Is Hydrogen Economy Viable Without Fusion Energy?

[Ivan Seeking]

Again, I agree these processes have been well understood for almost as long as the internal combustion engine itself. So have steam reforming systems and alternative fuels. And yes, hydrogen is an excellent energy transfer agent, but again that is not what makes hydrogen enrichment work. Hydrogen reduces ignition lag and speeds combustion which allows the conversion more energy to torque instead of heat. Now, that sounds like an increase in efficiency to me but you all disagree. So can we say it increases gasolines octane?

You keep missing the point. Let's assume hydrogen enrichment works, which it probably does. This does not speak to the complete efficiency of the process. There are more losses associated with producing the hydrogen than you will get back through increased efficiencies. The problem with hydrogen is producing the stuff.

Also, you can have whatever octane rating that you wish, but in the end you can't beat conservation of energy.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

As for Green Fuels, they make a lot of funny claims. For example, here they are discussing a particular interest of mine - biodiesel from algae:

The Vertigro Bio Reactor System has been designed to avoid both problems. Algae is grown within plastic bubbles hanging from racks in a greenhouse. Vertigro is a joint venture by and Global Green Solutions, a giant with offices in El Paso, Vancouver, London, Brussels and Johannesburg, and Valcent Products of Texas. During a 90-day continual production test, algae was being harvested at an average of one gram (dry weight) per liter, which the company estimates would equate to 33,000 gallons of algae oil per acre per year. Such an output is a third more than a pond system could produce, the team estimates.

http://www.greenfuelsforecast.com/ArticleDetails.php?articleID=481

It has been calculated that there is a net upper limit of about 10,000 gallons per acre-year based on the available energy input, which is absolute. The claim of 33,000 gallons is ridiculous.

 

[buffordboy23]

Hydrogen enrichment does work for lean engine operation. This is a condition when there is more air than at stoichiometric. Hydrogen makes the air/fuel mixture more homogeneous, which permits a more efficient combustion of gasoline during such conditions and smooths out the large temperature gradients associated with localized fuel charges. By having more air in the combustion cylinder, more work on the piston can be done, especially at higher compression ratios, because less heat from combustion is transferred to cylinder walls.

As for hydrogen enrichment at stoichiometric conditions, this is extremely questionable. I haven't seen any peer-reviewed studies that address this specific question, so this suggests that it is not a viable option. A while ago, I remember reading an article that looked at this aspect during a combustion simulation. If I recall correctly, the thermal efficiency increased by 2% but I forget what the assumed hydrogen flow rate was during the simulation. This efficiency improvement does not appear to compensate for the energy needs to produce hydrogen. If I find the article, I will post the data.

Although your argument makes sense Ivan Seeking, I am not fully convinced. The reason why is because hydrogen addition will likely change the combustion products, which could affect sensor data. If sensor data is affected is such a way, then it may be possible to "trick" your car into running lean, which may increase fuel economy but yet could be damaging in the long-term to your engine. For example, if hydrogen addition causes more gasoline to be combusted, which would be no more than 1% since most fuel is combusted anyways, then there is a reduction of free oxygen in the exhaust products. As a consequence, the O2 sensor would measure that the car is running "rich" for some throttle position, which could cause the ECU to shorten the fuel pulse-width to obtain the required free-oxygen products. Thus the car is now operating lean, and it could be possible to obtain an improvement in fuel economy. This is a hypothesis that I plan to test in the upcoming months by using an OBD-II interface and laptop computer to measure sensor data.

In regards to the hydrogen economy, I see that it will not be feasible for a long time, since many breakthroughs are needed, like storage, production, infrastructure, etc. What does make sense to me is that gasoline-hydrogen automobile hybrids, with the appropriate engine modifications for lean operation and machinery for producing sufficient quantities of hydrogen on-board, could become common in the near future. Such vehicles would have improved fuel economy and reduced emissions.

 

[mheslep]

As for Green Fuels, they make a lot of funny claims. For example, here they are discussing a particular interest of mine - biodiesel from algae:


http://www.greenfuelsforecast.com/ArticleDetails.php?articleID=481

It has been calculated that there is a net upper limit of about 10,000 gallons per acre-year based on the available energy input, which is absolute. The claim of 33,000 gallons is ridiculous.

Unless they went vertical? Probably still ridiculous.

 

[RMForbes]

You keep missing the point. Let's assume hydrogen enrichment works, which it probably does. This does not speak to the complete efficiency of the process. There are more losses associated with producing the hydrogen than you will get back through increased efficiencies. The problem with hydrogen is producing the stuff.

Also, you can have whatever octane rating that you wish, but in the end you can't beat conservation of energy.

