|
Posted by collin on January 20, 2008, 4:10 pm
Please log in for more thread options
: quoted-printable
I don't really want to be a nay sayer comments inserted below
> Myth No. 2: Hydrogen is too dangerous for common use This myth begins =
with
> the hydrogen-filled German zeppelin, the Hindenburg, which blew up at
> Lakehurst, New Jersey, in 1937.
The hydrogen in the blimp burned the way I see it it didn't blow up. =
When=20
the hydrogen and the oxygen or air are mixed in the flamable range and =
then=20
the ignition takes place that is what I call blowing up.
Recently that event was revisited in a
> detailed analysis by National Aeronautics and Space Administration =
(NASA)
> scientist Addison Bain. He found that it was not the hydrogen that
> originally combusted, but the dirigible's outer coating, a highly=20
> flammable
> material similar to that used in rocket propellants. In reality, the
> hydrogen industry has had an excellent safety record for decades. In =
30
> years, liquefied hydrogen shipments have logged 33 billion miles. =
During=20
> all
> this time, no product losses or fires were reported. Gasoline, our
> automotive fuel of choice, is 22 times more explosive and has a dismal
> safety record in comparison.
hydrogen being very light makes it kind of safe as it goes up and away. =
in=20
the blimp example above it is said more folks got burned from the fuel =
for=20
the engines than from the gas used for floatation.
Are you stating that the flame spread speed of a combustible mixture of=20
gasoline and air is 22 times the flame spread speed of a flamable =
mixture of=20
hydrogen and air? That is what I would call 22 times more explosive or =
at=20
least a good portion of it.
>
> Hydrogen, while flammable, is generally more easily managed than=20
> hydrocarbon
> fuels. If hydrogen is ignited, it burns with a clear flame and only
> one-tenth the radiant heat of a hydrocarbon fire. The heat that is=20
> produced
> tends to dissipate much more rapidly than heat from gasoline or oil =
fires.
> The bottom line is that hydrogen-safety critics should turn their fire
> against gasoline, and agitate for the rapid adoption of hydrogen on =
safety
> grounds alone! Myth No. 3: Hydrogen can't be distributed via existing
> pipelines The transportation of hydrogen, one of the most frequently
> mentioned concerns of critics, is easily accomplished through =
pipelines.
> Creating a new pipeline network to move hydrogen is unnecessary; we =
can=20
> use
> the one already in existence.
what about hydrogen embrittlement of steels? The hydrogen (H2)=20
disassociated into two seperate atoms (H) +(H) there is a constant that =
will=20
explain how much it isn't much. Just like the ph scale for water whose=20
constant is on the order of ten to the minus fourteenth power. If I =
wasn't=20
out of school for so long I would know where to look it up. These =
hydrogen=20
atoms are extremely small compared to the hydrogen (h2) molecule and=20
actually can make their way into the crystaline metal structure. When =
two=20
of these hydrogen bump into each other inside the crystaline metal =
structure=20
they invarably form the hydrogen molecule and become much larger forcing =
apart the crystaline metal structure. I really think the statement=20
immediatly above is incorrect without stating how much the life span of=20
those pipelines will have to be shortened.
Some existing pipelines are already
> hydrogen-ready. The others can easily be modified with existing=20
> technologies
> by adding polymer-composite liners, similar to the process used to=20
> renovate
> old sewer pipes. Using existing pipelines creates no additional safety
> concerns. Already, hydrogen-refueling stations are appearing in=20
> California,
> Florida and British Columbia. Other regions are sure to follow
Liquid hydrogen. zero tail pipe emissions if you don't count the =
nitrogen=20
from the air being affected. The emissions are somewhere else where =
the=20
hydrogen is produced and liquified. San francisco dredges their harbor =
electrically so there are is no air pollution. Or so they would like =
you to=20
think but they want the power plants out of state or did up until =
lately.
do you view the hydrogen for transportation as a fuel or a storage =
device?
>
> Myth No. 4: There is no practical way to run cars on hydrogen Hydrogen =
> fuel
> cells have been used for space flights since 1965 and they were used =
in a
> passenger vehicle as early as 1966 (GM's Electrovan). Today, fuel-cell
> vehicles are undergoing rigorous testing and are far advanced. As of
> mid-2003, manufacturers had dozens of fuel-cell buses and upwards of =
100
> fuel-cell cars on the road. Fuel cells are being tested for military
> vehicles on land and sea; submarines have used them for years. Heavy=20
> trucks,
> which spend up to half their engine run time idling because they have =
no
> auxiliary power source, are also beginning to use fuel cells. FedEx =
and=20
> UPS
> plan to introduce fuel-cell trucks by next year.
