I was not happy with this article

[demographic]

I heard something about the Shetland Isles on the radio a while ago.
Was about them using wind turbines to produce electricity and then shipping containers (easy to carry, modular size) with equipment in them to split water into hydrogen and oxygen and store it till the energy was needed and then it was recombined to produce electricity.

This to a large extent alleviated the over generation peaks and under generation troughs normally associated with wind turbines and would be dead handy for filling up those cars.

 

[santaman2000]

This is only 63 grand

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34647343

Out soon and it isnt that far out of the average persons price bracket, so soon it will be inside it. If petrol is 4 quid for 40 miles thats only ~500,000 miles before you brake even on a petrol model

That's about $92, 818.12. That would seem between 2 and 3 times the average persons vehicle budget. Even more for those used to buying used vehicles.

 

[petrochemicals]

That's about $92, 818.12. That would seem between 2 and 3 times the average persons vehicle budget. Even more for those used to buying used vehicles.

Well you have to think that the fuel will be as good as free I you make it yourself for your own consumption. I know in the states its alot cheaper fuel wise, about 2 quid or 3 dollars a gallon? But you do do alot more miles. Iff you go for 60,000 in fuel its still 20,000 gallons, but if you do 800000miles, 100,000miles a year, its not bad with a round trip each day of 275 miles.

You cannot please them all anyway, people are now moaningabout the trainfares in britian. A year ticket for travel of 300miles return costs you 10,000. If its actually add it up, 600 miles a day for 365 days actuallycomesin at 219000 miles, which would cost you over 20,000 pounds at 40mpg in a car you have to payfor, maintain, insure tax, and DRIVE every day, so really its a good deal !

 

[santaman2000]

Well you have to think that the fuel will be as good as free I you make it yourself for your own consumption. I know in the states its alot cheaper fuel wise, about 2 quid or 3 dollars a gallon? But you do do alot more miles. Iff you go for 60,000 in fuel its still 20,000 gallons, but if you do 800000miles, 100,000miles a year, its not bad with a round trip each day of 275 miles.

You cannot please them all anyway, people are now moaningabout the trainfares in britian. A year ticket for travel of 300miles return costs you 10,000. If its actually add it up, 600 miles a day for 365 days actuallycomesin at 219000 miles, which would cost you over 20,000 pounds at 40mpg in a car you have to payfor, maintain, insure tax, and DRIVE every day, so really its a good deal !

Possibly. But the main flies in the ointment are:
1)We still don't know how long the vehicle will last (will it be roadworthy long enough to recoup the extra purchase cost?)
2)Is it feasible for heavier vehicles (the single most popular vehicle here is the pick-up)
3) Most drivers here average from 15k miles to 30K miles per year (per vehicle) so it would take longer to recoup

I do like the idea; just want to see more first.

Gas (petrol here is less than $2 per gallon (add 25% to adjust for larger UK gallons) and going down. I've never driven a vehicle (other than a motorcycle) that gets 40 MPG (not even when converting to UK gallons) My truck gets around 16 MPG (US gallons so about 20 MPG UK gallons) Less with a full load or city/woods driving.

 

[mrcharly]

Possibly. But the main flies in the ointment are:
1)We still don't know how long the vehicle will last (will it be roadworthy long enough to recoup the extra purchase cost?)
2)Is it feasible for heavier vehicles (the single most popular vehicle here is the pick-up)
.

Propulsion by electric motor has been the preferred system for super-heavy machinery for decades. Electric motors create max torque at zero revs.

So sure, a hydrogen-fuel-cell electric vehicle would be practical for heavier vehicles.

 

[dewi]

Well you have to think that the fuel will be as good as free I you make it yourself for your own consumption.

Puzzled to why you think the average person would be able to make the fuel for free? The equipment needed to do it yourself costs... and its not cheap, so that expense would need to be added to the purchase price of the car. Then there is the permission to house it wherever you're going to put it... doubt councils will just allow the generators anywhere.... and finally, does everyone have the room for a hydrogen generator? What about the people with no driveway or garden?