I don't think I'm the one missing the point, I think you guys are trying to pull a Sarah Palin on me. (Half joking) Where we are having an issue is how much hydrogen it takes to maintain lean engine operation. You like most of the researchers (until quite recently) have ASSUMED it would require a rather large amount. That is not the case; those of us that have been experimenting have found positive results with as little as 3 to 4 grams/hour. That amount of hydrogen can easily be produced by a 350 watt device. But if you insist that more hydrogen would be required, try using the waste heat from the exhaust to generate steam and then run that through a magnetic field or around charged plates to disassociate the hydrogen and oxygen gases. Much more hydrogen can be produced this way by using waste heat energy.

 

[Topher925]

Although your argument makes sense Ivan Seeking, I am not fully convinced. The reason why is because hydrogen addition will likely change the combustion products, which could affect sensor data. If sensor data is affected is such a way, then it may be possible to "trick" your car into running lean, which may increase fuel economy but yet could be damaging in the long-term to your engine. For example, if hydrogen addition causes more gasoline to be combusted, which would be no more than 1% since most fuel is combusted anyways, then there is a reduction of free oxygen in the exhaust products. As a consequence, the O2 sensor would measure that the car is running "rich" for some throttle position, which could cause the ECU to shorten the fuel pulse-width to obtain the required free-oxygen products. Thus the car is now operating lean, and it could be possible to obtain an improvement in fuel economy. This is a hypothesis that I plan to test in the upcoming months by using an OBD-II interface and laptop computer to measure sensor data.

This is actually the case for most hydrogen assisted do it yer-self kits. Not only does the ECU lean the engine due to bad sensor data but most kits actually come with a unit to emulate the air sensor past the throttle body causing the ECU to run the engine lean also. I haven't seen any results of this lean operating condition but I am sure that as more garage scientists put these things in their cars you will start seeing the longer term affects. Not to mention the affects of the metals in the engine becoming hydrides.

 

[RMForbes]

This is actually the case for most hydrogen assisted do it yer-self kits. Not only does the ECU lean the engine due to bad sensor data but most kits actually come with a unit to emulate the air sensor past the throttle body causing the ECU to run the engine lean also. I haven't seen any results of this lean operating condition but I am sure that as more garage scientists put these things in their cars you will start seeing the longer term affects. Not to mention the affects of the metals in the engine becoming hydrides.

Wow, I thought they are storing H2 in metal tanks at 10k psi. Don't you think we should warn them before the metal turns to mush?

 

[Topher925]

Wow, I thought they are storing H2 in metal tanks at 10k psi. Don't you think we should warn them before the metal turns to mush?

The metal doesn't turn to "mush" the modules of elasticity still remains the same. The material just becomes much more brittle and less ductile.

 

[RMForbes]

The metal doesn't turn to "mush" the modules of elasticity still remains the same. The material just becomes much more brittle and less ductile.

The engine is already exposed to hydrogen during combustion, adding a little more will not effect any metal parts. To suggest it will is ridiculous.

 

[mheslep]

Wow, I thought they are storing H2 in metal tanks at 10k psi. Don't you think we should warn them before the metal turns to mush?

No they don't. Most tanks are 3K or 5K PSI, with a few 10k PSI tanks coming out now. The higher pressure tanks have sophisticated non metallic liners to prevent H2 permeating into the metal.

See issue on storage and transport of H2 here:
http://www.efcf.com/reports/E08.pdf

 

[mheslep]

The engine is already exposed to hydrogen during combustion, adding a little more will not effect any metal parts. To suggest it will is ridiculous.

I believe you want to check that too. I assume you are referring to some intermediate product of combustion that produces atomic or molecular hydrogen? If that exists at all, the amount of H2 in the piston from the suggested enrichment scheme (10%?) would be many orders or magnitude greater than any trace H2 found in standard hydrocarbon reactants or products.

Also see http://mechanicalplating.com/hydrogen.htm

 

[RMForbes]

I believe you want to check that too. I assume you are referring to some intermediate product of combustion that produces atomic or molecular hydrogen? If that exists at all, the amount of H2 in the piston from the suggested enrichment scheme (10%?) would be many orders or magnitude greater than any trace H2 found in standard hydrocarbon reactants or products.

Also see http://mechanicalplating.com/hydrogen.htm

Even if the levels needed are that high, which is not the case, all the hydrogen is consumed at the beginning of combustion. There is no chance for hydrogen to react with the metal anywhere.

 

[mheslep]

Even if the levels needed are that high, which is not the case, all the hydrogen is consumed at the beginning of combustion. There is no chance for hydrogen to react with the metal anywhere.

That statement doesn't make any sense. Of course the hydrogen is consumed by combustion, prior to that in a four stroke engine, during both he intake and compression strokes the air-fuel mixture is in contact with the cylinder.
http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/72/93572-034-26C16785.jpg

 

[RMForbes]

That statement doesn't make any sense. Of course the hydrogen is consumed by combustion, prior to that in a four stroke engine, during both he intake and compression strokes the air-fuel mixture is in contact with the cylinder.
http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/72/93572-034-26C16785.jpg

So you are saying that the hydrogen will be able to chemically alter the metal as it flows through the intake at high speed before it combusts. We are talking milli-seconds here, not weeks or months of storage at high pressures.

