Heya,

Okay lots of talk lately rating vehicles on the amount of carbon they
produce per km traveled.

It doesn't quite compute for me though.

It looks like a decent 4 cylinder car produces about 175 grams per km
traveled according to most experts.
The way I calculate it though wouldn't it actually be quite a bit
less?

Gasoline (petrol) weighs about 750 grams/litre.

My 4 cyl 1.5 litre car burns 10 litre/100km traveled in the city. So
about 100ml per km equaling about 75 grams of fuel used per km
traveled. Nowhere near the 175 gram/km quoted by the experts. So what
am I missing here?

Why is their figure so much higher than mine?

Ben

Solar Thermal Plant - The city of blinding lights is starting to see
green

Las Vegas - It draws busloads of Sin City tourists, it's got more
mirrors than the Trump Towers, and sometimes the
lights are practically blinding.

But this latest marvel in the Nevada desert isn't
a hotel casino. It's a solar thermal plant that
provides peak power to nearby Las Vegas, one of
the most unlikely places on the planet to be
showing signs of environmental fervor.

http://blog.alternate-energy.net/entries/entry_36.php

Get your daily alternative energy news

Alternate Energy Resource Network
1000+ news sources-resources
updated daily

http://www.alternate-energy.net

News Blog

http://blog.alternate-energy.net/index.php

Next_Generation_Grid

1.) First test the gas, ask yourself if the gas is combustible, and is it
sufficient to integrate into your car? Check your car weight, compare H2O
burning power to the Gasoline first.

2.) Check the temperature of your H2O generator, in many cases it
overheating H2O vapor can harm your engine than doing good.

The guys who sold you the H2O generators only hyped, there is no proof other
than their "feeling of saving".

I feel pity for you who fall for nothing, this is why I am reminding you to
be careful. You can burn a tea-spoon of gasoline and see with your eyes, if
your H2O can perform 1/5 of that power then you are Ok to use that funky H2O
generator otherwise Do not waste your time listening to the scam.

Based on my experience, I only see the popping sound when I tried to burn
the H2O gas. It has no power whatsoever to push the car.

YBTUS$$

No. not the lightweight tanks used in rockets for use once only but ones
engineered to operate safely in everyday use.

"Here's what Pimentel (1996, p. 211-212) has to say.

In terms of energy contained, 9.5 kg of hydrogen is equivalent to 25kg
of gasoline ( Peschka 1987). Storing 25 kg of gasoline requires a tank
with a mass of 17 kg, whereas the storage of 9.5 kg of hydrogen requires
55kg, (Peschka 1987)"
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/hydrogen.html

**** the storage of 9.5 kg of hydrogen requires 55kg ****

The tank weighs SIX TIMES the weight of the hydrogen.

Graham

"Yup! BUSH trashed US$$" wrote:

What H2O gas ?

Graham

http://rawstory.com/rawreplay/?p=372

The Canary is not in the coal mine...

Mention hydrogen peroxide and all the sudden we're deep in a muck war
of words and typos surviving a mainstream orchestrated gauntlet
infowar, of our having to defend each and every possible usage of h2o2
as opposed to burning up plain old fossil along with whatever vast
amounts of our mostly N2 atmosphere. Eventually the all-or-nothing H2
likes of William Mook shares what's essentially of public knowledge,
allowing some of his can-do insight as to our actually using h2o2 for
the greater good that such a liquid form of stored clean energy
represents.

Here's another long one of mostly Mook's feedback as having the usual
silly undertow or demise as to much of anything that isn't of his idea
to start off with, along with some of my comments intended to clarify
matters as best my dyslexic mindset can muster:

On Dec 27, 6:00 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

I never was that brilliant at using the gas laws.

Any ideas (or calculations ideally!) how much energy would be needed to
compress stp hydrogen to the 350 or 700 bar figures mentioned here ?
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-11-200...=

I know it depends on temperature rise too, but even assuming it could be
achieved isothermally ? with high efficiency pumps just how much energy
would it take to compress say 1kg or 100kg (1 tonne) of H2 to 350/700
bar ?

Given the phase change additional to LH2, I shudder to think about that
one.

Graham

Aside from the very considerable extra space required for H2 fuel which
makes any hydrogen fuelling of an existing aircraft design utterly
impractical without extensive rebuilding/conversion and 'megastretching'
with attendant weight increases that lose the very benefit of hydrogen's
lower weight in the first place, we did not pursue the added weight of
the hydrogen tank.

Willie has asserted that the tank will weight a fraction of the weight
of the hydrogen contained.

THIS IS PURE NONSENSE like most of his ramblings.

I looked for sources of info about H2 tanks and it's apparent that the
tank weights VASTLY more than the H2 fuel ! Current benchmarks figures
seem to hover around 4.5 - 6.5%% for the weight of the contained hydrogen
!

This was the very best advance I could find ....

Hydrogen's power to weight ratio give hydrogen helicopters gain huge
performance advantages over their jet fueled cousins.

Consider the weight and energy of fuel for the Bell 212 Helicopter
(detailed specifications given below) The relevant numbers are;

Max Gross Weight: 5.08 MT
Empty Weight: 3.27 MT
Useful Load: 1.81 MT
Fuel Load: 0.65 MT
Aux Fuel Load: 0.53 MT
Fuel Burn Rate: 0.28 MT/hr
Carbon Rate: 0.86 MT/hr

Jet A Fuel Energy Density 42.8 GJ/MT
Hydrogen: 143.0 GJ/MT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

So, the standard fuel load aboard this helicopter totals 27.82 GJ
The aux fuel load adds another 22.68 GJ