Assuming the fuel to be free is daft. They'll charge a market rate for hydrogen, and as it's a new innovation and will cost them money for the infrastructure... you can bet it'll be more than conventional fuel... at least at first.

 

[dewi]

Possibly. But the main flies in the ointment are:
1)We still don't know how long the vehicle will last (will it be roadworthy long enough to recoup the extra purchase cost?)
2)Is it feasible for heavier vehicles (the single most popular vehicle here is the pick-up)
3) Most drivers here average from 15k miles to 30K miles per year (per vehicle) so it would take longer to recoup

I do like the idea; just want to see more first.

Gas (petrol here is less than $2 per gallon (add 25% to adjust for larger UK gallons) and going down. I've never driven a vehicle (other than a motorcycle) that gets 40 MPG (not even when converting to UK gallons) My truck gets around 16 MPG (US gallons so about 20 MPG UK gallons) Less with a full load or city/woods driving.

Hydrogen can run a standard petrol engine... so question 1... how long does you standard petrol powered car last?

Same goes for question 2. Hydrogen engines are no different to petrol engines, so it'll run a pickup.

Question 3. How long does it take you to recoup the cost of a standard petrol car after purchase? Its irrelevant... you're not buying a hydrogen car to save money, you're buying it because its zero emissions. The fact it effectively runs from water makes no difference whatsoever as you clearly stated above... the energy companies will own the rights to distributing the fuel, so they'll hike up the prices to the maximum they can get. One of the many benefits of the free market... you'll probably be charged more for putting water in your tank than you're currently charged for fossil fuels.

 

[mrcharly]

I think you are missing the point, dewi. These are electric-motor-engined-cars, using a hydrogen fuel cell as the source of electricity.

Theoretically these should be far superior to current electric cars, providing super-fast refill (even quicker than petrol) and light energy storage.

The problems are mainly to do with the storage of the hydrogen in the car. It has a low energy density so you have a bulky fuel tank. It's also notorious for corroding seals.
People get worried about safety ("doesn't hydrogen explode, just look at the hindenburg!") but hydrogen is actually pretty safe stuff compared to petrol vapour.

 

[dewi]

I think you are missing the point, dewi. These are electric-motor-engined-cars, using a hydrogen fuel cell as the source of electricity.

Theoretically these should be far superior to current electric cars, providing super-fast refill (even quicker than petrol) and light energy storage.

The problems are mainly to do with the storage of the hydrogen in the car. It has a low energy density so you have a bulky fuel tank. It's also notorious for corroding seals.
People get worried about safety ("doesn't hydrogen explode, just look at the hindenburg!") but hydrogen is actually pretty safe stuff compared to petrol vapour.

I think you're missing the point charly... you're talking about hydrogen-electric hybrids.... I'm talking about hydrogen cars.

Fully aware of what the hybrid does, but using hydrogen and storing it, can't really see the difference... all the fuss made over LPG used the same arguments (other than the Hindenburg).

Toyota have already hinted that they're not putting their all into their hybrids, primarily because they've been carrying on the work that Fleischmann and Pons began. Those two were ridiculed at the time for their discovery, but Toyota read the papers they'd published and immediately set up a research centre in France. Recently there has been mutterings about it, but using a completely different description than Fleischmann and Pons gave it... nobody wants handbags at dawn with the scientists again.

 

[mrcharly]

I think you're missing the point charly... you're talking about hydrogen-electric hybrids.... I'm talking about hydrogen cars.

Fully aware of what the hybrid does, but using hydrogen and storing it, can't really see the difference... all the fuss made over LPG used the same arguments (other than the Hindenburg).

