Saving Ash from a Volcanic Eruption: A Geologist's Perspective

  • Thread starter wolram
  • Start date
In summary, all flights into and out of Europe have been cancelled due to the eruption of the Eyjafjallajoekull volcano in Iceland. The ash cloud from the volcano is spreading south and aircraft don't like flying over volcanoes.
  • #176
mheslep said:
FrameD, I provided sources for the various relevant combustion facts on H2 vs hydrocarbons, use them.

Those aren't "sources", that's a post by you. You don't address the issue of pressurization, and I believe you're ignoring some basic engineering issues here. By the way, define "jet fuel". Kerosene? A? A-1? B? If you're going to get pissy, at least do it for the right reasons. You're just going to have to explain a LOOOT about how highly pressurized H2, or LNG is NOT a bomb, compared to low-pressure, high-flash point (concentration aside) Jet Fuels!

You also should probably address the "leak" issue. You also have failed to cite a source for your assertion about the Hindenburg, and your "source" in this case, is you. If you want to be combative about this, at least come armed.
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #177
Frame Dragger said:
Those aren't "sources", that's a post by you.
As linked in that post by me:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/explosive-concentration-limits-d_423.html
o Kerosene lower concentration flammable limit is 0.7%, Hydrogen 4% (4-5X).
o HHV hydrogen is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_of_combustion" x ~170 gm/mole = ~7000kJ/mole, i.e. more than 20X more energy release per STP volume.
o http://web.archive.org/web/20060905074536/http://www.hydrogen.org/Knowledge/w-i-energiew-eng2.html", hydrogen's main danger:
The minimum required ignition energy required for a stoichiometric fuel/oxygen mixture is for hydrogen 0.02 mJ, for methane 0.29 mJ and for propane 0.26 mJ.

Also see:
Airbus's work with liquid H2 planes, especially slides 21-24 on safety http://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/dglr/hh/text_2001_12_06_Cryoplane.pdf" .
http://web.archive.org/web/20080607080532/http://www.hydrogen.org/Knowledge/w-i-energiew-eng2.html

References for H2 horrors and 'bombs', about how jet fuel is 'not dangerous'?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #178
mheslep said:
As linked in that post by me:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/explosive-concentration-limits-d_423.html
o Kerosene lower concentration flammable limit is 0.7%, Hydrogen 4% (4-5X).
o HHV hydrogen is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_of_combustion" x ~170 gm/mole = ~7000kJ/mole, i.e. more than 20X more energy release per STP volume.
o http://web.archive.org/web/20060905074536/http://www.hydrogen.org/Knowledge/w-i-energiew-eng2.html", hydrogen's main danger:

Also see:
Airbus's work with liquid H2 planes, especially slides 21-24 on safety http://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/dglr/hh/text_2001_12_06_Cryoplane.pdf" .
http://web.archive.org/web/20080607080532/http://www.hydrogen.org/Knowledge/w-i-energiew-eng2.html

References for H2 horrors and 'bombs', about how jet fuel is 'not dangerous'?

I didn't say that jet fuel wasn't at all dangerous, I said,
Frame Dragger said:
Jet fuel really isn't that dangerous... it requires the proper mixture with oxygen to "go boom". LNG is pretty well studied, and a blast from a propane tank vs. a similar vessel filled with jet-fuel isn't even a contest. There is also the issue of leaks... a fuel leak is dangerous... an H2 or LNG leak is disastrous. ...

You're also not addressing the issue of PRESSURE! H2 under pressure in a tank = BOMB. Jet Fuel in the same circumstances = BOMB! (specifically a Fuel-Air Bomb). You can't drag a zeppelin filled with hydrogen behind you as a fuel source... this is an issue. One you continue to ignore, by focusing only on fuel-air mixtures and relative combustibility!

As for you second link, this is what I get:

archive said:
Not in Archive.



No archived versions of the page you requested are available. If the page is still available on the Internet, we will begin archiving it during our next crawl.

This is not helpful as a source to me, and while I'd like to read it, I'd also like to know why it's no longer there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
25
Views
7K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top