Not a bad idea but for rain to fall you need to meet some physical parameters within the atmosphere - pressure and temperature need to be such to allow for the condensation out from the atmosphere of water vapour - in other words, if its too hot and too dry clouds won't form and therefore rain can't fall. So it's unlikely to work in the Sahara Dessert to make the dessert green, but as places with clouds generally have rain it wouldn't be need in Washington State for example as it never stops raining there.
2007-02-24 11:29:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by Moebious 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
This is an intriguing concept -- a generator that uses hydrogen, placed in a remote area. It provides both electricity for the people who live around it, plus pure water for irrigation. This is a completely feasible concept.
The big remaining question is whether or not it would be cost-effective. It would need to be compared to alternative irrigation methods, such as piping in water; also compare to alternative methods of providing power to remote areas (overhead powerlines, etc). Would it be simpler to bring hydrogen out to a farm than to bring water (particularly if you're getting both power AND water from it)? Since large-scale use of hydrogen power is unfortunately far off in the future, it might be quite some time before the question can be answered adequately.
Thanks for a very interesting question! :-)
2007-02-23 07:33:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Matti 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The water vapor by-product of a standard sized hydrogen powered automobile would be a negligible quantity that would provide a negligible quantity of water to be used for irragation/rain and the like.
Regrading the test at NASA, the air was probably already saturated or near saturated prior to the test. Even if hypothetically, the rocket's byproducts were the "source" of the rain, the output of water vapor from a NASA grade rocket would exponentially surpass the by-product output of say a family car.
so essentially, the utilization of the water vapor by-product of consumer owned devices, is not an economically viable option.
2007-02-23 06:40:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by L 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The answer is plausible... However plausible and possible are two seperate things. The shear size of a power plant utilizing Hydrogen recombination would be huge, I mean really fricken big.
In theory it looks good but in practice it would be so difficult to do that it is not economicly ecologicly and socialy possible.
great Question...
2007-02-23 08:32:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Patrick M 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Hydrogen Generators usually use electricity to break water apart. So it would be simpler to just use the water directly to irrigate land. Putting energy into desalinization plants might be more efficient as there is lots and lots of salt water.
2007-02-23 06:35:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by rscanner 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
First you must capture the water from the hydrogen powered cars and today there isn't enough hrdrogen powered cars
2007-02-23 06:49:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by bprice215 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
well the water would be usable to irrgiate. however, economically speaking it is far more viable to just lay in a pipeline from the sea, like they did in Saudi Arabia.
with currentday technology, hydrogyn is not yet viable as a means of supplying power. only time will tell if it oneday will replace fossil fuels.
2007-02-23 06:34:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by mrzwink 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Hydrogen is our most explosive element . The atoms are so small they will leak through anything. Hydrogen burns hot enough that it will oxidize nitrogen and it will produce photo chemical smog.
2007-02-23 09:46:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by JOHNNIE B 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Clearly uneconomical, engines cost money and wear out and need maintenance, so for the small amount of water that is produced its ridiculously uneconomical
2007-02-23 07:40:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by David H 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
no, that wont work
2007-02-23 07:55:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by jasonalwaysready 4
·
0⤊
1⤋