Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
4. Apples and oranges...
Thu Aug 18, 2016, 08:56 AM
Aug 2016

Half way right.

You can't compare gaseous hydrogen with a liquid fuel by volume. It has to be by weight.

Here's a hydogen advocate's takeo nit:

http://www.solarhighway.org/HydrogenFacts.html

h2-- 60,000 btu per pound
gasoline 18,000 btu per pound

And here's a more neutral chart that claims the same:

http://cta.ornl.gov/bedb/appendix_a/Lower_and_Higher_Heating_Values_of_Gas_Liquid_and_Solid_Fuels.pdf

Now, will a real chemist or physicist kindly explain why such a flimsy thing as hydrogen has such a high BTU level? Do all those carbon atoms in hydrocarbons mean little?

And, yes, I'm aware of the trade-off in the energy used to compress the hydrogen-- the point made by the first guy is that you can reduce compression costs.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Hydrogen Is Working and I...»Reply #4