Car powered by compressed air?

[Chieftain of the Carpet C]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?

The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

 

[Kent Wills]

At one time, not so long ago, IMBJR <imbjr@cloon.fucker> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:41:04 -0500, Kent Wills wrote:

And, it would seem, dedicated to keeping you ignorant of other
religions.

I'm fully aware of the Jewish and Islamic faiths, bacon boy.

While Christianity came from Judaism, Islam has no association.
And Christianity is the religion of which you have so proudly shown
your ignorance.
BTW, I'm a vegetarian. I don't think you would have known this
before, but it does mean I don't eat bacon. This, of course, means
your attempt at an insult fails.
You should get to know about the person you wish to insult so
that your insults don't fail.

--
Nessun maggior dolore
Che ricordarsi del tempo felice
Nella miseria.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 22:21:40 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the
Carpet Crawlers <theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 21:11:43 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 19:05:17 -0700, Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers
theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 18:44:20 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 17:17:12 -0700, Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers
theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 17:08:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

vents explosive gaseous hydrogen.

That is what you mix with the air and put into the engine each time the
piston drops when the intake valve is open.

You seem to have a problem with basic premises.

What happens if you leave it in the garage for the weekend? Where does
the boiloff hydrogen go?

John

You only fill it for each trip, idiot. The fill level is enough for
the trip. Pretty simple.

Uh, where do you get the liquid hydrogen to fill it? Do you keep it in
a dewar in the front yard? Or do you tow the car to the nearest
Chevron Hydrogen station?

If you load more than you need for the trip, do you vent the excess
before you push the car into the garage?

Do you do all of that every day?

You haven't thought this out.

John

You are an idiot. It is very easy to fill a small pressure vessel from
a larger one or from a large dewar. When you return home, you put the
remains in the surge tank that the compressor uses to fill the main
vessel. The same compression system that takes the low pressure
separated gas and compresses it into LH.

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?

I thought we were discussing using liquid hydrogen. He'd need a cryo
plant. If he used gaseous H2 at 10K psi, there would be no boiloff and
he could park indoors.

But even CNG tanks on vehicles blow up now and then, at lower
pressure.

Cool video:

http://jalopnik.com/#!5610184/korean-cng-bus-explosion-caught-on-camera

John

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, Chieftain of the Carpet Crawlers
<theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?


The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

The shuttle's main tanks would vent into your garage, moron.

Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

Compressed hydrogen. Do try to think, AlwaysWrong.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the
Carpet Crawlers <theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?


The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

That's the only way to turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room
temperature.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[IMBJR]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:00:59 -0500, Kent Wills wrote:

I'm a vegetarian

I bet you eat fish, though, like a lot of vegetarians.

 

[Don Lancaster]

On 4/3/2011 2:03 PM, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the
Carpet Crawlers<theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?


The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

That's the only way to turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room
temperature.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

The gravimetric energy density of hydrogen per kilogram is MUCH lower
than gasoline when the mass of the CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE is included.

Finding ANY substance with a better energy density per kilogram than
gasoline for automotive uses is totally pointless. It might make a 30
pound difference in vehicle weight. Hydrogen is certainly NOT a
candidate in any way, shape, or form.

The volumetric energy density of hydrogen per liter is ludicrously low,
even when liquified.

< http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.asp >





--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 3 Apr 2011 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), the renowned
"langwadt@fonz.dk" <langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

On 3 Apr., 23:03, Spehro Pefhany <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat
wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the

Carpet Crawlers <theslipper...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?

 The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

 Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

That's the only way to turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room
temperature.


you cannot turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room temperature, you
need
to cool it below critical temperature, that's a nice warm 33.2
Kelvin ....

Yup, agreed.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:55:12 -0700, Don Lancaster <don@tinaja.com> wrote:

On 4/3/2011 2:03 PM, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the
Carpet Crawlers<theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?


