consumption. The time has come to shift the focus of energy strategy planning, research and development from an elemental “Hydrogen Economyâ€

why is it that no one addresses the fact that water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse "gas", and is responsible for 80-99% (depending on who you talk to) of the current greenhouse effect.
because water vapor is not strictly a gas , does not mean it has no effect on the greenhouse effect.people might say "it will just rain out" or something, but does it rain on venus ?
the production of hydrogen from water is an losing proposition as it takes more energy to break the bonds than can be gained from burning hydrogen. so the power has to come from somewhere. it is slightly easier to gain hydrogen from petroleum, but not much.then there is the matter of storage. high pressure tanks on a car? that will leak due to hydrogen's small atomic size?

fuel cells will need to be plugged in to the main at night to have enough energy to work. might as well use electric cars.
no i am not a big oil fan, these are just a few facts. personally id like to see lpg/cng as a fuel. currently most of it is burned as waste on oil rigs.

notes:
water vapor is very small water drops in the earths atmosphere, so is not ,by definition, a gas. the lower the humidity the smaller and fewer the drops. at 100% humidity fog forms.

venus has the same amount of water as the earth. it is all suspended in the atmosphere as a vapor, and at higher altitudes, liquid in clouds.

hydrogen tanks typically have 3000lbs of pressure (or more). should a rupture occur there is a chance the vehicle will become a rocket in some random direction.

with cng/lpg the pressures are much lower usually around 40lbs and the risk of becoming a rocket is nonexistent. there is a fire hazard, though no more great than gasoline.in addition the infrastructure is already in place for cng/lpg. current engines can be modified to run acceptably on lpg/propane.emissions are mostly water and a small amount of co2 (less co2 than a gas/diesel motor would produce). in fact if properly tuned the propane/lpg motor would produce so few emissions that it would be nearly undetectable by a emissions test. your oil will last 10,000 miles rather than 3000 as is current(oil is changed because it gets contaminated by carbon, not cause its worn out).

/*eidt*/ tpyoes

My sentiments exactly Minifang, as I have mentioned above my previous post base on research and understanding I could gather,

Your info just add up to further justify greenhouse if combine with mass H2, further more with the emergence of hydrogen economy (where massive population usage) might result in drastic cooling of the lower stratosphere and the disturbance of ozone chemistry. This would probably result in further deplete the ozone layers into bigger and longer-lasting ozone holes in both the Arctic and Antarctic regions.

In a global sense a widespread use of hydrogen fuel cells would have possible unknown environmental impacts due to unintended emissions of molecular hydrogen, including an increase in the abundance of water vapour in the stratosphere (plausibly by as much as 1 part per million by volume). This would cause stratospheric cooling, enhancement of the heterogeneous chemistry that destroys ozone, an amassing increase in rain clouds, and changes in troposphere chemistry and atmosphere-biosphere interactions.

With regards to


Dr. Ulf Bossel proposes an ‘Electron base economy’ instead. The principle of high efficiency distributing electricity to the shortest route in an existing infrastructure could be taken. The efficiency of an electron economy is by pass any wasteful conversions from physical to chemical and from chemical to physical energy. Compare to hydrogen economy that is based on two such conversions - electrolysis then fuel cells and use of hydrogen engines.

There’s also alternative option of improving current existing LPG technology, as the next safest and economical way of transitional dependence from petroleum economy for the next decade to resolve present crisis while we overcome and implement free energy source and economy model.

LPG Advantages

This is something that the world should be aware of and should be having public debate and not put in the dark in terms of wrong decision making by our government leaders for the benefit of the few who will profit from this.

The result of the conference at Lucerne (by the way they are the utmost authorities and advocators of this technology and the very ones who are going to benefit and they are very much against it), clearly shows the fallacy of continuing to this path and creating solutions to where the government should be looking at. This people should be applauded for the honesty they have presented here.

cheers