|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:59 am
Kalorn chaoticpuppet Kalorn Chocolate Flavor Vanilla we have places not bought out still, you remember that race that just finished with the solar cars, I was at the finish line and it was quite impressive they made it so far. We have the technology, we can do it, it's just not conviniant enough yet, they are to slow, only run during the day, run out of power, hydrogen is dangerouse and you need alot of it and water costs to much to split apart. It's just not convinient yet. (By the way I got to sit on the solar car from Calgary ^^) Still, seeing those cars crossing the line was a breakthrough I think. is hydrogen really more dangerous that petroleum? It is a hell of a lot less stable. really? i didn't realize that. i mean i thought it was as dangerous as a compressed air tank, but i think of car feul tanks being more dangerous than that. have you ever heard of the Hindenberg(sp?)? its the reason that helium came into use rather than hydrogen in zeppelins.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 3:33 pm
Schildkrote Kalorn chaoticpuppet Kalorn Chocolate Flavor Vanilla we have places not bought out still, you remember that race that just finished with the solar cars, I was at the finish line and it was quite impressive they made it so far. We have the technology, we can do it, it's just not conviniant enough yet, they are to slow, only run during the day, run out of power, hydrogen is dangerouse and you need alot of it and water costs to much to split apart. It's just not convinient yet. (By the way I got to sit on the solar car from Calgary ^^) Still, seeing those cars crossing the line was a breakthrough I think. is hydrogen really more dangerous that petroleum? It is a hell of a lot less stable. really? i didn't realize that. i mean i thought it was as dangerous as a compressed air tank, but i think of car feul tanks being more dangerous than that. have you ever heard of the Hindenberg(sp?)? its the reason that helium came into use rather than hydrogen in zeppelins. I've heard of that, terrible tragedy, also, fuel now takes fire to explode, I dont think hydrogen needs fire to do the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:55 pm
Chocolate Flavor Vanilla Schildkrote Kalorn chaoticpuppet Kalorn Chocolate Flavor Vanilla we have places not bought out still, you remember that race that just finished with the solar cars, I was at the finish line and it was quite impressive they made it so far. We have the technology, we can do it, it's just not conviniant enough yet, they are to slow, only run during the day, run out of power, hydrogen is dangerouse and you need alot of it and water costs to much to split apart. It's just not convinient yet. (By the way I got to sit on the solar car from Calgary ^^) Still, seeing those cars crossing the line was a breakthrough I think. is hydrogen really more dangerous that petroleum? It is a hell of a lot less stable. really? i didn't realize that. i mean i thought it was as dangerous as a compressed air tank, but i think of car feul tanks being more dangerous than that. have you ever heard of the Hindenberg(sp?)? its the reason that helium came into use rather than hydrogen in zeppelins. I've heard of that, terrible tragedy, also, fuel now takes fire to explode, I dont think hydrogen needs fire to do the same thing. it needs a spark, just like petroleum vapors. and i do realize hydrogen is explosive, we put a match in a test-tube with hydrogen in Chemistry class and it was very loud. i just didn't realize it was more explosive than petroleum vapors. we once used some (like just a few splashes) to start a bond-fire and the guy who tossed the match in got his arm hairs singed off. not intelligent in retrospect, but not something i imagine possible with hydrogen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 8:42 am
I have seen stupider things done with fire, in short, beer cans explode! Anyways, the thing with hydrogen for a car, is to make it safe you would need an extremly thick gas tank, and isnt hydrogen corrosive?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:05 am
Chocolate Flavor Vanilla I have seen stupider things done with fire, in short, beer cans explode! Anyways, the thing with hydrogen for a car, is to make it safe you would need an extremly thick gas tank, and isnt hydrogen corrosive? probably, but i envisioned people just trading up the entire tank, like disconnecting the empty hydrogen tank and inserting a new one. i'm getting these would be kept in compressed air canister to save on volume.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 3:39 pm
yeah, it would probably be kept compressed, but that makes it even more explosive. i know that from smashing a compressed butane lighter. but in certain cases, it wouldnt make a huge difference. like i plan to get a rice rocket at some point, and yer straddling the gas tank on one of those, so more explosive fuel wont make a difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:00 pm
Schildkrote yeah, it would probably be kept compressed, but that makes it even more explosive. i know that from smashing a compressed butane lighter. but in certain cases, it wouldnt make a huge difference. like i plan to get a rice rocket at some point, and yer straddling the gas tank on one of those, so more explosive fuel wont make a difference. "rice rocket," huh? i haven't heard them called that before. i have heard "crotch rockets" though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:43 pm
