BTU Q's about burning water vs. burning gassoline

  • Thread starter Thread starter bbail2x2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Btu Water
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion compares the energy content of hydrogen and gasoline, highlighting that hydrogen gas contains 61,000 BTUs per pound, while gasoline has 20,500 BTUs per pound. Despite hydrogen's higher energy content, its production from water is significantly more expensive than fossil fuels. The conversation emphasizes that while hydrogen combustion produces no pollution, the economic control of energy sources remains a constant throughout history. The importance of understanding the volumetric and gravimetric differences between hydrogen and gasoline is also noted.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of BTU (British Thermal Unit) as a measurement of energy
  • Basic knowledge of hydrogen production methods
  • Familiarity with fossil fuel economics
  • Awareness of environmental impacts of fuel combustion
NEXT STEPS
  • Research hydrogen production methods, focusing on electrolysis and steam methane reforming
  • Explore the environmental benefits of hydrogen fuel compared to fossil fuels
  • Investigate the economic implications of transitioning to hydrogen as a primary energy source
  • Study volumetric and gravimetric storage solutions for hydrogen fuel
USEFUL FOR

Energy researchers, environmental scientists, policymakers, and anyone interested in the future of sustainable fuel sources.

bbail2x2
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I would like to know how Hydrogen compares to gasoline or diesel fuel for BTU which is the basic comparison for energy sources. If water is relatively easy to get, then the cost of hydrogen production is irrelevant. but gasoline on the other hand is expensive and controlled by a few individuals.
BTW, it is H2O not HO2 so you get 2 parts Hydrogen and 1 part Oxygen.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
This source mentions that hydrogen gas contains 61,000 Btus of latent energy per pound compared to regular gasoline which has 20,500 Btus per pound. Of course it also mentions that a pound of hydrogen gas takes up about 10,000 times the space that gasoline does...:

http://mb-soft.com/public2/hydrogen.html

Making Hydrogen gas from water to use as a fuel is much more expensive than simply using fossil fuels to do the task (the above site does a good job of explaining why)...the only real benefit over using gasoline is that you do not have pollution when burning hydrogen.

Whatever society uses to run itself will always be controlled by a few individuals. In the Roman times, salt was a controlled substance that was used as payment and doled out in small increments to the everyday people. If I had the same access to salt now while living then I would be a Roman kajillionaire! But times change and new substances become "precious" to the running of society such as coal in the late 1800's or fossil fuels now. If a new fuel is found, be assured it will be controlled by the same sorts of people (and fossil fuels will probably still be available at that time; and nobody will really use them because everyone will have switched over to this new controlled fuel!). Seen from that perspective, I am sort of happy that water likely won't become the new substance used to run society (after all, we need it to drink!).
 

Attachments

  • NEWS-p14-395_tcm18-99997.jpg
    NEWS-p14-395_tcm18-99997.jpg
    12.8 KB · Views: 554

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
Replies
25
Views
47K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
67K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K