 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsBoatsPaddle BoatsSailingCruisingBuildingElectronics Related Topics CarsMotorcyclesMore Topics ... |
Boat Forum / Cruising / November 2005Hydrogen fueled boating
I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a 40 foot powerboat, 8 months out of the year, likely stationed in Savannah. We dream of touring the ICW, Gulf, Caribbean, and the Great Lakes. Then we calculate today's fuel costs into the picture and gasp! Will H-boats being standard in 10-15 years? Will fuel costs drop as supply demands drops? Will a powerboater will be able to cruise all day for $50? Discussion. -Greg 15 years, absolutely, no problem! One of my university professors was deep in the development of both a hydrogen fueled internal combustion engine and a hydrogen fuel cell. Both nearly ready for production. OF course that was 40 years ago. BF > I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a 40 > foot powerboat, 8 months out of the year, likely stationed in Savannah. We [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -Greg The technology will probably be there but will you be able to find a hydrogen fuel dock in Georgetown, Exuma or points south?  SignatureGlenn Ashmore I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com > I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a > 40 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > -Greg I'd be very surprised to see Hydrogen power common on the waterways. I predict we'll see more electric power, especially if battery technology improves. Also, diesel-electric may be more common. The other trend I expect is more catamaran trawlers, or power cats. Fuel economy is much better than traditional displacement hulls. The PDQ MV34 user 4 gal/hour at 16 knots. > I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a 40 > foot powerboat, 8 months out of the year, likely stationed in Savannah. We [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -Greg "Iceland already has a plan to convert from fossil fuels to hydrogen. In 2003, the government, working with a consortium of companies led by Shell and DaimlerChrysler, took the first step by beginning to convert the capital city of Reykjavik's fleet of 80 buses from internal combustion to fuel cell engines. Shell built a hydrogen station to service the buses, using inexpensive hydroelectricity to produce clean hydrogen. In the next stage, Iceland's automobiles will be converted to fuel cell engines. And in the final stage, the Icelandic fishing fleet - the centerpiece of its economy - also will convert to fuel cells." > "Iceland already has a plan to convert from fossil fuels to hydrogen. In > 2003, the government, working with a consortium of companies led by Shell [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > final stage, the Icelandic fishing fleet - the centerpiece of its economy - > also will convert to fuel cells." The sticky point with hydrogen is that it takes so much energy to produce. Where are we going to get all this energy, which we're already short of? Iceland is blessed with practically unlimited geothermal energy. So they can produce hydrogen for their own use as well as export. Matt O. My opinion ... for long term hydro (I'm in canada eh), wind, solar make sense (usually lotsa wind, solar, and water around boats by the way). But for the short/near term, it's looking like mainly natural gas ... e.g bld has some units selling in japan, fcel units here and there. All I know is, somebody better start building that hydrogen infrastructure (and finish it) while we still have the fossil fuels to do the work. > The sticky point with hydrogen is that it takes so much energy to > produce. Where are we going to get all this energy, which we're already [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Matt O. > My opinion ... for long term hydro (I'm in canada eh), wind, solar make > sense (usually lotsa wind, solar, and water around boats by the way). But > for the short/near term, it's looking like mainly natural gas ... e.g bld > has some units selling in japan, fcel units here and there. All I know is, > somebody better start building that hydrogen infrastructure (and finish it) > while we still have the fossil fuels to do the work. >>The sticky point with hydrogen is that it takes so much energy to >>produce. Where are we going to get all this energy, which we're already >>short of? There is no shortage of energy. There is a shortage of power conditioning technology, like refineries, battery manufacturers, or solar collectors. There will be no actual oil shortage for at least 10 years. Longer, if we each take personal responsibility for reducing energy wastage and usage in a big way. We are being weaned, ever so gradually, by the oil guys who want to orchestrate the last 10 years of oil