The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

That's the only way to turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room
temperature.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany


The gravimetric energy density of hydrogen per kilogram is MUCH lower
than gasoline when the mass of the CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE is included.

Isn't that a matter of scale? After all, large liquid-fueled rockets used
LH2, though some used kerosene, too.

Finding ANY substance with a better energy density per kilogram than
gasoline for automotive uses is totally pointless. It might make a 30
pound difference in vehicle weight. Hydrogen is certainly NOT a
candidate in any way, shape, or form.

The volumetric energy density of hydrogen per liter is ludicrously low,
even when liquified.

http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.asp

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:55:12 -0700, the renowned Don Lancaster
<don@tinaja.com> wrote:

The gravimetric energy density of hydrogen per kilogram is MUCH lower
than gasoline when the mass of the CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE is included.

Finding ANY substance with a better energy density per kilogram than
gasoline for automotive uses is totally pointless. It might make a 30
pound difference in vehicle weight. Hydrogen is certainly NOT a
candidate in any way, shape, or form.

Probably more likely that we'll (as in 50 years from now) be using a
synthetic hydrocarbon fuel of some kind, at least where batteries and
electrics prove to be inadequate. It's hard to imagine an A380
operated off of batteries.

The volumetric energy density of hydrogen per liter is ludicrously low,
even when liquified.

http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.asp

And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline, but dealing with cryogens is not inexpensive, let alone
cryogens that gas off stuff that tends to explode when mixed with air.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 19:03:30 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:55:12 -0700, the renowned Don Lancaster
don@tinaja.com> wrote:


The gravimetric energy density of hydrogen per kilogram is MUCH lower
than gasoline when the mass of the CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE is included.

Finding ANY substance with a better energy density per kilogram than
gasoline for automotive uses is totally pointless. It might make a 30
pound difference in vehicle weight. Hydrogen is certainly NOT a
candidate in any way, shape, or form.

Probably more likely that we'll (as in 50 years from now) be using a
synthetic hydrocarbon fuel of some kind, at least where batteries and
electrics prove to be inadequate. It's hard to imagine an A380
operated off of batteries.

The volumetric energy density of hydrogen per liter is ludicrously low,
even when liquified.

http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.asp

And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline, but dealing with cryogens is not inexpensive, let alone
cryogens that gas off stuff that tends to explode when mixed with air.

Hey, I've got an idea! Let's put one of those in DimBulb's garage!

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 18:07:35 -0500, the renowned
"krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 19:03:30 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:55:12 -0700, the renowned Don Lancaster
don@tinaja.com> wrote:


The gravimetric energy density of hydrogen per kilogram is MUCH lower
than gasoline when the mass of the CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE is included.

Finding ANY substance with a better energy density per kilogram than
gasoline for automotive uses is totally pointless. It might make a 30
pound difference in vehicle weight. Hydrogen is certainly NOT a
candidate in any way, shape, or form.

Probably more likely that we'll (as in 50 years from now) be using a
synthetic hydrocarbon fuel of some kind, at least where batteries and
electrics prove to be inadequate. It's hard to imagine an A380
operated off of batteries.

The volumetric energy density of hydrogen per liter is ludicrously low,
even when liquified.

http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.asp

And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline, but dealing with cryogens is not inexpensive, let alone
cryogens that gas off stuff that tends to explode when mixed with air.

Hey, I've got an idea! Let's put one of those in DimBulb's garage!

Oh, the humanity!


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[langwadt@fonz.dk]

On 3 Apr., 23:03, Spehro Pefhany <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat>
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the

Carpet Crawlers <theslipper...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?

 The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

 Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

That's the only way to turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room
temperature.

you cannot turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room temperature, you
need
to cool it below critical temperature, that's a nice warm 33.2
Kelvin ....


-Lasse

 

[Don Lancaster]

And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline,

A popular misconception and a dead wrong OUTRIGHT LIE.

The CONTAINED mass energy density of hydrogen is actually WAY lower than
gasoline when used in any automotive app. And gets ridiculously worse as
the container empties.