Toyota have already hinted that they're not putting their all into their hybrids, primarily because they've been carrying on the work that Fleischmann and Pons began. Those two were ridiculed at the time for their discovery, but Toyota read the papers they'd published and immediately set up a research centre in France. Recently there has been mutterings about it, but using a completely different description than Fleischmann and Pons gave it... nobody wants handbags at dawn with the scientists again.

The original link was to an article about fuel-cell cars.

There are multiple models being tested in Yorkshire right now. There is an experimental hydrogen-producing station - it's not cracking hydrocarbons, they are working from water I believe. Highly experimental so years away from practical use.

 

[dewi]

The original link was to an article about fuel-cell cars.

There are multiple models being tested in Yorkshire right now. There is an experimental hydrogen-producing station - it's not cracking hydrocarbons, they are working from water I believe. Highly experimental so years away from practical use.

There are already functional stations working in Norway, and I posted up a portable station earlier. The technology to deliver this has been around for a while, but for reasons unknown, the delivery to the general populous has taken its time.

Can't think why?? Almost as if somebody somewhere wants us to carry on using fossil fuels.

Just like LPG, hydrogen can be fed (with modifications) into a standard petrol engine... far less efficient than the hydrogen-electric versions, but then the hydrogen-electric versions cost a lot more than a standard car.

Back to the stations though, there are designs that work from both solar and wind power... but they don't just sit their producing hydrogen. The Norwegian version charges electric cars, generates power for the local area and supports the station itself... its conceivable that they could tag on hotels to the stations, maybe more.

Will the fossil fuel providers buy into hydrogen though?

 

[David LaFerney]

Do many people really commute hundreds of miles a day? Sounds like a real need to encourage/allow them to live much closer to where they work/shop/worship/etc. Preferably walking distance.

 

[mrcharly]

Do many people really commute hundreds of miles a day? Sounds like a real need to encourage/allow them to live much closer to where they work/shop/worship/etc. Preferably walking distance.

Yes, they do.

What you are probably not realising is that even relatively short commuting distances (20miles or so) can be 2-3 thousand pounds a year by train. Driving might not be an option because there isn't parking near work, or maybe you have children and your partner needs the car to transport them to and from school.

I have colleagues in the USA who have (driving) commutes of 1.5hours each way and it is really not possible for them to move close to work.

 

[dewi]

Do many people really commute hundreds of miles a day? Sounds like a real need to encourage/allow them to live much closer to where they work/shop/worship/etc. Preferably walking distance.

Thats not possible though.

Example, I worked as a sub-contractor to a company that manufactured buses. Their initial depot was in the North West of England, less than 20 miles from me. Due to restructuring, they moved to the North East of England and this meant a daily drive of over 150 miles. When I got to the new site, a lot of the employees from the NW depot were there. Their only choice if they wanted to work for the firm was to travel to North East, but relocating their family to the North East at such short notice was impossible, so many were traveling between 150 and 200 miles a day to get to work. Besides, like me many were on short term contract, so once the job was completed there was no need to travel to site any more, there would be a new site to travel to and that might be in London or Glasgow... again another short term contract.

Millions of people can not afford to live near where they work, London is a prime example. They have to live on the outskirts and travel in. London has good public transport links, but that isn't the case in the rest of the country, so there is little choice for many, they have to travel in by car.

Another example, if I worked daily in Manchester and say I started at 9am, I would need to catch 2 buses and a train to get there. The cost of this would be far greater than driving into Manchester and whereas I'd have to set off at 8am to get to work, I'd be setting off at 6am if I used public transport. The reverse would happen in an evening, increasing my work day by 4 hours everyday and tripling the cost to get me to work. Or looking at it collectively... its a choice between £10 per day travel and a 10 hour total work/travel day, or £30 per day travel and a 14 hour total work/travel day. Millions of workers face that dilemma... and for some its worse still because they have no public transport links that would get them to work... so the workforce is trapped into traveling by car... then penalised for it at every opportunity because the politicians only see things from London perspective where there are dozens of ways to get to work via public transport... and the costs are subsidised (although you wouldn't think it given the cost of rail fares down that way).