to be a pricing frenzy. They are consolidating their garrotte on the refinery industry, now. Someone should start up a company to build a modest refinery on a big old slow ship with tanker hose connections, perhaps an obsolete single skinned tanker? You could anchor it anywhere, and empty it if a storm threatened. A refinery is just a big old still, after all. You can make a moonshine still from an old coffee maker. Think of hydrogen as part of a battery system, a refillable battery, if you will. The hydrogen gets "charged" at a hilly wind or desert sun site, and tanked or pipelined to users, who "discharge" it to create a substitute for transpiration, where we cut down trees to build this city. It's not rocket psciance, it's rock and roll. If Vegas's sewers went to a solar lagoon, the water extracted by Zenon (TM) Zeaweed (TM) could provide hydrogen without having to pipe in special water, or poison the ditch to the sea. Is there a runoff from Vegas, a river, or something? Some of the hydrogen produced by solar power and electrolysis and stored under a tarp could even be used to provide peak load electricity in a turbine or internal combustion super clean "steam" engine, bonus exhaust: pure water. The dried crap, sterilized by the sun, would make good odourless fertilizer for corn to make corny diesel, gasahol, and livestock feed, for the rabbits or goats under the sunshade solar collectors. Trangenic goats can be used to produce very fancy medical drug feedstock, and would never escape death valley, whatever, unaided. Serendipity? Problems, or solutions? It's really all in our attitude. We want lotsa cheap durable solar shingles, and the right to sell excess power back to the hydro company, even at 15 percent efficiency, or windmills where we can't hear them and where there are no birds or bats! Low pressure H2 pipelines would not depress permafrost, and could even float on cables above the ground or river crossing using low pressure anti static plastic pipes, greenhouse ventilation tubes actually. Such a pipeline could be unreeled from a helicopter, and anchored in rock, filling with gas as it is installed in the air. Crews could use very simple straight clamps to essentially close the low pressure line wherever needed. Occasional ground valves could contain mishaps, like Caribou antler entanglements. We need lightweight, flexible solar cells to print on the tops of the gas bags, along with the telemetered pressure gauges, like the ones they are going to print on solar powered electro-deflective-gel fleshed orthinopter high altitude balloon launched surveillance robot birds, like they demo'd on Discovery last week. Ain't war technology great? What do you think they use to lift big balloons, H2? Helium? Don't make me laugh! Who do you think sabotaged the Hindenburg, and why? Who promotes expensive, inefficient helium to preserve their old technology? Yup, shipping magnates, the oil guys, the heavy pipeline guys, and wildcat drillers. That is the future, but don't look to the oil guys to put themselves out of business real soon, yet. I said it about tungsten, of which I have a now near worthless collection recycled from incandescent bulbs over the years, and I optimistically say it about oil, Like some one said about buggy whips. Horses might still be popular if it wasn't for the horse muck. Oil is becoming obsolete, just like coal did. There are energy wars being conducted internally, by rich traitors and poor scientist-enterprenuer heroes. Set the army engineers on it, if you want to see a peace dividend. Remember that quaint term "Peace Dividend?" There is lots more coal in the ground, we just don't need it right now, because oil is easier and more profitable. There is no shortage of energy, only of imagination. Terry K >>Iceland is blessed with practically unlimited geothermal energy. So they >>can produce hydrogen for their own use as well as export. >> >>Matt O. Good read. Thanks! -Greg > > My opinion ... for long term hydro (I'm in canada eh), wind, solar make > > sense (usually lotsa wind, solar, and water around boats by the way). But [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] > >> > >>Matt O. Good one Terry! When I worked at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station I was amazed that the "Florida Solar Energy Center" was a 1/2 acre lot with a chain link fence and a building that couldn't have been more than 2,000 square feet. The 1/2 acre also enclosed the parking lot! If you're familiar with it CCAFS, it borders the South perimeter of Kennedy Space Center and combined, the together are about 30 miles long. There are SO many unused pads and facilities with an incredible amount of open land around them. It wasn't too hard to figure out why the Solar people were jammed into the 1/2 acre with not even enough room to walk