Re: The Electric Car

Besides, the general idea is *not* to use fossil fuels

> whatsoever, if I understood you correctly. H2O2, > presumably, would simply replace them, distributed in gas > stations much like gasoline is today. > > (Yeah, right.)

Well, if it wasn't so expensive, and resource-hungry, it could theoretically make for a real simple internal "combustion" engine- just get some BHP (basic hydrogen peroxide - essentially 100% H2O2); and instead of a spark plug, a lump of catalyst, like MnO2; it'd be a two-stroke - at TDC or so, squirt a dollop of H2O2, it catalyzes into H2O + O2 + heat; driving the power stroke; then there's an exhaust stroke, which consists of, Ta-Da! water and oxygen; then you do it again. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise
Loading thread data ...

I believe that is correct, and to also remember that we're talking of a one cycle ICE, so there's only the power stroke to deal with, or the more limited 2-cycle version of accommodating whatever a piston has to go through in order to get back into that starting point of each power stroke.

Perhaps an opposed 2 cylinder of a two-stroke configured little engine that's given h2o2+c12h26 would easily outperform a four-stroke 6 liter V8 that's running itself on gasoline, a little O2 and otherwise mostly N2.

h2o2+fuel can also each be 1000 bar injected for as long as you'd care to force energy into that power stroke. Too bad that anything of an ICE rotary or radial power turbine can't possibly work. (just kidding)

BTW, hot air balloons could also become h2o2 powered, as well as given a touch of whatever fossil fuel for a little added thermal kick.

- Brad Guth -

Reply to
BradGuth

In sci.physics, Rich Grise

wrote >

Why would the engine be resource-hungry? Of course the fuel source would be -- but Brad's hypothesis, taken at face value, would assume terawatts of power available from these clean, simple towers, convertable into synthesizable hydrogen peroxide.

Except that the towers are neither clean nor all that simple.

- Cleanliness: The PV aspect is the most troublesome; the research continues and may very well solve this problem but at present the return on investment of a simple solar cell, at current electric rates, is approximately its expected lifetime -- about 20-50 years. Of course part of it is that the PV is not part of a sophisticated solar/wind powered tower, apparently (not that that would make all that much difference; wind power doesn't come out of nowhere, after all).

- Simplicity. The tallest man-made structure is about 341 m in height (in the USA, anyway; I'd have to check for buildings in other places e.g. Petronas towers in Malaysis) with quite a bit of complexity such as a generally tapering structure (in the case of the Empire State Building, it's blocky). Modern skyscrapers are designed to flex. I've already mentioned the shadowing problem; I should mention that there's a certain issue regarding wind shadowing as well. Presumably the wind, hitting the blades of a windmill, gets deflected in various interesting ways, dissipating its energy -- and rendering the wind relatively useless for a windmill following.

As for H2O2 synthesis from raw materials -- I'd have to look.

Presumably this is Brad's notion more or less as well. However, AIUI crystallized H2O2 is very touchy to handle

-- an issue if a vehicle has been sitting for too long. There's also the possible problem of spontaneous breakdown. Certain contaminants in the mix -- you mention manganese dioxide; I know nothing about it but that's certainly one possible contaminant! -- would break down the peroxide, either slowly over time, yielding relatively useless water and oxygen (from a power standpoint) -- or explosively.

At least gasoline more or less vanishes through evaporation (though the result might be smog if there's enough of it). It is also explosive but only under relatively controllable conditions; it requires a rather specific fuel-to-air ratio. Of course its flammability is a concern, but then so are coal's, wood's, and chicken fat's, given the right conditions.

And gasoline is long-term stable; it's not likely to do weird things such as polymerize or spontaneously decompose, under proper storage conditions.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Windows.  Multi-platform(1), multi-tasking(1), multi-user(1).
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
The Ghost In The Machine

instead of a spark plug, a lump of catalyst, like

catalyzes into H2O + O2 + heat; driving the power

Much like anything that's new and improved, h2o2 is only spendy if not having the clean and fully renewable cache of spare/surplus energy to start off with, and as I'd said before that Warren Buffett, William Mook and myself will gladly provided all those spare teraWatts of affordably clean and renewable energy.

The new and improved hybrid electric car, and of its ICE that runs on such a composite of clean fuel, is more doable than you'd think.

h2o2 as a monopropellant is only worth 2.9 Mj/kg, and the good blend of low sulphur heating oil or LS diesel is worth 44 Mj/kg.

