Forum menu
It's not all about commuters though is it? We are now in a time when people drive [i]everywhere[/i]...
People are so selfish now, I just can't ever see that Utopian world you predict ever coming TJ. I hope you're right, I just can't see it.
It's not all about commuters though is it?
A massive amount is I reckon.
Nobeer - as energy costs rise it will be inevitable. We can either go with the flow or fight it - but its coming like it or not. Families where both parents commute a distance can easily be spending towards 10 000 pa on commutting costs. As this rises it will force a change in behaviour
Will it though? look at how much as a percentage of salaries people spend on phones, cars, mortgages etc. Years ago that amount was unthinkable.
We have apprentices in here that are running brand new beemers and audis on PCP ffs!
When your £5000 commuting bill becomes £10 000, £15000 then you don't think folk will change? Energy costs are going to rise and keep on rising.
Although the cost of fuel would fall if people stopped using it. So it'll probably flatten out at a level that's *just about* affordable when people have to work really hard for it.
Not an ideal situation, but that's an ultimate effect of capitalism.
Solar panels and windmills are getting cheaper per kWh produced, hydro has always been cheap. Remove taxes from energy saving measures and energy efficient transport and it's not at all certain that energy will be more expensive in the future. Inflation adjusted it's never cost me so little.
Energy no - petrol probably.
fitnessischeating - Member
I have to say to me it seem like hydrogen is the best fit for a long term solution.Accepting its inefficient to produce, once we move it to scale production its going to get better, and the way seems to me, the big oil producing Middle East can switch to solar plant hydrogen production, and ship it round the world using the same model as currently for oil.
Local production can also be made to work, as the big issue with solar and wind in places like the UK, is its not always windy/sunny when the power is required, so needs to be stored some how, so, produce hydrogen to power cars/lorries etc.
Battery power seems like a poor solution on many fronts.
1 They take a lot longer to charge than to fill a tank
2 Range isn't approaching current technologies, albeit getting better, perhaps works for social and commuting use, but not really great for industry
3 batteries are heavy
4 batteries are expensive to produce, using scarce difficult and polluting to extract materials
5 batteries have an intrinsic lifespan as anyone with a modern phone will know.
1. Compared to having the car fully charged every morning? Going to a special location to fill a car up is going to seem very old fashioned in short order.
2. Nor is it in hydrogen cars see links below
369 miles https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/hyundai/ix35-fuel-cell
312 miles https://ssl.toyota.com/mirai/fcv.html
3. So is the equipment required to carry hydrogen. The Mirai weighs 1,850 kg for instance. Tesla Model 3 (long range version) 1,730 kg.
4. So is the equipment required to carry hydrogen. Toyota Mirai price = £66,000. Tesla model 3 (long range) price = £35,000
5. So what? The body of the car itself has a lifespan, everything does. As long as it is either replaceable or lasts the lifetime of the car it doesn't matter.
So, hydrogen is impossible to store, fuel cells just use fuel in a different way, LPG isn't worth a look because petrol, diesel is, well, messy, and batteries are still raping the planet despite the magic electricity fairy removing all the pollution*.
*in the adverts.
Anyone for horses?
pretty sure a significant number of journeys could be undertaken by some form of human powered propulsion system . Perhaps with a variable drive system that makes for an efficient energy usage system to provide forward movement while cutting down on all the storage requirements for empty space ?
pretty sure a significant number of journeys could be undertaken by some form of human powered propulsion system . Perhaps with a variable drive system that makes for an efficient energy usage system to provide forward movement while cutting down on all the storage requirements for empty space ?
Heresy!
Other countries seem to manage those mysterious forms of travel trail rat. I wonder why we can't
Other countries seem to manage those mysterious forms of travel trail rat. I wonder why we can't
Because those countries managed to get the people doing this before they became one of the most obese, lazy bastard nations on the planet.
Hydrogen is total crap: difficult and expensive to make, store and distribute. Spending money on it is a waste of time, energy and money.
Ignorance is bliss.
You think drilling in Deep water is easy, cheap, and the product is clean, safe and easy to refine and distribute then, ransos?
Now consider what's happening to our climate and how best to limit the changes that are threatening ever greater numbers of your fellow earthlings.
Ignorance is bliss.You think drilling in Deep water is easy, cheap, and the product is clean, safe and easy to refine and distribute then, ransos?
Yes, what we should definitely do is stop using oil, and replace it with something equally crap.
Now consider what's happening to our climate and how best to limit the changes that are threatening ever greater numbers of your fellow earthlings.
I have. Hydrogen is not on the list.
We cant imagine it because most of the voices on here are not to put too blunt a point on it..old.
Younger people don't have such a hang up about new ideas.
Hydrogen is total crap
Need to compare it to the other clean alternatives that we currently have...