between the ground mounted solar panels. I guess Washington can't squash development of alternative energy, but they can make it hard to do! The facility has since moved but still only has a staff of 15. Doesn't really sound as if we are very serious does it? MMC > > My opinion ... for long term hydro (I'm in canada eh), wind, solar make > > sense (usually lotsa wind, solar, and water around boats by the way). But [quoted text clipped - 104 lines] > >> > >>Matt O. > Good one Terry! > When I worked at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station I was amazed that the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > really sound as if we are very serious does it? > MMC This IS bloody serious. I believe it is the tip of an iceburg, at the root of which is an avaricious oil industry, protecting it's share of the energy market worth trillions by means fair and foul, openly and subtley. Organisations of every sort are bait for the ambitious, good hearted and bad. I think the energy barons have only their own interest at heart, and can purchase whatever scruples they may lack. What ever happenned to fusion power research, and why can we not purchase light, simple, efficient cars about as dangerous as a motorcycle? I want an efficient reversed tricycle commuter with one driving / normal regenerating braking wheel at the rear, for about 100 km, at highway speeds of about 100kph, with modest accelleration, and wouln't mind recharging it at home from 110vac. Two old bikes welded togeter, two lawn chairs side by side, canvas covers, and a regenerating brake wheel motor like used on the japanese / french electric would do me. Search the net for eliica. http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/previews/51690/eliica_eightwheeler.html Do you really think some oil merchant is gonna give me a startup loan, or lend me a welder? I figure such a beast could go for well under 10K. Wanna bet they come out at about 29K? Oil is obsolescent. The oil thinkers are chewing an old buggy whip. The reason GM is losing market is 'cause they don't offer what car buyers want. They should spend less on ads and more on market research. The people still in the market for a car are the ones who can't afford a huge SUV. Terry K >>>My opinion ... for long term hydro (I'm in canada eh), wind, solar make >>>sense (usually lotsa wind, solar, and water around boats by the way). [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >>already >> >>short of? >>There is no shortage of energy. There is a shortage of power >>conditioning technology, like refineries, battery manufacturers, or [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] >>>> >>>>Matt O. > Oil is obsolescent. The oil thinkers are chewing an old buggy whip. > The reason GM is losing market is 'cause they don't offer what car > buyers want. They should spend less on ads and more on market > research. The people still in the market for a car are the ones who > can't afford a huge SUV. why should they bother to retool and offer what people want when its more profitable to change what people want with advertising and lobbying, hm? I would say that the government's true purpose is public protection - they protect us from nasty foreign powers (via the military) but they seem to be strangely quiet on protecting us from nasty corporations in our midst.. Signaturehttp://maps.google.com/maps?q=ireland&ll=52.2711,-9.8630&spn=0.0244,0.0822&t=k >> Good one Terry! >> When I worked at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station I was amazed that the [quoted text clipped - 180 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Matt O. Go ahead and build it, and then see if you can get it thru the NTSB safety requirements... By the time it'll pass the NTSB (and all the other alphabet soup) requirements, it'll look just like what you can already buy... Forget about hydrogen fuel. It is a non-starter, especially in a mobile installation. Rockets don't count. > Forget about hydrogen fuel. It is a non-starter, especially in a mobile > installation. Rockets don't count. What? You don't want to see a hydrogen-fueled boat light off? SignatureDon't pray in my public schools, and I won't think in your church. To clarify ... hydro, wind, solar energy could be used to create the hydrogen. And it's looking like natural gas, swamp gas, you name it may be used as well without the combustion side effects associated with getting energy from gas. > > The sticky point with hydrogen is that it takes so much energy to > > produce. Where are we going to get all this energy, which we're already > > short of? OK, a little chemical reality here... First, if creating the electricity to electrolyze water by "hydro, wind,solar energy" were economical today, then it would also be true that creating electricity for ANY use (including water electrolysis) would be economical today. In the US, pretty much all the economical hydro power has been tapped already (or is unavailable for other reasons, eg. damming up the Colorado in the Grand Canyon is unacceptable), and wind and solar are still considerably more expensive than (depending on the location) burning natural gas, oil or coal to make electricity. As soon as it becomes economically feasible to tear down the coal-, oil- or gas-burning power plants and replace them with windmills and/or solar cells, it will be done. Second, obtaining hydrogen from "natural gas, swamp gas, you name it" is already the current primary production methodology. The end product is CO2, which comes from the carbon in the hydroCARBON source (exactly the same amount of CO2 is produced as when the hydrocarbon is burned in a power plant), and hydrogen. And of course, the amount of energy contained in the product hydrogen is considerably less than what was contained in the feed hydrocarbon. And no electricity is produced. <dons asbestos suit, getting ready for flame war> bob > To clarify ... hydro, wind, solar energy could be used to create the > hydrogen. And it's looking like natural gas, swamp gas, you name it may be [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>>produce. Where are we going to get all this energy, which we're already >>>short of? No matter to me ... I've been doing the reading, picking up stocks ... about 30% of the old self directed RSP is in H2 "startups" ... bld (bldp), fcel to name two ... and this is definitely long term ... maybe 2020 :-). So did you read that India plans to put 1,000,000 H2 vehicles on the road by 2020 http://www.h2fc.com/index.html ? > <dons asbestos suit, getting ready for flame war> > As soon as it becomes economically feasible to tear > down the coal-, oil- or gas-burning power plants and replace them with > windmills and/or solar cells, it will be done. Welcome to the future. The province of Ontario will see the building of nearly 3000 windmills over the next 5 years. Total output of 4500 megawatts or approx. 17% of the province's maximum daily summertime usage. At a current construction cost of approx. $2.5 million each, the construction costs are recouped in 10 years at current electricity rates. http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/Local/2005/11/26/1324583-sun.html not that this has anything to do with hydrogen fueled boats >> As soon as it becomes economically feasible to tear down the coal-, >> oil- or gas-burning power plants and replace them with windmills [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > not that this has anything to do with hydrogen fueled boats It does answer the question that was asked "where are we going to get all this energy?" That was intended to "charge up the hydrogen tanks," but is relevant whatever conditioning the energy requires to substitute for fossil hydrocarbons. If high compession H2 storage is elusive, it leaves it to us to consider what format for H2 could benefit from low pressure tanks, and that solitary format inevitably involves a gasbag, dirigible or otherwise, even inflated kite sails made from non-static materials. I want a low noise, low cost helicopter style sailboat, and am convinced that a dirigible, pre-stressed inflated frame will make it possible, if a little gargantuan. A neutral bouyancy active hydrodynamic keel would enable an airship sailshape to sail to windward. A longer line should enable a dirigible sailboat to handle high seas and high winds over deep water. Imagine a lawn chair, suspended on ropes by an H2 sail shaped (lifting body shape) dirigible, and using a steerable lightweight leeboard towed below in the water. A bellows able to apply nad release a little overpressure to an inner chamber containing a percentage of the H2 might enable a dirigible to ascend or descend like a fish using a swim bladder only, or water could act as it does in a MAC 26. Tents and dodgers with inflated tube frames are the newest thing, soon to become more popular than cheap balloon sofas? A question in this regard, previously unanswered: at what pressure does hydrogen weigh the same as air at STP? About 8 or 9 atmospheres? Could a kevlar or carbon fibre bag sealed with some plastic film inside maintain neutral bouyancy (in air) H2 fuel pressure? Neccessity is not yet percieved as pregnant enough, I guess. Terry K There's still a lot of problems to be overcome with using hydrogen, or swamp gas, or biogas... or any other non-petroleum based fuel... in vehicles. First and foremost, there's the energy density problem. All of those gases have far less energy content per unit volume than any petroleum product. Ergo, it takes lots of gas to create the same horsepower. Where are you gonna put all that gas in a vehicle? You have to