Schildkrote yeah, it would probably be kept compressed, but that makes it even more explosive. i know that from smashing a compressed butane lighter. but in certain cases, it wouldnt make a huge difference. like i plan to get a rice rocket at some point, and yer straddling the gas tank on one of those, so more explosive fuel wont make a difference. speaking of butane, I thought of a good example for how dangerouse this could be, butane is one of the weakest fuels out there, its lighter fluid. We used butane to build a rocket in mechanics (our teacher helped us lol) anyways, we made a cannan that could launce a tenis ball the length of a football feild, imagine a stronger gas and something heavier, even if the hydrogen in a compressed tank didnt explode it would get propelled, chances are towards a car. I'd expect that it would go a fair distance with alot of force. Very dangerouse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:37 pm
Chocolate Flavor Vanilla Schildkrote yeah, it would probably be kept compressed, but that makes it even more explosive. i know that from smashing a compressed butane lighter. but in certain cases, it wouldnt make a huge difference. like i plan to get a rice rocket at some point, and yer straddling the gas tank on one of those, so more explosive fuel wont make a difference. speaking of butane, I thought of a good example for how dangerouse this could be, butane is one of the weakest fuels out there, its lighter fluid. We used butane to build a rocket in mechanics (our teacher helped us lol) anyways, we made a cannan that could launce a tenis ball the length of a football feild, imagine a stronger gas and something heavier, even if the hydrogen in a compressed tank didnt explode it would get propelled, chances are towards a car. I'd expect that it would go a fair distance with alot of force. Very dangerouse. godd reason not to put it in normal cars, that. but street racers would love that kinda s**t. aim a nozzle backwards and vent the gas out for a massive speed boost. that kinda outdoes nitrus, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 10:40 pm
Schildkrote Chocolate Flavor Vanilla Schildkrote yeah, it would probably be kept compressed, but that makes it even more explosive. i know that from smashing a compressed butane lighter. but in certain cases, it wouldnt make a huge difference. like i plan to get a rice rocket at some point, and yer straddling the gas tank on one of those, so more explosive fuel wont make a difference. speaking of butane, I thought of a good example for how dangerouse this could be, butane is one of the weakest fuels out there, its lighter fluid. We used butane to build a rocket in mechanics (our teacher helped us lol) anyways, we made a cannan that could launce a tenis ball the length of a football feild, imagine a stronger gas and something heavier, even if the hydrogen in a compressed tank didnt explode it would get propelled, chances are towards a car. I'd expect that it would go a fair distance with alot of force. Very dangerouse. godd reason not to put it in normal cars, that. but street racers would love that kinda s**t. aim a nozzle backwards and vent the gas out for a massive speed boost. that kinda outdoes nitrus, in my opinion. I think NO2 would do better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 3:33 pm
Chocolate Flavor Vanilla Schildkrote Chocolate Flavor Vanilla Schildkrote yeah, it would probably be kept compressed, but that makes it even more explosive. i know that from smashing a compressed butane lighter. but in certain cases, it wouldnt make a huge difference. like i plan to get a rice rocket at some point, and yer straddling the gas tank on one of those, so more explosive fuel wont make a difference. speaking of butane, I thought of a good example for how dangerouse this could be, butane is one of the weakest fuels out there, its lighter fluid. We used butane to build a rocket in mechanics (our teacher helped us lol) anyways, we made a cannan that could launce a tenis ball the length of a football feild, imagine a stronger gas and something heavier, even if the hydrogen in a compressed tank didnt explode it would get propelled, chances are towards a car. I'd expect that it would go a fair distance with alot of force. Very dangerouse. godd reason not to put it in normal cars, that. but street racers would love that kinda s**t. aim a nozzle backwards and vent the gas out for a massive speed boost. that kinda outdoes nitrus, in my opinion. I think NO2 would do better. even if its just cause nauss wont cut a car in half when it nails a telephone pole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:53 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 7:56 pm
hey i just saw this thing on Nova about fuel cells. the mentioned the pros and cons and didn't mention that hydrogen is dangerously explosive. i mean i know it is, but i think if it was worse that petroleum the would've mentioned it. they did mention that hydrogen is a green-house gas, thus it might not make as big of a dent is global warming. also that they could get oxygen from the atomsphere, but they'd need hydrogen to be in a tank, and compressing and super-cooling takes lots of energy as does spliting the water again. so it might not actually be so environmentally favorable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 12:22 am
Kalorn hey i just saw this thing on Nova about fuel cells. the mentioned the pros and cons and didn't mention that hydrogen is dangerously explosive. i mean i know it is, but i think if it was worse that petroleum the would've mentioned it. they did mention that hydrogen is a green-house gas, thus it might not make as big of a dent is global warming. also that they could get oxygen from the atomsphere, but they'd need hydrogen to be in a tank, and compressing and super-cooling takes lots of energy as does spliting the water again. so it might not actually be so environmentally favorable. I saw the end of that one a couple of weeks ago, I'm not sure about it, I dont think they were taking avount of the explosive tendencies maybe because of a thick tank, anyways, the process is simply, since hydrogen is a duotomic molecule, split two of them apart from each other and use them, since they will have a charge, one of a charge of +1 and one -1, they could use it for power, they dont burn it, so they dont need to worry about the gases, just disposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