 

[mrcharly]

the politicians only see things from London perspective where there are dozens of ways to get to work via public transport... and the costs are subsidised (although you wouldn't think it given the cost of rail fares down that way).

They get more subsidies in London - and per mile it is often much, much cheaper than up here.
One of my step-daughters commutes to London from Essex, about the same distance I have from York. Her fares are 2/3rds the cost of York-Leeds.
Buses in London are really cheap compared to the North.

 

[dewi]

They get more subsidies in London - and per mile it is often much, much cheaper than up here.
One of my step-daughters commutes to London from Essex, about the same distance I have from York. Her fares are 2/3rds the cost of York-Leeds.
Buses in London are really cheap compared to the North.

It probably doesn't seem that way to the people using the London transport network, but yep, they're subsidised... not only that they have access to the so-called Boris Bikes... again, heavily subsidised by the taxpayer.

In contrast, it is dearer to travel by car around London and parking is extortionate... but with the transport network they have, there is little or no need for a car.

All that, and we're only talking about personal transport for work... when we get to goods in transit, parcel companies/general mail, social travel and the self-employed... none of that works with public transport at all. The travel by road is unavoidable.

 

[David LaFerney]

What % of the employeed population lives with 30 minutes or so of work/school? Where I live I would say that is probably 90%. Suddenly small town suburban America sounds a lot better. Even most Nashville commuters (the nearest largish city) probably only have a 30-40 minute drive most days - unless there is an unusual traffic problem.

 

[mrcharly]

What % of the employeed population lives with 30 minutes or so of work/school? Where I live I would say that is probably 90%. Suddenly small town suburban America sounds a lot better. Even most Nashville commuters (the nearest largish city) probably only have a 30-40 minute drive most days - unless there is an unusual traffic problem.

I honestly don't know.

At a guess, it would be a small minority. But then that would be true for my colleagues who work in Santa Clara, USA.

Small-towns with employment often provide a better work/life balance, due to not needing to commute.

The UK has very little industry these days, so people chase office jobs or contract construction/engineering-type work (like dewi). To keep going, you have to be prepared to travel to work.

 

[dewi]

What % of the employeed population lives with 30 minutes or so of work/school? Where I live I would say that is probably 90%. Suddenly small town suburban America sounds a lot better. Even most Nashville commuters (the nearest largish city) probably only have a 30-40 minute drive most days - unless there is an unusual traffic problem.

Pretty much impossible to determine, especially in the northern parts of England. Our traditional industries are all but finished, so the workforce that is skilled in mining, engineering and steelwork are redundant for the most part. They have to take jobs in largely unskilled sectors such as warehouse work, call centres or retail outlets... and just as there is no guarantee how long the work will last, there is also no guarantee that the work will be local to where the individual or more importantly, the family, lives. If you've got kids in school, moving areas becomes a nightmare, especially if they're at key points of their education. And the cost of moving, for a job that isn't guaranteed to last, isn't terribly appealing either.

Half an hour driving in the States isn't anything like half an hour driving here though. We don't have the road network you have, the width of roads etc.... and the last time I was in the States I don't think I saw a single roundabout. Over here is like roundabout city in places... not to mention the bottlenecks due to the roads following the path of original roads from centuries ago, but that are no longer fit for purpose. Putting in new roads is a big no no as far as the locals are concerned for the most part... and unlike the grid pattern used in your cities... we have very tightly packed towns and cities that follow no organised plan... they've developed over centuries and the majority really are not suited to cars if we were honest about it.

Park and ride schemes work well over here... you drive to an area just outside of town and jump on a bus... but again, this increases journey time, and are only available to specific points in town and do not take in the industrial estates that are usually on the borders of towns and cities.

 

[vestlenning]

The world consumes about 90 million barrels of oil, a lot of gas and coal per day. This is a lot of energy and other things, how exactly could we possibly create equivalents at a similar scale, every day all year round?