compress it and put it into some kind of storage tank. Compressing anything takes more energy. How are you going to create the hydrogen or other gas? You don't just gather it up. It has to be manufactured, which takes more energy. Some methods allow you to use passive energy such as solar, but take a long time to generate the quantities required to be useful. Other methods require energy input from... petroleum fuels... to create the "clean" gas. Ack. Second, with hydrogen there is a huge storage issue. Hydrogen molecules are tiny, the tiniest molecules around. They're even smaller than helium molecules. Ever watch a helium balloon deflate over days? It leaks THROUGH the balloon, not out the knot. Same thing would happen to a pressurized hydrogen storage tank. Gradually the molecules would seep out and the tank would empty. Not good. So, people are working on storage techniques using metal hydrides to bind with the hydrogen, then release it upon demand. Unfortunately, the "release" part requires more energy input. Third, let's assume that we're talking about using a fuel cell approach to convert hydrogen into energy. Fuel cells produce electricity. This means electrical motors for a boat, and possibly larger battery banks. Ever priced 100hp electric motors, not to mention 300hp ones? Wonder what the power plant for a trawler consisting of a 200kW fuel cell, a bank of batteries, two 100Hp motors, the associated electronic controllers, and the huge inverter(s) for AC consumption onboard might cost? Ack. How about what it would weigh? Fourth, let's assume that we're not generating our own hydrogen or biogas or swamp gas on our boats. How long do you think it will be before every marina and fuel dock in cruising waters has a hose marked "hydrogen"? I think the longterm answer will be some sort of sequential machine: hydrogen generator feeds fuel cells which feed electric motors, or something. You'll make your own hydrogen (or swamp gas, or ...) on the fly using sea water, sunlight, and Special Sauce, then feed the gas you produce right into the "engine". Hopefully, the "Special Sauce" will be cheap and available. If I ever get into the cruising game, and I intend to - thus I'm lurking in groups such as these - I'll try to employ alternative fuels. I just don't think affordable diesel is going to last all that long into the future. But, per my research, practical alternative fuels are ways away. Don't believe me? Go to some of the web sites that promise such wondrous technology. See how many have a commercial, viable product. Folks like to talk about what can be done, but there are a LOT of technological and economic hurdles yet to overcome before these alternative fuels are a viable reality. > To clarify ... hydro, wind, solar energy could be used to create the > hydrogen. And it's looking like natural gas, swamp gas, you name it may be [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> > already >> > short of? There's some sort of mis-assumption that 20 years from now we'll all still be driving/cruising around as usual in H2 or whatever powered vehicles ... my opinion, most of us peasants will be walking. And this I find interesting ... about 99% of the energy that goes into your gas tank is used to move the frikken vehicle ... and about 1% is used to move the driver. How's that for modern day dinosaur ... complete with the brain to weight ratio :-) A light weight vehicle would not require "the same horsepower". A significant paradigm shift is required before even beginning to think constructively about replacing combustion and carbon energy. > Ergo, it takes lots of gas to create the same horsepower. Where are you > gonna put all that gas in a vehicle? You have to compress it and put it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to generate the quantities required to be useful. Other methods require > energy input from... petroleum fuels... to create the "clean" gas. Ack. > my opinion, most of us peasants will be walking. That might be true, but not because we're out of oil. There's lots of interesting graphs at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/perspectives.pdf especially Figure 21, the real and nominal price of gas ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, those worthless US Dollars (or more worthless Canadian Dollars) in your wallet. As you can see, fuel is CHEAPER now than it was in 1980, if we take the awful inflation out of it. We are in a zone of rising (until last week at least) prices. One thing the gummit bureaucrats conveniently left out of this pdf file was a graph of FUEL TAXES REAL AND HIDDEN over these periods. Real gas tax, in SC, is 34.3c/gallon, state and federal. That graph looks like a tangent function on a linear scale. Remember all those fuel tax increases for "education" all those years? Our kids