Further, the mass energy density is utterly and totally meaningless for
automotive apps, as voluumetric density utterly and totally dominates.

Even in those apps when mass energy density is crucial, twenty out of
twenty X-prize candidates used something else instead.

The volumetric density of hydrogen is ludicrously low.
Even when you throw cyrogenics or high pressures into the mix.
Neither of which should EVER be allowed even remotely near the general
public.

See < http://www.tinaja.com/glib/nrglect2.pdf > to shatter more
ridiculous hydrogen myths.

--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

 

[Jon Kirwan]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 17:06:50 -0700, Don Lancaster
<don@tinaja.com> wrote:

And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline,


A popular misconception and a dead wrong OUTRIGHT LIE.

The CONTAINED mass energy density of hydrogen is actually WAY lower than
gasoline when used in any automotive app. And gets ridiculously worse as
the container empties.

Further, the mass energy density is utterly and totally meaningless for
automotive apps, as voluumetric density utterly and totally dominates.

Even in those apps when mass energy density is crucial, twenty out of
twenty X-prize candidates used something else instead.

The volumetric density of hydrogen is ludicrously low.
Even when you throw cyrogenics or high pressures into the mix.
Neither of which should EVER be allowed even remotely near the general
public.

See < http://www.tinaja.com/glib/nrglect2.pdf > to shatter more
ridiculous hydrogen myths.

My son did a report on this subject, several years ago, and
his literature search and study (using only official gov't
sources and reputable, scientific sources) showed exactly
this conclusion, too. Whether by volume OR by mass, whether
cryogenic or high pressure (5000 psi) or any other way that
even remotely might be used in a car (metalic hydrogen,
obviously not doable), gasoline/kerosine always stored more
energy per unit.

I do remember seeing something on the TV recently, about
chicken feathers burned to a crisp in some 'special fashion,'
showing some possibilities because of the huge amount of
surface area. That wasn't in his report, since he didn't
uncover it. But I would suspect that if it really _did_ work
well, it would be quite hard to get the hydrogen released for
use. But I don't really believe the report I saw, either.
There was only one source of information, the man proposing
the idea. So I'm remaining skeptical for now.

Jon

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 17:06:50 -0700, the renowned Don Lancaster
<don@tinaja.com> wrote:

And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline,


A popular misconception and a dead wrong OUTRIGHT LIE.

The CONTAINED mass energy density of hydrogen is actually WAY lower than
gasoline when used in any automotive app. And gets ridiculously worse as
the container empties.

Further, the mass energy density is utterly and totally meaningless for
automotive apps, as voluumetric density utterly and totally dominates.

A 24" cube of liquid hydrogen holds as much energy as 15 gallons of
gasoline. That's certainly not an outrageous volume if the car is
designed around it, less than 7% of the passenger+luggage volume of a
Toyota Camry. Even if the dewar increases that by 50% or 75%, it's
still not remotely decisive. OTOH, a 747-400 would have no passenger
or cargo space left over if you tried to fuel it with liquid hydrogen.
It would end up looking like the hideously ugly 747-LCF.

Even in those apps when mass energy density is crucial, twenty out of
twenty X-prize candidates used something else instead.

True.

The volumetric density of hydrogen is ludicrously low.
Even when you throw cyrogenics or high pressures into the mix.
Neither of which should EVER be allowed even remotely near the general
public.

If the liquid hydrogen was 1/2 the price of gasoline for equivalent
energy we'd probably find a way to use it relatively safely (ie. so it
doesn't kill more people than gasoline does), but it isn't and won't
likely ever be.

See < http://www.tinaja.com/glib/nrglect2.pdf > to shatter more
ridiculous hydrogen myths.

As in those things that refer to hydrogen as a "source of energy"? lol


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 21:46:28 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 17:06:50 -0700, the renowned Don Lancaster
don@tinaja.com> wrote:



And the mass energy density of liquid hydrogen is actually WAY higher
than gasoline,


A popular misconception and a dead wrong OUTRIGHT LIE.

