Car Tech: What do you think of hydrogen fuel cell cars?
- 4/12/07 2:04 PM
Free From Arab Oil
by gapman59 - 4/13/07 4:28 PM In reply to: What do you think of hydrogen fuel cell cars? by wcunning
I support hydrogne for three very positives reasons:
- It frees us from Arab oil.
- Hydrogen will jump start a whole new industry that will leave
much of the world stuck in old technology. Socialists systems
do not adapt as quickly as a capitlaist system.
- Nuclear (France generates 75% and Europe generates 38% of the
electricity used from nuclear reactors) can be used to generate
hydrogen.
- Gore's CO2 trading company will not make much once the U.S.
switches over to hydrogen and nuclear.
- The crazies that thought they were going to freeze technology will
end up living in a super tech world which will, maybe,drive them
sane.
The ozone hole may end having to do more with cosmic conditions than some girls using hair spray in the 60s. Computer sims aren't matchine what is happening. So, I am not losing sleep that hydrogen is going to destroy anything.
The Gorite Global Wamring Machine that is preaching man made CO2 is causing the world to sizzle ignoring the little factg that the earth did not sizzle during the Roman Warm Period which was warmer than it is today) is not even a factor. Note: (Coldest April in last 100 years).
Arab Oil? Try Canadian!
by mrpresident1776 - 4/18/07 6:29 PM In reply to: Free From Arab Oil by gapman59"AMTR"
This is a commonly screwed up fact but America does not rely on Arab oil as much as we are lead to believe by our great leaders such Dick and George. We only get about 15% of our oil from the Middle East. Our largest source of foreign oil is Canada, our second largest, Mexico and our third largest is Venezuela. And we're also pretty good at producing it ourselves. So when you say "free from Arab oil," it sounds as if it had a rope around our neck and it was just cut. That's just not the case.
Put blame where it is due.
by Andy77e - 6/2/07 5:14 PM In reply to: Arab Oil? Try Canadian! by mrpresident1776If anyone is ignorant about where we buy our oil from, it's not Dick and Georges fault. It is simply people not knowing how things work. You are right, we only get 15% of our oil from there.
The issue isn't the specific location we get oil from, it's the imported oil market itself. Whether you like it or not, the largest suppliers in the world, have the largest effect on "Supply and Demand" which governs every product in the world.
OPEC, of the middle east, supplies more oil than anyone anywhere on this planet. Regardless of where we buy our specific oil, the price we pay is greatly effected by OPEC. For example, if OPEC cuts production, the supply will drop, causing prices to increase. Even if we are just buying from Canada, a Crude Oil seller in Canada isn't going to sell for $30 a barrol if he can sell it to russia for $75 a barrol. This is how a world market works.
In fact there are independent crude oil sellers in the US, and it's no different for them either. Why would they sell for too much less than the world market price?
This is why OPEC is an issue at all. It's not that we buy imported oil exclusively from them, it's that regardless of where we buy, they have the most control over prices.
This is the reason I support getting oil here in America. It has little to do with "where" or "who" we buy from. It's about getting out of the market as much as possible. The only way to prevent our oil prices from being effected so much by imported oil, is to produce more ourselves.
The largest untapped known supplie of oil, is in our land. We know it's there, we know how to get it, but our government prevents us from doing so. Further, there's tons of places we haven't even looked, because our government won't let our oil companies even look for oil. Plus, many companies don't even bother looking now, after all, if we know there's oil here and you won't let us get it, why bother exploring?
It's amazing to me the number of people who complain the oil companies make so much profit.... well of course they do. You prevent them from exploring, your prevent them from drilling... what else do they have to invest in with the money? Nothing. It's all profit now.
Who knows how much oil might be directly under our feet every day we walk around, yet instead we import it and complain about high prices. Americans can sure be plain stupid sometimes.
Not exactly
by Andy77e - 5/26/07 4:04 PM In reply to: Free From Arab Oil by gapman59It will not free us from Arab oil.
Hydrogen will not jump start a new industry, it will just be another product for energy/oil companies to sell.
It will require less power to run an electric car from nuclear power, than to make hydrogen with the power and run the car on hydrogen. Why bother? Just drive an electric car then. Save you some money and use less power.
Electric .. but how
by plcard - 5/27/07 6:48 AM In reply to: Not exactly by Andy77eI agree electric probably is the answer. However, the technology I am able to find, means if we want to take a trip of over 250 or more, we will spend the majority of the vacation recharging the vehicle.
The challenged faced is to make a vehicle, semi, cars, lite trucks, so they can recharge on the super highways, much like the hybrids of today that charge when the breaks are applied.
It will happen, but after being chewed out the last time I said it, NOTHING is going to occur until "Big Oil" says it will. Their pockets are too deep; they own too many politicians; and probably more patents for high mileage engines than you know.