Hydrogen can and usually is carbon free. Take water, add electricity, get hydrogen and oxygen. Take hydrogen, add oxygen, get water and electricity. Nice and clean. Fuel cells contain nasty catalysts tho but are endlessly recyclable
Hydrogen can be a very useful storage medium - read the links I put up to PURE / Unst project
And yet it's old people who invest most in alternative energy, low-energy use housing, bio foods etc.. The profile of an electric car user:
, il gagne bien sa vie, est âgé de 51 ans et habite une petite ville ou la campagne.
well off, 51, and lives in a small town or the country.
Need to compare it to the other clean alternatives that we currently have...
I'd rather not lock us into perpetuating the status quo with a dead-end techno-fix that is marginally better than using fossil fuels.
Read up Ransos - its hugely better certainly from the carbon point of view. NO pollutants in use. Zero! No range limitations unlike elecric. Its just a way of storing energy and a highly efficient one
If car drivers were not massively subsidised by the general taxpayer then it would have gone already
Not sure I'm following this one, buying a car is expensive and taxed pretty highly. Running a car is even more expensive and taxed massively. Is fuel not pretty much the highest taxed thing in our economy? All just a gut feel but it seems to me like motorists are paying a huge chunk into the economy and if everyone stopped driving there would be a massive hole to fill.
Hydrogen can and usually is carbon free.
How are you going to make the electricity? If you're thinking of renewables, we've done this before: there is no realistic scenario in which we can convert mass transport to electricity (either through hydrogen or battery) [u]and[/u] decarbonize the rest of our demand (industrial, domestic). Hydrogen takes the problems of battery-storage and adds a bunch of new ones - it's inefficient, difficult to store and difficult to distribute. Nuclear? Even leaving aside its inherent problems, you're looking at 15-20 years for new plant. We could probably replace our existing fleet, which brings us back to the problem of additional generation capacity.
No, the answer is massive demand-side reduction, which renders the residual fuel source much less important.
Read up Ransos - its hugely better certainly from the carbon point of view. NO pollutants in use. Zero! No range limitations unlike elecric. Its just a way of storing energy and a highly efficient one
From your posts, I'm pretty sure I'm better-read on the subject than you.
All just a gut feel but it seems to me like motorists are paying a huge chunk into the economy and if everyone stopped driving there would be a massive hole to fill.
In the short term yes. In the longer term, the savings would be felt on road maintenance, infrastructure provision, health improvements, crime rate reductions, reductions in pollution (of various sorts) etc. The stuff that everyone typically subsidises motorists to do!
No, the answer is massive demand-side reduction
No - that is mandatory, but we ALSO need a green fuel solution.
I'd rather not lock us into perpetuating the status quo with a dead-end techno-fix that is marginally better than using fossil fuels.
Hydrogen is a possible energy distribution and storage solution, not an energy source. So cannot be compared to fossil fuels. If you are going to use hydrogen, you have not answered the question of how to generate electricity, so you still need to work on that.
there is no realistic scenario in which we can convert mass transport to electricity
Another display of ignorance on this matter, ransos. There's more than enough sun, wind, tidal, hydro, wave to produce all the power we need and the technology for a smart grid and storage (which hydrogen and battery electric cars can be a part of).
v8ninety - Member
What he said^ plus, it all comes down to energy density. Diesel is more 'efficient' than petrol purely because it has more joules per litre
...by 5% and is less efficient if, like every commodity you measure it by weight and not volume.
Diesels efficiency is due more to ignition and combustion than fuel density.
Hydrogen is not an option really. Although it's the most abundant thing in the universe its not readily at had for us to use easily. It costs a huge amount of electricity to make it from water. Not sure where Hydrogen fuel cells are - it's all fallen quiet on that front in recent years after it was touted as being our saviour.
We can't go back down the fossil fuel route for environmental and political reasons so we've got to be looking at EV and hybrids really I think.
But there doesn't have to be a one-size solution for all. There is no reason why people in densely populated towns and cities can't use public transport or pure EV's, people I rural areas use hybrids or ultra-efficient petrol IC engine cars, commercial transport using more hybrid or other IC based driven vehicles etc. There is no way outside of a busy and densely populated town or city you're ever going to get public transport to totally replace cars. You don't see it in other countries that have much better public transport infrastructure than we do and where public transport is more socially acceptable. At some point people do value their convenience above all else.
Because old folk also have all the money!
I'm not sure you're typical either.
I agree with the point above it'll be a mix for half a century at least.
stevemtb - Member
If car drivers were not massively subsidised by the general taxpayer then it would have gone already
Not sure I'm following this one, buying a car is expensive and taxed pretty highly. Running a car is even more expensive and taxed massively. Is fuel not pretty much the highest taxed thing in our economy? All just a gut feel but it seems to me like motorists are paying a huge chunk into the economy and if everyone stopped driving there would be a massive hole to fill.