The CONTAINED mass energy density of hydrogen is actually WAY lower than
gasoline when used in any automotive app. And gets ridiculously worse as
the container empties.

Further, the mass energy density is utterly and totally meaningless for
automotive apps, as voluumetric density utterly and totally dominates.

A 24" cube of liquid hydrogen holds as much energy as 15 gallons of
gasoline. That's certainly not an outrageous volume if the car is
designed around it, less than 7% of the passenger+luggage volume of a
Toyota Camry. Even if the dewar increases that by 50% or 75%, it's
still not remotely decisive. OTOH, a 747-400 would have no passenger
or cargo space left over if you tried to fuel it with liquid hydrogen.
It would end up looking like the hideously ugly 747-LCF.

Even in those apps when mass energy density is crucial, twenty out of
twenty X-prize candidates used something else instead.

True.

The volumetric density of hydrogen is ludicrously low.
Even when you throw cyrogenics or high pressures into the mix.
Neither of which should EVER be allowed even remotely near the general
public.

If the liquid hydrogen was 1/2 the price of gasoline for equivalent
energy we'd probably find a way to use it relatively safely (ie. so it
doesn't kill more people than gasoline does), but it isn't and won't
likely ever be.

See < http://www.tinaja.com/glib/nrglect2.pdf > to shatter more
ridiculous hydrogen myths.

As in those things that refer to hydrogen as a "source of energy"? lol

Buy hydrogen is so plentiful!

Johm

 

[Bitrex]

On 4/3/2011 6:50 PM, krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:55:12 -0700, Don Lancaster<don@tinaja.com> wrote:

On 4/3/2011 2:03 PM, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 10:50:17 -0700, the renowned Chieftain of the
Carpet Crawlers<theslipperman@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 13:12:07 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

You are going to have a 10,000+ PSI compressor in your garage?


The tanks on the shuttle main engine are not high pressure tanks.

Who other than you ever said a damned thing about 10,000 psi
compression?

That's the only way to turn gaseous Hydrogen into liquid at room
temperature.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany


The gravimetric energy density of hydrogen per kilogram is MUCH lower
than gasoline when the mass of the CONTAINMENT STRUCTURE is included.

Isn't that a matter of scale? After all, large liquid-fueled rockets used
LH2, though some used kerosene, too.

Rockets use LH2 to obtain the maximum possible practicable exhaust
velocity for chemical propellants, and therefore a high specific
impulse. In fact, the Shuttle and other O2/LH2 bi-propellant rockets
actually waste quite a bit of their LH2 fuel; if the propellants were
mixed at the correct stoichiometric ratio to cause complete combustion
of the liquid hydrogen, the combustion temperature would be so high that
no engine bell material could withstand it, even with active cooling of
the bell by the cryogenic fuel.

 

[Don Lancaster]

On 4/3/2011 6:46 PM, Spehro Pefhany wrote:

A 24" cube of liquid hydrogen holds as much energy as 15 gallons of
gasoline.

Energy density of gasoline is 9600 watthours per liter.
Energy density of liquid hydrogen in theory is 2600 watthours per liter.

Effective energy density of liquid hydrogen is much, much lower, owing
to compression and system loses. As well as the obscene size increase
of the containment vessel.

There is no way in hell that ordinary hydrogen can remotely compete with
room temperature carbon bonded hydrogen for automotive vehicle apps.

< http://www.tinaja.com/h2gas01.asp >


--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

 

[Chieftain of the Carpet C]

On Sun, 3 Apr 2011 19:04:34 +0000 (UTC), IMBJR <imbjr@cloon.fucker>
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:00:59 -0500, Kent Wills wrote:

I'm a vegetarian

I bet you eat fish, though, like a lot of vegetarians.

I'll bet that you couldn't be any more of an utter retard if you tried.