Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I miss cheap gas
- Thread starter poppe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yes you can make it from sea water exept for the fact that you have remove the salt from it first because we need it to be fresh water before we can use it. We can not really use salt water for cooling and what not because of the high salt content. Plus the engery demand to make it from water is very high.
So now not only do you have to deal with the engery demand of getting the hydrogen from the water but also the high engery demand to remove the salt from the water.
I think its funny that you are responding to someone with Optimus Prime as an avatar.
I personally have always found the idea of the hydrogen cars to be a false hope. The only way to get hydrogen is to electrolyze water which requires more energy that you get out.
Indeed!
The only way that is environmentally friendly is to get that electricity from solar, wind, or hydro power, but wouldn't that power be better suited for something else?
On the subject of Ethanol.
I agree with the last few posters against it. Great idea, but it's lower energy output, and high production cost defeats the purpose.
Not if you made it on some far off windy island which has loads of room for wind turbines but no one on the island to use it. Then you just pump it back to the mainland.
Don't forget Geothermal and Nuclear.
Another problem with hydrogen is that it is a pain and a half to deal with. It doesn't compress well. Gasoline has more hydrogen per gallon than liquid hydrogen. LNG has almost twice as much. Hydrogen also leaks. Its leaks through solid aluminum. To be useful to store you need to keep it at insane pressures which exacerbates the leaking.
today was great, as i started my AM by getting to change my blown (and very, very worn) tire on the side of the highway in high wind + rain.
4 new tires, 205/55r16 = around $550.
this week's gas bill = around $50.
contributing to the detriment of the environment with emissions = priceless.
i cannot wait to move and start using a bike.
4 new tires, 205/55r16 = around $550.
this week's gas bill = around $50.
contributing to the detriment of the environment with emissions = priceless.
i cannot wait to move and start using a bike.
Since when is nuclear energy environment friendly?
Where from and how do we get the Uranium?
What are we doing with the waste?
The price for Uranium ore is increasing exponentially at the moment, because the mining is very energy intensive (mainly oil used => CO2 into atmosphere) and we used most stockpiles of old nuclear weapons. See:
Uranium ore price chart for the last 15 years
In my opinion Nuclear is not a long term option.
Nuclear energy doesn't produce large amounts of harmful byproducts. It does however create small amounts of very harmful byproducts. Most of the harmfulness goes away in 100 years. Which seems like a huge time scale, but its less than most of the global warming panic time scales. If you look at millennia long problems century long ones aren't so extreme.
Uranium is mined from hard rock and doesn't involve strip mining.
Local storage in elevated glass lined steel casks for 100 years will drop the radioactivity to safe levels. After which it can be buried, perhaps in the same hard rock mines it came out of.
I read a great article about this in "Mechanical Engineering" a couple of years ago.
Something interesting about Nuclear energy is if we recycle the parts it reduces the waste by a lot. The US is the only nation that has nuclear power that does not recycle it due to an stupid law passed during the cold war that would not allow it. It was hope that other nation would follow this idea so nuclear weapons could not be made from it. The other nations where smart enough to see the stupidity of dealing with large amount of nuclear waste and chose to recycle it and have next to no Nuclear waste. On top of that we have a way of putting the fuel in this little sphere things pretty cheaply and after it used up they are self sealed and never well leak. As an added bonus they can never be used for a nuclear weapons because the cost to get the nuclear material out of them is astronomically high.
As for wind energy. It can never and will never be a main stay power supply. All wind energy can do is reduce power demand. The reason why wind can never be come primary power sources is because it a use it or lose type of deal and it has no spare capacity for when power demands jump. Now our coal burning plants can increase and decrease the power out put on demand unlike wind.
That being said wind power is a great way to go because it at least reduces the strain on the power plants.
The biggest problem with the renewable energy is we can not get much more power out of them. We are sitting near the theoretical max on efficiency (which is like nice high 10%) and that is just because they are just not hot enough to be much better.
Thank you Mr Peanut.
Pebble bed reactors.
