permafrost Loc: Minnesota

This may have interest for many on OPP... read the article to get more info.. this is from 2021, but I think it is still pertinent..

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/how-and-why-hydrogen-engines-came-to-be-what-lies-ahead?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=content&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=Feb14&fbclid=IwAR0sEVbicRBjlQ1IhaCF88WvZRxgCx4pZXhQvpfYSS3KQdRcVQssjksr_QI

After a number of years of promises that hydrogen is the clean fuel of the future, only for not much to happen, it now appears that the future may finally be almost upon us.

Automotive manufacturers, including Mazda and Toyota, are currently developing hydrogen engines to power their vehicles, and these engines could one day replace not only hydrogen fuel cell technology and traditional combustion engines, but perhaps even electric vehicles (EVs).

SEE ALSO
However, while the EV market races ahead, the use of hydrogen engine technology in commercial vehicles is still in its initial phase, and the feasibility of hydrogen gas as a useful and practical alternative is yet to be proven.

A hydrogen engine is an advanced version of traditional internal combustion engines that uses liquid hydrogen instead of gasoline as fuel. An automobile that runs on hydrogen engines is called a hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicle (HICEV). These are different from hydrogen fuel cell electrified vehicles (FCEVs), such as Toyota's Mirai or the Hyundai Tucson, which use a fuel cell in which hydrogen chemically reacts with oxygen in the air to produce electricity that powers an electric motor.

Hydrogen engines generate power through the combustion of hydrogen and use fuel supply and injection systems that are modified versions of those used with gasoline engines. Except for the combustion of small amounts of engine oil, which is also the case with gasoline engines, hydrogen engines emit no CO2 when in use.

FallenOak Loc: St George Utah

People are probably going to say that battery power is safer than hydrogen and cite the Hindenburg. Germany had millions of miles logged by hydrogen lighter-than-air ships but that one explosion ended that mode of travel. Also the fact that the US and Europe were slowly beginning to try to isolate Germany.

The hype is on electric vehicles today and I do not believe many people are going to be converted to hydrogen. It may come to pass when after some wrecks there will be people who have been disfigured by the acids in batteries. Perhaps that sort of accident will be acceptable. Only just over 1/3 of the passengers and crew on the Hindenburg died while we get much higher percentages of death when an airliner goes down today.

People who are pushing electric cars are overlooking the fact that a good portion of our electric power is generated by burning f****l f**ls. I have also looked into methane gas as a power source but sadly in the US there are laws that do not allow for septic tanks to be used as generators for methane which can be used to power machinery.
The masses are controlled by the one who shouts the loudest. The mass media and the internet are the devices that are controlling the masses today. Until there are enough electric cars in use and needing charging daily with the inherent danger of fire from defects in the batteries people will follow the drumbeat of their leaders and demand electric autos. The fire that now result from the charging of electric golf carts are seldom reported so few know of those instances.

Interesting article though.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

GEE, how could I have forgotten the Hindenburg?? I have been a fan of hydrogen for a long time.. so I got excited reading this article, missed the obvious.. Methane, we have a few generators in Minnesota, labor intensive, but they do work, not very adapted to American style agriculture.. but both cattle and hog operations worked.. I am a fan of progress will work out the problems and we have seen that happening with EV and Batteries.. but hydrogene to me has even more promise..

glad you found the article of interest..

FallenOak Loc: St George Utah

I have long been interested in alternative fuels. In 1973 or thereabout I was interested in steam power for automobile power. I found a company that produced an engine that used various fuels but the cost was $10,000 at the time and a brand new truck was just over $2,000 then. Gas was cheap and propane was cheaper so I opted for a propane conversion. Also, the company sold the engine but it was up to you to install it in your vehicle. Those were also the years I spent learning about methane gas production.
I also read about the lighter-than-airships. The US used helium while the rest of the world used hydrogen. Helium does not have the lifting power of hydrogen but is not explosive. I think there are only six countries that have access to helium thereby causing the rest of the world to use hydrogen.
I did become interested in looking some more and discovered this article. https://www.pirelli.com/global/en-ww/road/hydrogen-as-a-fuel-the-pros-and-cons
Thanks again for an interesting article to get my interest piqued.