does hydrogen hold the key to combat global warming?

Answer 1

I think that there are a lot of uncertainties but hydrogen may well be the key to combating global warming. Bits of established and proven technology are all there to be linked to provide a production, distribution and useage chain with very low CO2 emmissions. It will be more expensive and without a regulatory framework liquid hydrocarbon fuels will just be produced from coal or natural gas as crude oil becomes more limited undercutting a more expensive hydrogen system. One uncertainty is affordable improved battery technology, which, if it happened would greatly improve the viability of electric cars. Another would be the development of methods to produce bioalcohols which does not involve the use of grain (energy intensive to produce and a feed material for humans and animals) and rather used plants grown on land unsuitable for conventional agriculture or stalks. Another uncertainty is whether a breakthrough will occur in the production of cheap and efficient solar cells. This might mean that vast arrays were used to produce hydrogen by electrolysis during the day rather than the normally more efficient method of steam reforming of coal, oil or natural gas and separating out and sequestering the CO2 byproduct most probably deep underground.

Answer 2

I think that hydrogen powered vehicles might be part of the solution.

Hydrogen powered vehicles have been around for some time. President Carter had a presidential limo that was dual powered, hydrogen and gasoline.

The problem with hydrogen is that it is gas that is very difficult to liquefy and keep as a liquid. When burnt as a fuel, it releases much less energy than gasoline. While we can put liquid hydrogen into a large rocket, do you really want liquid hydrogen in every car on the road?

Part of the problem is that we are cutting down the forests, which convert the carbon dioxide in the air to oxygen.

Would you be willing to give up high powered, long range automobiles and trucks, buses, trains, aircraft and ambulances?

Did you know that gasoline produces about 26 times more heat energy when burning that hydrogen does. About 80% of that energy goes out the radiator and exhaust pipe, and about 17% is converted to heat by the brakes when you stop. So you only use about 3% of the energy in gasoline to travel.

Maybe we need to plant more trees, and maybe genetically engineer trees to use more carbon dioxide.

I am all for continuing to use fossil fuels, and even renewable fuels that are normally liquid at room temperatures such as alcohol and kerosene, but we need to do it responsibly.

Hybred cars are a step in the right direction, but they are mostly a cop out. You could get almost the same increase in gas mileage by driving more carefully, coasting to a stop when practical, and not following others so close. The hybreds I have seen are so tiny, it is rediculous to think they are going to make a difference.

Answer 3

Hydrogen is a step towards it. Using hydrogen instead of burning fossil fuels is better because it doesn't give CO2, Even fuel cells that use methanol are better but still generate a little CO2.

One major problem is that electricity is used to split water in to hydrogen and oxygen, unless this electricity is generated cleanly there is no point in using the hydrogen.

The biggest gamble at the moment is ITER, an experimental fusion reactor being built to produce power. This is based on the theory that fusion will work if you make it big enough. It would fuse deuterium or tritium into helium in a similar reaction to the sun.

Answer 4

Na! Hydrogen doesn't compress small enough easily so you would need to pull a trailer with a fuel tank on it to do the same distances as the petrol car and you have to use energy to produce the hydrogen anyway. We dont need to travel any way in a physical way,just virtually will do.Thats the way it going to go anyway!!

Answer 5

Probably it is part of it.

First cars have been launched to the market (BMW, Germany) and first hydrogen gaz stations are now open. (Z60 hl can burn traditional gas as well). Fueled by hydrogen, its emission is water (H2O), then it is almost emission-free.

Japan bets for hybrids (electricity-fuel). Sweden bets for pure ethanol and Germany for Hydrogen.

We will see what market decides in the next few years. Now it is just a marketing to see what technology among them will win.

Advantages of each one now:
- Hybrids, Japan is a big market and those cars have an important penetration in India and China
- Ethanol, Sweden and soon France (Renault and PSA-Chrysler). There is a very solid market in Brasil. Migration from fossil fuel to ethanol powered cars is easy. There are biomass plants in most developed countries and corn would be easy as well.
- Hydrogen. Germany is a big market. They target not only cars but all engines (trucks, vans, aircrafts, satellites, etc.)

Transportation is the second industry in GHG emissions. The first is electricity production. The options that most developed countries are deploying are solar and wind.

Hydrogen is not seen as an option for electricity generation.

Answer 6

No, think EROEI. Energy Returned On Energy Invested. It costs just as much energy to produce hydrogen as the energy it will give. Imagine you use two barrels of oil (for the machines) to extract two barrels of oil out of the ground....is that worse it?
That's the problem with hydrogen...it is also the same problem with nuclear power station, the effort and money they cost to build and then maintain during their production life and after their production life is very slightly less than the money and resources we get from them.

Answer 7

Not for a few years, with todays technology it's down to nuclear power stations.

However quite how anything man-made is going to overcome a completely natural and cyclical event is beyond me!

Answer 8

No. You and all the other people of the world do.

Answer 9

no .

if the hydrogen is used for proliferation purposes after effect of these could do

Answer 10

Possibly. It more efficient and therefore produces less emission in comparison to coil and oil.

Can be produced by bacterium throughout photosynthesis.