It is going to take someone, say a Ted Turner, with more money than they know what to do with and a vision as a Henry Ford to produce a car that will save us from the middle east. Nothing would make me happier than to see them drown in that black stuff. Come on Ted... you can do it!!
Agreed, but forget Ted.
by Andy77e - 5/27/07 11:47 PM In reply to: Electric .. but how by plcardElectric has some huge issue. I would never buy one with a max distance of 80 to, if I'm lucky, 100 miles. Forget that. My statement wasn't that I thought Electric is the way to go, I just pointed out that it would be vastly better than Hydrogen. Why make hydrogen with electricity, when you could just as easy use the electricity to start with.
Big oil has nothing to do with it. Even with tons of money, if I make a 100 mpg engine and choose to make cars with it, they can't do jack. Government can though. And politicians have invested interest in keeping oil a problem. They can't set themselves up as the solution to a problem, unless there's a problem to be a solution to. How would congress pass millions of tax payer money out to hydrogen political supporters, if imported oil isn't a problem? Government is the ultimate evil, yet most see it as the solution which is what they want. So they pass laws that prevent oil exploration and prevents drilling where we know oil is, so that there is an oil import problem and they say "vote for me, I'll fix this!" Even though they caused it.
Ted Turner is not going to help you. Ted Turner paid off dozens of Democrats (and I'd bet some Republicans too) in order to get them to re-enact subsidies. One of the biggest of these government hand outs of our tax money, is the Ethanol subsidizing. Ted rakes in millions every year to grow corn for Ethanol. Oil is needed to make Ethanol. He's not going to shoot his own foot off by supporting something that would kills his government hand outs, and tick off his partners in the auto industry.
Just Kidding About Ted
by plcard - 5/28/07 6:43 AM In reply to: Agreed, but forget Ted. by Andy77eI obviously was kidding about Ted. I was just using him as an example. I don't suppose we can get a consensus on this, but Big Oil has the blessing of Big Government. It is a hand in hand situation.
We the people, are being screwed no matter where you put the blame. Oil has dropped, what, $7 a barrel in the last few weeks and yet, we have gone from $2.60 to well over $3 here in Pensacola. Yes, we are some that have fought to protect our beaches. Tourism is strong here and just one problem and it is over... or so they think.
Anyway, I just have to feel that hydrogen is the answer. I just looked up an MIT study on alternative fuels. I understood about every 10th word and IF I understood it correctly, they to feel that hydrogen is the way to go. I guess time will tell.
Ted is your friend :)
by Andy77e - 6/2/07 5:24 PM In reply to: Just Kidding About Ted by plcardI had hoped you were joking, but you never know on this forum. I don't know that we're being screwed really. But clearly in every situation, companies take advantage of governmental stupidity.
Oil dropping $7 dollars a barrel doesn't mean much. You have to realize that the price curves, take a while to reach the consumer. If the price drops $10 right now, it takes how long for a boat full of oil to get here? It takes how long to transport it across the country? It takes how long for it to be refined into gas? It takes how long for the truck to fill up at the refinery and distribute it to all the gas stations?
In other words, do not ever expect gas prices to fall the next day after the price on a barrel drops a little today. It could take 2 weeks to a month before you see it. Also remember that little station you buy gas from, most of them are all independent from the company.
Lot of people don't know this, but the store manager at the store you buy from has more say over the price than the company does. I worked at one, and pretty much, the manager walked in and said raise the price or lower the price depending on how much the other stores were charging. Marathon never called us up and told us how much to charge, it was literally the managers progative.
So if you see a station in the boonies charging 50 cents more a gallon, it's not BPs fault, it's just the manager knows he's the only station for 10 miles and wants to make some extra cash.
Not Necessarily
by plcard - 6/3/07 4:20 AM In reply to: Ted is your friend :) by Andy77eYou mentioned that oil dropping $10 a barrel would take a long time to show up at the pumps. I will take exception to that. The gas being delivered today, at least here in Pensacola, is immediately re-priced at a new and lovely higher price. They are paying for the oil to come. So consequently, I'm afraid your argument isn't quite right. Close but no cigar.
Isn't it amazing to you, that when OPEC announces a $10 a barrel increase, you almost immediately see an increase at the pumps, but when there is a decrease, it takes forever.
I still cannot believe, in this day and age of Internet access, news, and other sources, people cannot see that this is the rape of the American people by a handful of businesses who have bought and paid for politicians who refuse to do anything about it.
I called my Congressman's office Friday and spoke with a young man by the name of Barry. I could not believe my ... well I'll call him my representative when truly he is a representative of Big Oil ... voted against a bill outlawing gouging. Barry danced around and around until he finally agreed that perhaps a vote for the bill might have had it's merits.
