On Dec 8, 2007, at 8:41 AM, R.C.Macaulay wrote:
If an engine does not exist at present, does this inhibit the search for developing the gas as a fuel ?
Hydrogen combustion engines are at best temporary fads, and at worst a painful distraction from getting on with real solutions. Combustion engines are limited by Carnot efficiencies, while fuel cells are not. That said, The real problem is the cost of generating, transporting, and storing hydrogen economically. The notion that grid electrically powered electrolysis filling stations will be economically sustainable is nonsense, even if the vehicles have fuel cells and efficient storage. The only way hydrogen can make it is through reduction in the cost of production and, assuming no free energy or renewable source is available in small packages to generate it, the development of a transportation infrastructure. The US is way behind in the research and testing necessary to build such an infrastructure. That should tell you something. The powers that be have no intention of developing a hydrogen infrastructure any time soon. If it happens it will be localized and probably driven in the form of nuclear reactor power or possibly by a few maverick outfits using biological means. Direct solar generation is also a possibility. The commitment to generate a major infrastructure just does not seem to be there at the moment, and even if it were it would probably take at least 10 years of research to get high pressure transmission lines working safely and another 10 to build them. Batteries and plug in hybrids, especially diesel hybrids that also run on biodiesel, seem to be the likely winners for the future. home solar hydrogen may add to that picture a bit, but the cost is high and the volume would be small. The answer to your question is no. Developing cheap reliable and long lasting fuel cells and on vehicle hydrogen storage is the main inhibition. That's my opinion anyway, but I guess that goes without the saying.
Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
