| Author |
Message |
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
 Thu Aug 18, 2005 12:33 pm |
|
| webtaz99 wrote: |
Using hydrogen in a fuel cell is something between 2 to 3 times as efficient as using it in a combustion engine. The problem is that without a nearly-miraculous breakthrough, hydrogen will be taken from oil or natural gas. That's called a shell game. |
i can't really follow what you are saying... Can you please rephrase it for me?
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Five - seveN
Rear Admiral
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 3567
Location: Shadow Moon
|
| Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 am |
|
He's saying that hydrogen fuel cells are basically a way to store energy, which will be taken from oil and stuff like that. I think. 
And indeed, we can't make sustainable and profitable cold fusion reactors yet.
|
|
|
Kylon
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 292
Location: In a distant galaxy far far away...
|
| Fri Aug 19, 2005 6:23 pm |
|
1) To contain steam, although REALLY REALLY expensive, you would use big metal engine things, and possibly, the lake could be made deep in the ground, which would use the natural ground walls to help contain it.
2) About Pyroelectric fusion, I could comment on that, but I'd be giving away provitable propreitary information.
3) We don't need tritium for fuel, we can use deuterium, which makes up 1 out of every 6700 hydrogen atoms in the ocean. That's alot of deuterium. The reaction only produces 14.8936 percent of the energy a tritium reaction, but at 2.4 MeV, and the fact that the neutron that's shot off will likely hit another hydrogen atom and generate more deuterium, or possibly tritium that's more than enough energy.
-------signature-------
Imagination is more important than knowledge.
Albert Einstein
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Fri Aug 19, 2005 8:11 pm |
|
| lionhead wrote: | | webtaz99 wrote: |
Using hydrogen in a fuel cell is something between 2 to 3 times as efficient as using it in a combustion engine. The problem is that without a nearly-miraculous breakthrough, hydrogen will be taken from oil or natural gas. That's called a shell game. |
i can't really follow what you are saying... Can you please rephrase it for me? |
A "shell game" is when a you take an object (the classic is a pea), and hide it under one of several other objects (the classic is a nutshell - hence the name). The game consists of the perpatrator moving the shells around in order to confuse the victim, who then has one chance to pick the "shell" the "pea" is under. On the street, the victim NEVER wins.
What I meant was, the "hydrogen economy" as the big oil companies are pushing it, would just be a much more expensive (read that as profitable for them) version of the same old oil business.
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Fri Aug 19, 2005 8:31 pm |
|
| Kylon wrote: |
1) To contain steam, although REALLY REALLY expensive, you would use big metal engine things, and possibly, the lake could be made deep in the ground, which would use the natural ground walls to help contain it.
|
Please talk to a real steam power engineer. The sooner you give up this this concept the sooner you can start on one that works.
| Kylon wrote: |
2) About Pyroelectric fusion, I could comment on that, but I'd be giving away provitable propreitary information.
|
Yeah, right, whatever. 
| Kylon wrote: |
3) We don't need tritium for fuel, we can use deuterium, which makes up 1 out of every 6700 hydrogen atoms in the ocean. That's alot of deuterium. The reaction only produces 14.8936 percent of the energy a tritium reaction, but at 2.4 MeV, and the fact that the neutron that's shot off will likely hit another hydrogen atom and generate more deuterium, or possibly tritium that's more than enough energy. |
| Quote: |
From: http://members.nuvox.net/~on.jwclymer/snf/pyro.html
Pyroelectric Crystal Fusion
In April 2005, Seth Putterman's group at UCLA published a paper describing a new method of nuclear fusion based on pyroelectric crystals. In the experiment a pyroelectric crystal, lithium tantalate (LiTaO3), was heated 25 C in low-pressure (0.7 Pa) deuterium gas generating a potential of 100 kV. The electric field of 25 GV per meter, focussed by a tungsten needle, ionizes the deuterium which is accelerated into a target of erbium deuteride (ErD2). There the deuterium nuclei fuse about once in every million collisions to produce helium atoms and about 1000 neutrons per second. This device is not capable of producing excess energy, but is considered to be potentially useful in the generation of neutrons.
|
Please notice the last sentence. "not capable of producing excess energy" means it will never be a source of energy.
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Sat Aug 20, 2005 3:06 am |
|
| webtaz99 wrote: |
A "shell game" is when a you take an object (the classic is a pea), and hide it under one of several other objects (the classic is a nutshell - hence the name). The game consists of the perpatrator moving the shells around in order to confuse the victim, who then has one chance to pick the "shell" the "pea" is under. On the street, the victim NEVER wins.
What I meant was, the "hydrogen economy" as the big oil companies are pushing it, would just be a much more expensive (read that as profitable for them) version of the same old oil business. |
Ah, now i get it. Yes, i think you are right. Thats probably whats going too happen. Hm, never thought of it that way.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
Kylon
Lieutenant Commander
Joined: 03 Jun 2002
Posts: 292
Location: In a distant galaxy far far away...
|
| Sun Aug 28, 2005 1:21 am |
|
I don't see why we couldn't use the steam produced as a source of power.
-------signature-------
Imagination is more important than knowledge.
Albert Einstein
|
|
|
lionhead
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 4020
Location: The Delta Quadrant (or not...)
|
| Sun Aug 28, 2005 7:15 am |
|
| Kylon wrote: | | I don't see why we couldn't use the steam produced as a source of power. |
that is hardly enough, we would need huge machines too produce the energy we need.
-------signature-------
Never explain comedy or satire or the ironic comment. Those who get it, get it. Those who don't, never will. -Michael Moore
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:19 pm |
|
Energy only needs to be produced at the rate it is used. You would have to contain the steam, and meter it slowly out through a set of turbines. It is much more effecient and safe to use the same nuclear fuel in a closed-cycle reactor.
Also, the steam turbines being produced today are as large as possible. They need to spin at 3600 rpm in order to provide the AC power we use. At their current size, the tips of the turbine blades are moving at just under the speed of sound. The turbine cannot stand sonic booms (shock waves).
The sad truth is that the light water reactors used in most of the world were developed in the US in order to generate bomb-grade plutonium. There are other reactor designs which are inherently safe (CANNOT melt down or explode) and are able to process their own wastes, so that instead of using 4% of the power and throwing away 100% of the "fuel", they can use 50% or more of the power and throw away 2% of the "fuel". (I say "fuel" because in both cases the actual radioactives are mixed with other materials.)
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
Uss_Voyager
Shadow's Captain
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 1205
Location: On U.S.S. Shadow
|
| Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:16 pm |
|
Oh Well Ill Still be alive we use Solar Energy!, and it gets quite hot here in Australia! 30 degrees and higher sometimes!
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