Congress was to have had hearings sometime ago. Big Oil was to open up their books, don't know which set, so they could be examined. I asked about those hearings and amazingly enough, even with the other party in power, these hearings are on the back burner.
The only answer to this is to bust up the monopoly of oil companies, and then let the power of supply and demand work. Look at who owns these companies. Check them out and see where your money is going.
Patrick
Amazing.
by Andy77e - 12/25/07 8:51 PM In reply to: Not Necessarily by plcardOk, let's think this through real quick. Why would prices go up fast and drop slowly? Try the switch places method, where you put yourself in the place of a gas station owner.
Three quick illustrations, 2 with prices going up, 1 going down. You own a gas station on a street corner, and there's another station across the street.
First situation, gas prices slowly rise over the last 2 days: What are you going to do? If you raise your price first, you'll lose customers to the station across the street. So you hold out and hope they raise their prices first. They are doing the same thing. Eventually you snap realizing you are going to lose to much money, and jump the price up. The other station does the same after you. So even though it seems like a sudden jump in price, it actually happened over several days.
Second situation, a spike in gas prices. Now you have a 10K gallon tank under your shop. You filled it for $2 a gallon and sold half of it. So you spent $20K and have $10K back. You just heard on the news crude oil jumped in price. You call up you gas broker who informs you the next shipment will cost $2.50/per gallon.
So the next shipment will cost $25K and you only have $10K. Are you going to just raise the price to $2.50 a gallon? Heck no, you only have 5000 gallons left. You'd only get $12,500 from it, plus the $10,000 you already got. Now you only have $22,500 when the next shipment costs $25K... where do you get the extra $2,500 from? Your pocket, you own the station, you get to pick up the short fall. Are you going to do that? Not a chance. Instead you are going to jack the price up as high as you can without losing too many customers, to make up for that short fall.
Third situation, prices of oil have gone down. You are selling for $2.50/per gallon. The station across the street is selling for $2.48/pg. You call up your broker who informs you the next shipment will only be $2.20 per gallon. So what do you do? Drop to $2.20 a gallon? What for? You only need to be cheaper than the station across the street. Then you can still be the cheapest, still get all the customers and extra business, plus make a tidy profit to make up for the money you lost in the first 2 situations.
This is why prices at the pump tend to rise quickly, and drop slowly.
Finely, let us discuss 'price gouging'. It's amazing to me how people who have not even the slightest clue how the free market, and the oil market works, still think that know exactly what's going on.
You own something somewhere that you treasure. Let's say it's a '56 Chevy. You put time, maybe money, effort, into it. Fix it up, make it pretty, not billion dollar makeover, but a decent car again. Let us say one day you choose to sell it. Because you are a capitalist, you put capital (aka: time, money, effort) into that Chevy, you want extra money for it.
I come along, and I want your Chevy. But I don't want to pay extra for it. So I go running to government, cry about how you are charging so much more for your thing, than I want to pay, demand a law against gouging, and force you to sell your Chevy for how much I want you to. Do you have freedom? Not really, even though you thought you owned that Chevy, I forced you do what I wanted with it.
This is American, a land that's supposed to have freedom. Freedom to bring products to market, and charge as much as you want for your product. Remember it's supposed to be yours... you own it. So if it's your product, you own it, you can charge as much as you want for it. This is the founding fathers of our country... life, liberty, and property.
The only time and place where 'gouging' can really occur is when you are in a life and death situation, and the supplier knowing you will die without their product, charges insane prices. Like oil heaters in the middle of a level three blizzard where people don't have heat.
And worse yet, we have cheaper fuel here than most of the world. UK people pay 4 times as much for a single gallon. Almost $14 dollars a gallon. Why people are crying here in America where we have it so good, is beyond me.
Last of all, if you want to blame someone for high gas prices, blame yourself. We allowed our government to mandate fuel formulations ($) mandate expensive Ethanol ($$) and one full dollar per gallon is taxes ($$$) and better still, by preventing oil companies from drilling, from exploring, from building refineries, we have forced them to import oil ($$$$) So with all due respect... stop calling your representative about 'price gouging'... the person doing the gouging is the one in the mirror.
Hydrogen is not an energy source......
by cole169 - 12/21/07 7:11 AM In reply to: Free From Arab Oil by gapman59it is a method of energy transport, and a VERY inefficient one at that. Hydrogen does not exist freely in nature, it has to be made, and that takes lots of energy. After that there are problems with storage, infrastructure, fuel cell tech and safety (10,000 psi car fuel tanks!!) No thanks, better to work on EV or biodiesel or a combo.
