Quote :

"Hundreds of semitrailer trucks zipping along North American highways are now powered in part by hydrogen. These 18-wheelers make hydrogen as they go, eliminating the need for high-pressure, cryogenic storage tanks or hydrogen filling stations, which, by the way, don't yet exist. These truckers aren't just do-gooders. They like Canadian Hydrogen Energy's Hydrogen Fuel Injection, or HFI, system because it lets them save fuel, get more horsepower and, as a bonus, cause less pollution. "We're saving $700 a month per truck on fuel," said Sherwin Fast, president of Great Plains Trucking in Salinas, Kansas. The company tried the HFI system on four trucks and has ordered 25 more. "Drivers like the increased power and noticed there is a lot less black smoke coming out of the stacks," said Fast."

http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,69529,00.html

Sweet.

11/15/2005 10:38:22 PM

Quote :

"But the HFI system uses electricity from an engine's alternator to power the electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen as needed from small amounts of distilled water. "

OHHHHHHH


it feels so good to be 100 percent right.

11/15/2005 11:00:59 PM

yeah that is a pretty big burn to those people that were talking shit to you in that thread

11/15/2005 11:02:20 PM

^yes, i believe it is

11/15/2005 11:03:56 PM

DON'T WRECK THAT TRUCK!

11/15/2005 11:12:12 PM

another "who cares" thread. hippies

11/15/2005 11:47:05 PM

i'm sure you like your food cheaper.

11/15/2005 11:49:04 PM

^^i'd say the people saving $700 a month PER TRUCK care

^^^uhm, i fail to see the similarity
"These 18-wheelers make hydrogen as they go"

[Edited on November 15, 2005 at 11:49 PM. Reason : `]

11/15/2005 11:49:06 PM

he just joking i thought -- theres no real danger

11/15/2005 11:56:21 PM

$700 per month is hardly pittance. This doesn't sound economical for passanger vehicles, but I can see it being very effective with trucks if it really saves that much money.

11/15/2005 11:56:28 PM

i'm not up to speed on my tractor trailor diesel fuel efficency? what kind of percentage reduction are we talking about when we say $700/mth

11/16/2005 12:05:50 AM

I didn't say I could read

11/16/2005 12:08:19 AM

Quote :

"i'm not up to speed on my tractor trailor diesel fuel efficency? what kind of percentage reduction are we talking about when we say $700/mth"

Site says that it's 10% reduction or more guaranteed.

When they use as much as they do, that's a pretty decent reduction.

11/16/2005 12:14:35 AM

damn, with a ROI of no more than 2 years thats a pretty sweet investment for truck companies.

11/16/2005 12:25:20 AM

wierd judgement call to move this to the garage

but i understand it

11/16/2005 12:26:28 AM

Quote :

"it feels so good to be 100 percent right."

WTF? As the article says, there is nothing all that new or special about the technology. Its just a new application of electrolysis, powered by the alternator of the engine.

Effectively, they are using diesel in part to create hydrogen, which is then fed back into the combustion cycle. This is very similar to a hybrid, in that gasoline is used in part to generate electricity that contributes to the propulsion of the car. Its simply an exercise in efficiency, which shows that most vehicles are pretty damn inefficient in their current design.

Its not like they are creating energy out of nothing, like you tried to argue in that other thread.


[Edited on November 16, 2005 at 12:56 AM. Reason : 2]

11/16/2005 12:39:05 AM

ahhaahhh your only defense is to put words in my mouth. i claimed that water could be used to power cars by extracting hydrogen from it, and behold, i am proven correct.

its sad then when its printed plainly that hydrogen from water can power automobiles, all you can do is try and twist yourself into a incomprehensible linguistic pretzel.

anyone that can read or think knows that there is the potential to power cars from hydrogen extracted from water

[Edited on November 16, 2005 at 1:06 AM. Reason : -]

11/16/2005 12:59:25 AM

Except these trucks are not running 100% on hydrogen like you were saying in the other thread.

11/16/2005 9:11:07 AM

10% is nothing to scoff at.

11/16/2005 9:47:07 AM

I could have sworn this thread was going to be about using hydrogen to weigh less when going over the scales.