True costs of motoring are debatable but most timers the sums are done its a subsidy from the general taxpayer to the motorist of around 50 - 100% - depends what you add in. Every death is a million pounds and include all the road deaths thats a lot. cost of all the infrastructure, all the pollution, all the road law enforcement - it all adds up
Huge display of willful ignorance Ransos - did you look at the PURE link?
Hydrogen is simply an energy storage medium - and a fairly good one at that. Much better than batteries in many ways.
Plenty of scope to power vehicles from renewables. If scotland already produces more than enough renewables for all its domestic electricity use. Doubling or tripling that would mean plenty to run all the cars and trucks as well.
Of course its doable - especially if combined with energy usage reduction measures. simply takes political will
Hybrids have a massive potential in larger vans and up
Hybrids are not the answer. No pollution or energy consumption reduction over their lifespan.
Another display of ignorance on this matter, ransos. There's more than enough sun, wind, tidal, hydro, wave to produce all the power we need and the technology for a smart grid and storage (which hydrogen and battery electric cars can be a part of).
If you think that mass transport, industrial and domestic energy demand can all be switched to renewables in the necessary time frame, then you are completely deluded.
Huge display of willful ignorance Ransos - did you look at the PURE link?Hydrogen is simply an energy storage medium - and a fairly good one at that. Much better than batteries in many ways.
I was researching hydrogen as a fuel source and storage medium long before you decided you were an expert because you know how to use google. It's cruddy in some very important ways, that cannot be solved because of its chemistry.
People saying that Hydrogen is not an option because of energy cost need to look at the picture below
[img] 
[/img]
The three squares represent the area which needs to be covered in solar panels to power, the world, the EU 25 and Germany. Saudi for example has a massive amount of nothing land and a massive amount of sun and money, as well as a declining principal (only?) asset.
It's cruddy in some very important ways, that cannot be solved because of its chemistry.
Enlighten us then? I know about the storage and condensing difficulties. I am not talking about using it in IC engines but in fuel cells - and am aware of the drawbacks of fuel cells. so what else? Its already been used on a small scale for a decade on unst.
Serious request Ransos - enlighten us please
Bimbler - there is a solar plant supposed to be being built right now in north africa - some doubts over financing but its hopeful
people I rural areas use hybrids or ultra-efficient petrol IC engine cars
There could well be a place for IC based on biofuels. If we restricted their use and provided alternatives for other uses, then biofuel could meet those needs quite possibly. Things like diesel from algae or ethanol from cellulose.
Its already been used on a small scale for a decade on unst.
Lots of things are feasible on a small scale because they don't address the problems of mass usage. Scotland has loads of land and hydro potential and not many people - the opposite of England.
Molgrips - only small scale hydro potential. NO room for any more big projects
Enlighten us then? I know about the storage and condensing difficulties. I am not talking about using it in IC engines but in fuel cells - and am aware of the drawbacks of fuel cells. so what else? Its already been used on a small scale for a decade on unst.Serious request Ransos - enlighten us please
1. Producing hydrogen is inefficient (and dirty in most cases)
2. Compressing hydrogen is inefficient
3. Poor energy density
4. Prone to leakage (highly diffuse gas)
5. Entirely new distribution and storage infrastructure needed.
Nothing there insoluble is there? The biggest difficulty is the distribution and storage for sure. Low energy density? Compared to batteries? compared to hydrocarbons yes.
To me its one part of the jigsaw of solutions needed and yes I understand all those technical issues. The inefficiency of conversion wind / electricity / hydrogen/ electricity. That is insoluble.
But then fossil fuels and nuclear fuels are finite. renewables are not.
Not sure I buy your reasons against it Ransos...
you seem to be peddling the message we're all doomed and have to go back to pulling hand carts in the street, theres nothing to be done....
Well even if it not the be-all end all solution, it seems the best on offer to me.
1. Inefficient, but easy to do from solar etc giving essentially free/clean energy to do it
2. Again, efficiency is moot if the renewable generation of energy is in place
3. So you only the similar range as batteries, but can fill up again in a few minutes, non-issue
4&5 - so storage in infrastructure is required, it was managed by the oil industry, I see no reason it can't be put in place for a sustainable green alternative.
I would like to know what you mean by dirty production, I'm not touting myself as an expert, far from it, and would happily be educated on the downsides
Ransos, you seem to have missed the fact that 1-4 have been solved and 5 is work in progress. There are already hydrogen filling points and pipeline networks are already in place in parts of Europe:
[url= http://www.afhypac.org/documents/tout-savoir/fiche_4.1_pipelines_r_v._juin_2009.pdf ]Hydrogen pipeline networks[/url]
As for efficiency, using excess renewable capacity is highly efficient. One of the problems with intermittent energy is the need for buffers. When there are no more fossil fuel plants to shut down as demand drops and insufficient pump storage we'll need somewhere to dump excess kilowatts, the obvious answer is in hydrogen production.