HHO works?
by hydrocars - 11/13/08 8:48 PM In reply to: Free From Arab Oil by gapman59I just want to inform you that HHO can really be used by our cars, actually we can convert our car so that it can run with water, there are hydro kits and manuals sold through the net, with just proper information and knowledge we can build our own DIY version of <a href="http://gaspricerelief.net">hydrogen cars</a>.
you might also wanna check this out..
http://gaspricerelief.net
Did they really think this through completely?
by Miko34 - 4/13/07 5:21 PM In reply to: What do you think of hydrogen fuel cell cars? by wcunning
I've often wondered about what would happen if Hydrogen fueled cars became the mainstream car. In all the videos I've seen about the subject, I've seen the little droplets of water coming out of the tailpipe and they highlight the fact that it is good enough to drink.
My question is... what happens when there are a hundred plus million of these cars out there? Is it going to make the streets and highways wet constantly? Sure, a few cars here and there wouldn't make much of a difference, but when it is the majority... a little turns into a lot.
Also, what about the Northern parts of the world during the winter? Are the tailpipes going to freeze? I'm sure these issues have come up, but I have seen more than a couple of future car shows and whenever they mention the Hydrogen cars... this does not get mentioned.
Now, I'm completely against Ethanol. I'm glad farmers are getting rich off it... but the price of corn is now going up and the people in Mexico (and other regions who use corn for tortillas as one example) are getting upset because that is there livelihood. We shouldn't feed our cars with food when there are starving people in the world.
Hydrogen is just another way for companies to charge more money for something we have an abundance of in this universe. There are so many different technologies (including using plain compressed air) that whoever gets the most funding and support is the one who is going to win. The Hydrogen people aren't going to look at someone else's idea and admit that another way is better... even if it is. They spent too much time and effort into it. We need all these people to get together and make it together. I don't care how many lobbyists are against it. Aren't they rich enough?
Sorry if this is venting... but I guess I'm just upset at the $3.50/gallon out there. We had electric cars... we can still make them. Hybrids can do a lot more performance than the car companies are allowing. It's been proven (100+ mpg). No wonder Ford is closing down plants.
The New Zealanders at Massey University got it right with their new type of solar panels that get 10 times the power of current solar panels using their green photosynthesis what-have-yous. If we can use that solar energy and wind power... then I think we have something.
I say no more gas/fuel stations. I want a car that can cross the country on one tankful... if there are still tanks in the future. Is that too much to ask? Charging your car at home is the Future.
Yes you are asking too much.
by Andy77e - 5/26/07 4:24 PM In reply to: Did they really think this through completely? by Miko34This is fruit cakeish. It takes X amount of energy, to move Y amount of weight, Z amount of distance. You can't get a car the drives 3 thousand miles, with 5 people and 2 dogs with 4 suit cases full of clothes, on one drop of "whatever". It's not going to happen. There are laws of physics that do not change just because you want it to.
Hybrids only get 100 MPG when you modify them in unhealthy ways and drive like an idiot. Car companies do not support "plug-in mods" because it harms the batteries. You will void your warranty, and at $3000 a battery pack, you better hope luck is on your side.
A battery powered car will never go as far on one charge as a gas car will go on one tank. We can make electric cars, but not enough people want them to mass produce, which means the cost will be high. And no one is going to buy a car for $30,000 that can only carry 2 people with minimal cargo space, and can only go 80 miles before needing a recharge, and if you go on a trip there will not be any place to charge it.
It's amazing how whiny Americans are. Here we used to walk across the country with mules and horses and covered wagons that acted like a greenhouse in the summer sun, and had no heat in the winter. Yet our ancestor made do and moved forward to create the greatest country in the world. Now, in our AC cooled, power windowed, power seats, power locks, heated side mirror cars, we complain and whine because our Honda Civic with the Bose 6 speaker sound system blasting music out our tinted windows, only gets 35 mile per gallon... awwwwwww poor little American... how sad.
Some of you all need to shut up, and grow up.
Andy likes to play with Mules.
by Miko34 - 7/9/08 6:36 PM In reply to: Did they really think this through completely? by Miko34Wow, I would've replied sooner if I actually cared that much about the subject to check if someone responded.
Has anyone else noticed how much this Andy77 guy complains? Check out all his posts. It's like he has nothing better to do. He likes to talk about the times of mules and horses, but we live in the 21st Century now. He obviously uses the internet ... a lot. I'm sure he'd complain if his internet went down or if his cell phone ran out of battery power, so hypocrisy at it's best.
We have to move into the future, not just do what makes the most money. Yes, I know they had tough times 150 years ago and I'm sure they complained too, but what about the cavemen? They had tough times too.
Cars help us survive longer, as do cell phones and the internet, so why can't we ask for the best? And look at what has happened in the past year, more hybrids and less SUVs... It would seem that if the car companies tried to make more hybrids sooner, they wouldn't be in a mess as they are in right now trying to play catch up. And companies wouldn't be shutting down or laying off employees. Well, that's it. I'm off for another year. When gas will be $10/gallon.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
|
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