Each "pebble" on its own is relatively harmless and extracting the nuclear material from the core is difficult.That why you team it with pump storage facilities. Coal plants don't really have that fast of a turn around. It can take an hour or two to build up a head of steam. Fast turn around is what gas turbines are good at.
For our power plants, I believe solar is the way to go.
Stick some solar panels in the sunniest spot on earth, plus other places that get a lot of sun, and we just reduced our fossil fuel usage.
Stick some solar panels in the sunniest spot on earth, plus other places that get a lot of sun, and we just reduced our fossil fuel usage.
yup, I got this far into the thread and thankfully found one of these posts. (because I was going to write one myself, as a matter of course)
When I lived in the states I bitched about fuel prices, then I moved to the UK and found out what fuel prices can REALLY be like. ($7 + per gallon)
Them's da brakes, USA: You go about wasting the world's resources but you can at the very least pay your very nominals fees for it. It's the least you can do.
I little bit of sun will not replace a nuclear power plant. Not least as they're only 40% efficient at the moment.
Solar can help, but I don't see how it can be a solution.
What I've been told about ethanol and from the reports I've read was that sure ethanol is not fuel effecient at the moment, but that it has the ability to become more fuel efficient to the point that it would be the same as gasoline now. Sadly don't have any links or anything.
All Americans need to stop wining about expensive gas. The current recommended retail price for a liter of 95 octane (so regular stuff) is 1.475 here. In US units that's $7.56 per GALLON. For Super Plus (98 Octane) its even $7.86 per gallon.
The biggest issue isn't the longer distances covered, its that lots of Americans still insist on driving seriously over-powered cars. I remember when I was over last summer that the vast majority of the ads on TV were screaming 200+hp for even the most basic sedan. Its kind of senseless (although I do like a nice and powerful car myself ). I don't see gas prices dropping to old levels anymore so the change is going to have to come from the consumers by trading is their huge V8s for something more sensible like a Smart
The biggest issue isn't the longer distances covered, its that lots of Americans still insist on driving seriously over-powered cars. I remember when I was over last summer that the vast majority of the ads on TV were screaming 200+hp for even the most basic sedan. Its kind of senseless (although I do like a nice and powerful car myself
). I don't see gas prices dropping to old levels anymore so the change is going to have to come from the consumers by trading is their huge V8s for something more sensible like a Smart 
Too many Americans over here drive trucks and SUV's. I like cars. I like cars with 4 doors and a nice trunk. There's whole lot of nice vehicles that fit that description.
All Americans need to stop wining about expensive gas. The current recommended retail price for a liter of 95 octane (so regular stuff) is 1.475 here. In US units that's $7.56 per GALLON. For Super Plus (98 Octane) its even $7.86 per gallon.
The biggest issue isn't the longer distances covered, its that lots of Americans still insist on driving seriously over-powered cars. I remember when I was over last summer that the vast majority of the ads on TV were screaming 200+hp for even the most basic sedan. Its kind of senseless (although I do like a nice and powerful car myself
I really think gas should be $8 or $9 a gallon, because that's the true cost of obtaining it. (from pumping to refining to shipping). My problem is I drive a small car shared with 4 other people and my gas prices go up when someone with a Hummer pisses away the supply. I really think those who waste more gas need to pay more for it. (In other words, more government incentives for economic vehicles)Too many Americans over here drive trucks and SUV's. I like cars. I like cars with 4 doors and a nice trunk. There's whole lot of nice vehicles that fit that description.
The problem as I see it (at least here in the US) is:
1) Urban sprawl. Can you say 2 hour commute each way (at least where I live)?
2) Stupid drivers. People cutting me off at a red light, only to brake heavily (and waste gas). People who don't plan their route so they cut to an exit at the last minute, forcing lines of drivers to brake and waste gas. People who stop traffic with accidents causing whole freeways of people to get 0 MPG.
3) Consumerism. It encourages being wasteful and replacing things that work perfectly well.
3.5) People buying more than they need. SUVs that will only ever see a freeway piss me off the most.
4) The replacement of conscience with self-will. (but that's going off-topic)