should be coming out of grade school with PhDs by now...yeah, right. They still can't read.... http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/adjusted.txt Here....Someone has tabulated fuel prices in 1979 dollars for you....Hell, fuel was cheaper in January of 2005 than it was in 1979! The graph is on: http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html The REAL devil in all this is the D word....DEVALUATION....There, I dared say it. The goddamned government is running the printing presses full bore diluting the value of the money into worthlessness. Remember copper pennies? We lost our a.ses stamping out pennies costing more than a penny was worth, so we switched to copper-painted aluminum. A few months ago, we started losing our a.ses stamping out aluminum pennies costing more than an aluminum penny is worth! We're running the printing presses sending out checks to people who don't, can't or won't produce WORK....a product to create value. We're printing paper money to cover the checks. "Oil company profits are at an all time high!" Exxon's stockholders made $10B with a B! How awful! But, is it? Adjusted for inflation back 50 years, I doubt Exxon stockholders are making any more VALUE, today than they were in 1955, when a loaf of bread was 39 cents and a whole meal in a diner was $1.89...including 10c for the Coke. Wake up, people! Anyone working is really working for LESS and LESS every year....trading their labor and hard work for less and less VALUE....and it isn't going to change until the collapse, which I don't think is far away... when..."most of us peasants will be walking." SignatureLarry If you plot gas prices against the price of a Chevy to put it in....Gas is CHEAP! Now you're talking... It seems to me we can make some significant progress in this area with technology we've already developed, not pie in the sky stuff... > There's some sort of mis-assumption that 20 years from now we'll all still > be driving/cruising around as usual in H2 or whatever powered vehicles ... [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> to generate the quantities required to be useful. Other methods require >> energy input from... petroleum fuels... to create the "clean" gas. Ack. > I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a > 40 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > -Greg From what I've seen most scientist think realistic fuel cell technology...including the distribution factor in the equation, is at least 20-30 years out. Another big sticking point is the unknown -- if you believe in the human induced global warming theory then we must be concerned with fuel cell technology. The primary emission of a hydrogen powered engine is water vapor; of the "greenhouse gases" water vapor is the most prominent followed by CO2. So, what happens if we begin releasing millions/billions of pounds of previously unreleased water vapor...will it exacerbate global warming? Unintended consequences? As we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. > I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a 40 > foot powerboat, 8 months out of the year, likely stationed in Savannah. We [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -Greg Only if he is willing to cruise at about 3 knots, on account of the hull speed rise in drag. At really low speeds, boats can be very efficient. At high speed, forget it, you would need a nuclear reactor if regular fuel won't do. At economical speed, you may as well calculate on sails, and patience. Unless.... If you had a huge, low pressure fuel tank, say, sewn into the inflated sails, that was able to carry the boat so it was mostley out of the water, an airship with a sail and a low weight dynamically erect or towed leeboard / centreboard, and solar cells to make H2 at sea.... One advantage is that to make water, all you have to do is burn H2. to power or heat the boat. This would save weight, too. Hmmmmm. Terry K > I'm looking into my crystal ball and envisioning being a liveaboard on a > 40 foot powerboat, 8 months out of the year, likely stationed in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > demands drops? Will a powerboater will be able to cruise all day for > $50? You can still do it today with a modest single screw diesel trawler. It's unfortunate that the mainstream recreational power yacht these days is a semi-displacement fuel hog. Just say no! There are alternatives. Is the anchorage 100 miles away really any better than the one half that far? Life's just as good at 8kt, vs. 15. Also, people will chug around all day using 50-100% more fuel, not to mention put up with double the maintenance, just because docking is easier with twin screws. This is absurd. Learn to drive, and set yourself free... Matt O. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.