 

[mheslep]

So you are saying that the hydrogen will be able to chemically alter the metal as it flows through the intake at high speed before it combusts. We are talking milli-seconds here, not weeks or months of storage at high pressures.

The cylinder is exposed to hydrogen roughly half the time the engine is running, regardless of the cycle time, and at high temperature which accelerates embrittlement. I don't think embrittlement qualifies as chemical reaction; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement#Process" the process is due to the formation of molecular hydrogen inside flaws in the metal lattice, worsening them. Since all gas is removed during the evacuation stroke perhaps this slows the diffusion of H into the metal lattice vs the rate seen in a static container, but a same time evacuation cycle is not going to pull all of the atoms back out of the lattice.

No doubt some coating or lubricant can help protect the cylinder on an engine designed for H2, but I think it likely unprepared gasoline engines are likely to see damage with extensive H2 burning.

 

[RMForbes]

The cylinder is exposed to hydrogen roughly half the time the engine is running, regardless of the cycle time, and at high temperature which accelerates embrittlement. I don't think embrittlement qualifies as chemical reaction; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement#Process" the process is due to the formation of molecular hydrogen inside flaws in the metal lattice, worsening them. Since all gas is removed during the evacuation stroke perhaps this slows the diffusion of H into the metal lattice vs the rate seen in a static container, but a same time evacuation cycle is not going to pull all of the atoms back out of the lattice.

No doubt some coating or lubricant can help protect the cylinder on an engine designed for H2, but I think it likely unprepared gasoline engines are likely to see damage with extensive H2 burning.

Yeah, I saw that Wiki quote before, but I thought you guys were serious scientists. This is obvious bunk. So many errors, where to begin. Hydrogen is not exposed to the cylinder half the time, try less than 25%. There is no left over hydrogen after combustion, not even hiding in the metal lattice. Hydrogen is far too reactive for any not to combust. All gas is not removed during the exhaust stroke, depending on rpm as much as 22% remains. There has never been proof of any hydrogen embrittlement on any ICE running hydrogen enrichment.

 

[mheslep]

Yeah, I saw that Wiki quote before, but I thought you guys were serious scientists. This is obvious bunk. ...

H embrittlement is obvious bunk?

There is no left over hydrogen after combustion, not even hiding in the metal lattice. Hydrogen is far too reactive for any not to combust.

You don't know what you are talking about. High vacuum chambers require hours or days depending on the metal to bleed off gas molecules trapped in the metal.

 

[Topher925]

There has never been proof of any hydrogen embrittlement on any ICE running hydrogen enrichment.

Wtf are you talking about there is tons of proof. During the last energy crisis of the 70s there was a @#$% load of work done on hydrogen enrichment and hydrogen embriddlement was a common failure mode. The crank case and/or liner along with the pistons will be affected by hydrogen embriddlement with standard materials, there is no debate. And the engine is exposed to H2 at least 35% of the time. And FYI, the ignition temp of hydrogen is hell of a lot higher than gasoline, about 250K greater IIRC. Do you even know the stoichy equation of combustion in a gasoline engine with hydrogen enrichment?

 

[RMForbes]

H embrittlement is obvious bunk?
You don't know what you are talking about. High vacuum chambers require hours or days depending on the metal to bleed off gas molecules trapped in the metal.

I'm sure hydrogen embrittlement exists, but there has never been any evidence that a ICE running hydrogen enhanced fuel suffered any of these effects. It has not even been an issue for experimental engines running hydrogen as the only fuel. And, I did not say all gases are removed from the metal, only that hydrogen reacts too easily to be left over after combustion. Therefore, how can it cause any ill effects. Your theory that engines using hydrogen enrichment will wear poorly because of hydrogen embrittlement, does not hold water. Actually, hydrogen enhancement has been proven to improve engine wear because carbon deposits are not allowed to form in the cylinder. Carbon deposits don't build up on the piston rings to cause uneven wear to the cylinder walls. Deposits in the cylinder are removed so pre-ignition misfires are greatly reduced. The stresses caused by pre-ignition misfires are far more damaging to metal parts than your theory would ever be.

 

[RMForbes]

Wtf are you talking about there is tons of proof. During the last energy crisis of the 70s there was a @#$% load of work done on hydrogen enrichment and hydrogen embriddlement was a common failure mode. The crank case and/or liner along with the pistons will be affected by hydrogen embriddlement with standard materials, there is no debate. And the engine is exposed to H2 at least 35% of the time. And FYI, the ignition temp of hydrogen is hell of a lot higher than gasoline, about 250K greater IIRC. Do you even know the stoichy equation of combustion in a gasoline engine with hydrogen enrichment?

Calm down and just prove it. Show me one documented case that absolutely proves that the engines failure was due to hydrogen embrittlement only. I don't think you can.