Jump to content



Photo

What holds Energy Tech back ?

boeing lithium ion lawrence berkeley national lab mit energy storage research

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16 DocM

DocM

    Neowinian Senior

  • 19,055 posts
  • Joined: 31-July 10
  • Location: Michigan

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:34

There was an American inventor who created a method to retrofit all cars so they could run on water.

The man was poisoned and all his work was discredited.

http://www.dispatch....A1_4V77MOK.html

http://en.wikipedia....water_fuel_cell


Read hour own sources -

Theory violation: First law of thermodynamics[1][2]


The Meyer Fuel Cell was a sham, simple electrolysis disguised as new tech, and Meyer himself lost a lawsuit by investors charging him with fraud.

This isn't to say that splitting water can't work; there was an advance last week using metal nanoparticles with the H2 driving a fuel cell, but it is VERY far from practicality. Fuel cells are very expensive. That and processing the nanoparticles blows up the economics.


#17 +zhiVago

zhiVago

    Pax Orbis

  • 9,319 posts
  • Joined: 04-October 01
  • Location: The Heartland
  • OS: Windows Seven

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:47

Read your own sources -


Yes, I have read them. The wikipedia page is for general information.

The following is from the article:

At dinner that night, Meyer told them: "The Arabs wanted to offer me $250 million to stop today. You and this lovely family can live in peace and prosperity the rest of your days."


Stephen Meyer recalled a phone call to his brother's home in the 1980s.
"He turned to me and said, 'They just offered me $800 million. Should I take it?'


The Meyer Fuel Cell was a sham, simple electrolysis disguised as new tech, and Meyer himself lost a lawsuit by investors charging him with fraud.


yeap, it's so simple (Physics 101) and cheap that the control system had to kill him.

#18 Salutary7

Salutary7

    Neowinian

  • 459 posts
  • Joined: 05-March 12

Posted 06 February 2013 - 13:07

Energy density (either energy per mass, energy per volume or even energy per price) and the physics behind it are what holds things back. The energy density of batteries sucks and is already not too far from theoretical limits. The energy density of hydrogen (per volume) sucks as well. As far as batteries go, most of the improvement is in making them cheaper and safer. Hydrogen doesn't make much sense from a practical standpoint at the moment considering its mostly made by destroying a perfectly good fuel for vehicles - natural gas - along with myriad other reasons. I would argue that electric vehicles are still what we should work for, since electricity is still one of our most efficiently produced "fuels". When it becomes mainstream relies largely on when the price of batteries goes down sufficiently or when the price of fossil fuels goes up sufficiently

#19 DocM

DocM

    Neowinian Senior

  • 19,055 posts
  • Joined: 31-July 10
  • Location: Michigan

Posted 06 February 2013 - 15:50

I agree that electric drivelines are the future, but the rub is if they will use high density batteries, ultra-capacitors, a mix of the two, or one of the prevoous buffering a fuel cell. The automakers are investing heavily on all of the above.

Even though GM isn't selling a lot of Volts its battery + range extender (can be an IC engine, turbine, fuel cell, whatever) driveline puts them in a great position to use a battery / ultra-capacitor buffered fuel cell. They have a ton of patented intellectual property from that program.

#20 FloatingFatMan

FloatingFatMan

    Resident Fat Dude

  • 16,101 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 04
  • Location: UK

Posted 06 February 2013 - 21:29

Some of the worst NIMBY's are environmental groups.


Most of them should be shot on sight. :p

#21 TPreston

TPreston

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,709 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Ireland
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Enterprise & Server 2012R2/08R2 Datacenter
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 1520

Posted 06 February 2013 - 21:51

There was an American inventor who created a method to retrofit all cars so they could run on water.

The man was poisoned and all his work was discredited.

http://www.dispatch....A1_4V77MOK.html

http://en.wikipedia....water_fuel_cell


You have fallen for a conman free energy and cheap diesel/gasoline alternatives are among the most persistant and common scams out there.

They scam gullible conspiracy theorists into buying plans and parts,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUgUF5M3FTI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6FxJh_Rr34
They scam investors out of millions.

This is nothing special its common.

http://www.water4gasstore.com/

Yes, I have read them. The wikipedia page is for general information.



And the rest comes from a dark dark place.

#22 Phouchg

Phouchg

    has stopped responding

  • 5,689 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 11

Posted 07 February 2013 - 19:10

Cold fusion, hmm hmm...

#23 DocM

DocM

    Neowinian Senior

  • 19,055 posts
  • Joined: 31-July 10
  • Location: Michigan

Posted 07 February 2013 - 19:22

"Cold fusion" is real, it's actually called muon-catalyzed fusion, but it doesn't work as Pons & Fleischman described and the energy produced is miniscule compared to the energy required to make muons.

#24 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,893 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:44

Why do you think that propane/LNG/CNG (all far older technologies than hydrogen - and all related) - a relative bargain given current natural-gas prices compared to gasoline, let alone diesel fuel - has gone exactly nowhere outside of - of all places - military fleet usage? (Joint Forces Base Andrews is one of the cleanest - in terms of emissions - military bases around, and it;s far from small. The home of Air Force One runs over HALF their fleet of vehicles on CNG - including three-fourths that would ordinarily be powered by diesel, such as military ambulances and fire trucks.)

In other countries LNG/CNG are used quite a lot actually, it's only in America where it isn't.

For example, all taxis in HK (of which there are quite a lot) are all LNG. A lot of taxis in India are LNG too. For a long time in the US nobody cared about other sources because gas was so ridiculously cheap but as it keeps increasing more people will stop using it and switching over to other means.

Now your other means could be battery powered, which goes <100 miles, takes an entire night to recharge and then costs you thousands to replace the batteries after couple of years. Or you can switch to things like hydrogen, or CNG. Battery technology just hasn't increased as fast as we'd like it to. Maybe in the next 10 years there will be some giant breakthrough, but the chances of that happening isn't very high.

#25 Anibal P

Anibal P

    Neowinian

  • 4,418 posts
  • Joined: 11-June 02
  • Location: Waterbury CT
  • OS: Win 8.1
  • Phone: Android

Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:47

Reality is all that's holding back the dream of "alternate" energy, they aren't viable and won't be, simple facts

#26 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,893 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 09 February 2013 - 05:56

Reality is all that's holding back the dream of "alternate" energy, they aren't viable and won't be, simple facts

I would say the media is what's holding them back.

Nuclear may not be renewable but its a lot better than coal and other fossil fuels. But after Fukushima, and the constant media coverage making it seem like the world was going to end, most people are terrified of it. Sad thing is Fukushima didn't happen because Nuclear power was unsafe...it happened because Tepco cut corners in order to save on costs (outdated reactor design, backup generators built below sea level etc).

#27 The_Decryptor

The_Decryptor

    STEAL THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

  • 19,529 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 02
  • Location: Sol System
  • OS: iSymbian 9.2 SP24.8 Mars Bar

Posted 09 February 2013 - 09:23

...
yeap, it's so simple (Physics 101) and cheap that the control system had to kill him.


His device didn't (and couldn't) work, and he had an aneurysm.

#28 remixedcat

remixedcat

    meow!

  • 10,497 posts
  • Joined: 28-December 10
  • Location: Vmware ESXi and Hyper-V happy clouds
  • OS: Windows Server 2012 R2
  • Phone: I use telepathy and cat meows to communicate

Posted 09 February 2013 - 09:44

what holds energy tech back.... BIG OIL.