11/16/2005 9:55:10 AM

For cars:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/11/hydrogenenhance.html

Quote :

"Researchers at the Sloan Automotive Laboratory at MIT also discovered that both hydrogen and carbon monoxide (both products of the partial oxidation process of the reformer) act as octane enhancers. Adding the reformed fuel gas to the engine thus also supports a substantial increase in compression ratio. Once an engine is developed that operates ultra-lean, is turbocharged—or super-charged—and is better able to withstand engine knock, engine downsizing while maintaining performance becomes a credible option that can lead to significant additional fuel economy and performance benefits. —Beister and Smaling Such an ultra-lean-burn, high compression-ratio, turbocharged HECE could exhibit the following characteristics: * Extremely low engine out NOx emissions requiring little or no exhaust emissions control * Reduced pumping losses (~5-10% efficiency gain) * Improved thermodynamics (~10-12% efficiency gain) * Reduced friction (downsizing) (~5-8% efficiency gain) ArvinMeritor is targeting release of the HECE for approximately 2008."

11/16/2005 10:10:26 AM

Quote :

"Except these trucks are not running 100% on hydrogen like you were saying in the other thread."

but nice try Josh

11/16/2005 1:27:05 PM

Quote :

"ahhaahhh your only defense is to put words in my mouth. i claimed that water could be used to power cars by extracting hydrogen from it, and behold, i am proven correct. its sad then when its printed plainly that hydrogen from water can power automobiles, all you can do is try and twist yourself into a incomprehensible linguistic pretzel. anyone that can read or think knows that there is the potential to power cars from hydrogen extracted from water "

they are two different ideas. Well . . . not completely different, more the same just backwards.

I'm assuming the other thread was the one about hydrogen fuel cells which take hydrogen and produce electricity to power the car and have as a byproduct water.

This idea is passing an electric current through water to produce hydrogen which is then added to the fuel and combusted.


You make it sound as if you can put water in a car like it were gas and it would power it. But then there would be no source for electricity to produce the hydrogen from the water.

11/16/2005 2:59:18 PM

see, Josh, I think what the point here is, is that you get less energy out of burning hydrogen than you put into electrolytically extracting it... so you can never power a car with water, except maybe with a freaky sort of catalyst that doesen't exist as of yet. This is closer to a car producing its own supply of nitrous oxide, than running a car off of hydrogen... it improves the efficiency and power output of the primary fuel, but could not operate without the primary fuel...

11/16/2005 3:20:03 PM

Why does everyone think hydrogen is the Holy Grail. It takes electricity to produce it which has to come from somewhere (fossil fuels).

11/18/2005 8:27:45 PM

it takes electricity to get gas from oil

11/18/2005 8:34:19 PM

you can create energy by sun, wind, sea, running water, nuclear and geothermal ways. We need a power company that make normal buildings with roof top solar cells to make energy. It may not be a lot, but if you put it on top of every house, every building, it adds up. And reduce coal usage as a source of power (70% or so of US power is from coal, believe it or not).

I agree, hydorgen isn't the holy grail for energy needs, but its just another viable way of it becoming the next usable energy source. The holy grail will be and still is fusion. Once we figure it out and harness the power of the sun, energy will become a lot more plentiful of where we can make hydrogen fuel cells cheapier, be a lot more clean and make it more efficient.

11/18/2005 9:05:37 PM

Quote :

"It may not be a lot, but if you put it on top of every house, every building, it adds up."

and on cloudy days? how about when it snows, what then?

11/18/2005 9:13:26 PM

Quote :

"so you can never power a car with water"

we power entire cities with water everyday but we can't power a car with it? we can but the oil companies won't let us.

11/18/2005 9:34:05 PM

hydroelectric power isnt exactly suited to vehicle propulsion

11/18/2005 9:39:47 PM

haha, sure it is if you can get over the fact that every car will have a nuclear reactor.

11/18/2005 9:43:24 PM

Quote :

"and on cloudy days? how about when it snows, what then?"

solar panels are only there as suppliments to power energy needs, never as the dependent energy source. It would reduce the power needed from coal or other electrical energy sources.

11/18/2005 10:19:36 PM

hydroelectric vehicle propulsion

11/20/2005 1:06:47 AM

hhaaha


realistically will the hydrogen truckers add be enough to counteract the high levels of methane they expel?

11/20/2005 1:45:18 PM