>
>
> ---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News=20
> Provider ----
> http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to=20
> 100,000+ newsgroups
>
> ---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News=20
> Provider ----
> http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to=20
> 100,000+ newsgroups=20
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01C85BA8.D1526350
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.3243" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" =
size=3D3>I don't really=20
want to be a nay sayer comments inserted =
below<BR><BR><BR><BR>"collin"=20
Roman"=20
size=3D3>rebel@prosof.net</FONT></A><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" =
size=3D3>> wrote=20
in message <BR></FONT><A =
face=3D"Times New Roman"=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3>...<BR>> Myth No. 2: Hydrogen is =
too dangerous=20
for common use This myth begins with<BR>> the hydrogen-filled German=20
zeppelin, the Hindenburg, which blew up at<BR>> Lakehurst, New =
Jersey, in=20
1937.<BR><BR><BR>The hydrogen in the blimp burned the way I see it it =
didn't=20
blow up. When <BR>the hydrogen and the oxygen or air are mixed in =
the=20
flamable range and then <BR>the ignition takes place that is what I call =
blowing=20
up.<BR><BR><BR><BR> Recently that event was revisited in a<BR>> =
detailed=20
analysis by National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)<BR>> =
scientist Addison Bain. He found that it was not the hydrogen =
that<BR>>=20
originally combusted, but the dirigible's outer coating, a highly =
<BR>>=20
flammable<BR>> material similar to that used in rocket propellants. =
In=20
reality, the<BR>> hydrogen industry has had an excellent safety =
record for=20
decades. In 30<BR>> years, liquefied hydrogen shipments have logged =
33=20
billion miles. During <BR>> all<BR>> this time, no product losses =
or fires=20
were reported. Gasoline, our<BR>> automotive fuel of choice, is 22 =
times more=20
explosive and has a dismal<BR>> safety record in=20
comparison.<BR><BR><BR>hydrogen being very light makes it kind of safe =
as it=20
goes up and away. in <BR>the blimp example above it is said more =
folks got=20
burned from the fuel for <BR>the engines than from the gas used for=20
floatation.<BR><BR>Are you stating that the flame spread speed of a =
combustible=20
mixture of <BR>gasoline and air is 22 times the flame spread speed of a =
flamable=20
mixture of <BR>hydrogen and air? That is what I would call 22 =
times more=20
explosive or at <BR>least a good portion of it.<BR><BR><BR>><BR>>=20
Hydrogen, while flammable, is generally more easily managed than =
<BR>>=20
hydrocarbon<BR>> fuels. If hydrogen is ignited, it burns with a clear =
flame=20
and only<BR>> one-tenth the radiant heat of a hydrocarbon fire. The =
heat that=20
is <BR>> produced<BR>> tends to dissipate much more rapidly than =
heat from=20
gasoline or oil fires.<BR>> The bottom line is that hydrogen-safety =
critics=20
should turn their fire<BR>> against gasoline, and agitate for the =
rapid=20
adoption of hydrogen on safety<BR>> grounds alone! Myth No. 3: =
Hydrogen can't=20
be distributed via existing<BR>> pipelines The transportation of =
hydrogen,=20
one of the most frequently<BR>> mentioned concerns of critics, is =
easily=20
accomplished through pipelines.<BR>> Creating a new pipeline network =
to move=20
hydrogen is unnecessary; we can <BR>> use<BR>> the one already in=20
existence.<BR><BR>what about hydrogen embrittlement of steels? The =
hydrogen (H2) <BR>disassociated into two seperate atoms (H) +(H) there =
is a=20
constant that will <BR>explain how much it isn't much. Just like =
the ph=20
scale for water whose <BR>constant is on the order of ten to the minus=20
fourteenth power. If I wasn't <BR>out of school for so long I =
would know=20
where to look it up. These hydrogen <BR>atoms are extremely small =
compared=20
to the hydrogen (h2) molecule and <BR>actually can make their way into =
the=20
crystaline metal structure. When two <BR>of these hydrogen bump =
into each=20
other inside the crystaline metal structure <BR>they invarably form the =
hydrogen=20
molecule and become much larger forcing <BR>apart the crystaline metal=20
structure. I really think the statement <BR>immediatly above is =
incorrect=20
without stating how much the life span of <BR>those pipelines will have =
to be=20
shortened.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>Some existing pipelines are =
already<BR>>=20
hydrogen-ready. The others can easily be modified with existing <BR>> =
technologies<BR>> by adding polymer-composite liners, similar to the =
process=20
used to <BR>> renovate<BR>> old sewer pipes. Using existing =
pipelines=20
creates no additional safety<BR>> concerns. Already, =
hydrogen-refueling=20
stations are appearing in <BR>> California,<BR>> Florida and =
British=20
Columbia. Other regions are sure to follow<BR><BR>Liquid=20
hydrogen. zero tail pipe emissions if you don't count =
the=20
nitrogen <BR>from the air being affected. The emissions are=20
somewhere else where the <BR>hydrogen is produced and =
liquified. San=20
francisco dredges their harbor <BR>electrically so there are is no air=20
pollution. Or so they would like you to <BR>think but they want =
the power=20
plants out of state or did up until lately.<BR><BR>do you view the =
hydrogen for=20
transportation as a fuel or a storage device?<BR><BR>><BR>> Myth =
No. 4:=20
There is no practical way to run cars on hydrogen Hydrogen <BR>> =
fuel<BR>>=20
cells have been used for space flights since 1965 and they were used in=20
a<BR>> passenger vehicle as early as 1966 (GM's Electrovan). Today,=20
fuel-cell<BR>> vehicles are undergoing rigorous testing and are far =
advanced.=20
As of<BR>> mid-2003, manufacturers had dozens of fuel-cell buses and =
upwards=20
of 100<BR>> fuel-cell cars on the road. Fuel cells are being tested =
for=20
military<BR>> vehicles on land and sea; submarines have used them for =
years.=20
Heavy <BR>> trucks,<BR>> which spend up to half their engine run =
time=20
idling because they have no<BR>> auxiliary power source, are also =
beginning=20
to use fuel cells. FedEx and <BR>> UPS<BR>> plan to introduce =
fuel-cell=20
trucks by next =
year.<BR>><BR>><BR>> =20
---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News <BR>> =
Provider=20
----<BR>> </FONT><A href=3D"http://www.pronews.com"><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3>http://www.pronews.com</FONT></A><FONT =
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3> offers corporate packages that have =
access to=20
<BR>> 100,000+ =
newsgroups<BR>><BR>> =20
---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News <BR>> =
Provider=20
----<BR>> </FONT><A href=3D"http://www.pronews.com"><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3>http://www.pronews.com</FONT></A><FONT =
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3> offers corporate packages that have =
access to=20
<BR>> 100,000+ newsgroups </FONT><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap