A) the earth has an insufficient level of hydrogen
B) hydrogen gas wont burn
C) it must be produced from a primary energy source
D) it causes pollution
2006-12-06 06:54:45 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment
C is the big one. . .
Of course, process of elimination should get you there pretty quickly.
2006-12-06 06:57:56 · answer #1 · answered by DJL2 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Earth has tons of hydrogen in forms other than its molecular form, energy is required to extract it. Hydrogen gas does burn very hot with an invisible flame. It does not cause pollution, when it burns it only creates water. The problem, as mentioned before, is that you need a primary source of energy (like solar power) to get molecular hydrogen from the other forms it's currently in (like water).
2006-12-06 14:59:10 · answer #2 · answered by electrophoenix 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Funny - it has been used on the shuttle and in space for years.
It is called a fuel cell!! Rockets run on the same balance as water 2 tanks of hydrogen to one of oxygen. Far from not burning, think back to your science lessons - it is explosive!!
There are problems in producing enough and in containment but Hydrogen is definitely likely to be a viable alternative in the near future.
Far from having insufficient Hydrogen there is an ample supply of Hydrogen locked up in our oceans!
One avenue of research uses boron to split it from water and it is calculated that a car would have to carry just 18 kilograms of boron and 45 litres of water to produce 5 kilograms of hydrogen, which has the same energy content as a 40-litre tank of conventional fuel.
Even better the recently described Gratzel Cell is 42 percent efficiency in splitting it from water using just sunlight!
Therefore it does not require a primary energy source, unless that is you are counting sunlight!!
It would be all pollution free.
There are problems still to overcome and more research is required but it will almost certainly become a viable energy source.
You may care to consider that there are a number of hydrogen fuelled concept cars running very well in experimental tests in a number of countries!
2006-12-07 11:07:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
'C more energy is needed to break apart water molecules than the energy given off by putting them back together. To be "pollution free" it would need some kind of renewable energy source. But even then the products that would harness the renewable energy source are most likely made from the energy of non-renewable energy sources. So it a sense it is also D
2006-12-06 15:11:24 · answer #4 · answered by NeoPhysicist 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Out of your options C is the only one close to true.
I think the biggest disadvantage is that Hydrogen will combust if you look at it funny..so would need special equipment to keep safe
2006-12-06 15:04:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Currently, it is expensive to produce energy with hydrogen-cells.
2006-12-06 15:05:27 · answer #6 · answered by Strider 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
C. At this point in time it takes alot of electricity to generate hydrogen by splitting water molecules by electrolysis or metal reactions.
2006-12-06 14:58:48 · answer #7 · answered by dtbrantner 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
C is the correct answer, however the biggest disadvantage is that it's very, VERY flammable.
LZ 129 Hindenburg -- yeah.
2006-12-06 15:02:48 · answer #8 · answered by John W 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None of your answers are correct.
Hydrogen is very explosive and will burn from 4% to 96% mixture with air - therefore, it is very dangerous to handle. It also requires special equipment to dispense and specially adapted vehicles to burn it.
2006-12-06 14:58:49 · answer #9 · answered by jack w 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have to spend energy to make it.
2006-12-06 14:57:28 · answer #10 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