Keeping in mind that an amount greater than 7:1 as utilized of h2o2:fossil is going require those 7+ parts of h2o2 per given part of LS diesel.

7.25 * 2.9 + 44 = 65 Mj/kg of each consumed kg of that SL fossil fuel, at that there's zero NOx and the absolute minimal amount of CO2 getting contributed per given kg or if you like per Hummer or GM Volt mile.

Next taking into account, instead of getting 12.5% thermal dynamic efficiency as obtained from the typical 4-Stroke or 4-cycle engine, of getting at least twice that good if not nearly 4 times as much because of using a 1-stroke or 1-cycle ICE that's not wasting all of that kinetic energy by having to deal with going through all of those wasted piston strokes. In other words, in addition to having the 65 Mj/kg to work with, it's entirely possible to reach a 50% worth of thermal dynamic efficiency, and that's not to mention the small size and minimal mass of this ICE that could be held in as little as one hand.

The combined density of 1.32 g/cm3 for essentially obtaining 65 Mj/kg of the LS fuel oil is in of its self impressive.

BTW, that LS diesel can be easily replaced by just about anything, including the clean alternative fuel obtained from coal gassification or any number of interesting biofuels, as they'll each burn hot an clean along with having contributed zero NOx.

- Brad Guth -

Reply to
BradGuth

Thanks for all the constructive feedback, as I never once said it would be easy, nor have I suggested that it's the least spendy alternative for getting that Hummer down the road.

You have to admit there's number of primary and secondary advantages in burning h2o2:fossil, instead of complex gasoline and that of a mostly N2 atmosphere that's only getting more polluted by the minute.

- Brad Guth -

Reply to
BradGuth

I didn't. I said that making H2O2 is expensive and resource-hungry.

Thanks, Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

It obviously doesn't matter whatever you said, because they obviously don't like anything you have to share.

- Brad Guth -

Reply to
BradGuth

instead of a spark plug, a lump of catalyst, like

atalyzes into H2O + O2 + heat; driving the power

is going require those 7+ parts ofh2o2per given part of

Not exactly rocket science, is it.

Road fuel via coal gasification/liquefaction as syngas/synlio/synfuel offers an amount of stored liquid energy that's worth 34~40 Mj/kg or perhaps as low as 28 Mj/kg which can get pushed to roughly 36 Mj/kg if a good amount of waste plastics are incorporated, although the energy taken for the syngas production itself is substantial and by no means offers an environment friendly process, often taking a ratio of 3:1 in order to convert itself into liquid fuel (giving us roughly less than

100 years if all known reserves of coal were to be liquified), not to mention the lives of coal miners taken and of whatever to do with all of those nasty death-trap mines and vast open pits of toxic remains once excavated.

So, it seems imperative that we utilize our fossil fuel reserves in the best and most efficient way possible, that is unless you don't mind energy wars and of worse things to come. So, we've got ourselves roughly another spendy, sooty and bloody century to piss or get off the pot. Of course by then we may not have to bother with the makings of h2o2, LH2 or LOx in order to get the most clean energy and/or mileage from a given amount of fossil fuel because, there will not be any such affordable fossil fuels to burn, whereas instead every drop of liquid fuel for our Hummers will have become spendy syngas/synoil/ synfuel of at least $10/gallon if we're extremely lucky.

Lots of nifty information about the consumption of coal with or w/o capture of CO2, and/or along with fresh water.

formatting link

Coal liquefaction

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link

formatting link
"Fischer-Tropsch diesel (FTD) fuel is colourless, non-toxic liquid that has virtually no sulphur, or aromatics. FTD is not a compound but a mix of hydrocarbons, mainly from C12 to C20. FTD is today produced from natural gas and coal with big construction projects under way. The energy content (LHV) is about 34 MJ/litre (44 MJ/kg) with slightly lower density than regular diesel."

Similar to LPG, "DME is at normal atmospheric conditions a gas (boiling point -25=BAC) and must be handled under pressure (>5 bar) to obtain a liquid. DME contains no impurities of sulphur or metals and is under practical conditions a harmless gas from health and environmental point of view (is among others used as propelling gas in spray cans) and is non-mutagenic. DME is synthesised from methanol or directly from synthesis gas. DME has as liquid an energy content (LHV) of about 19 MJ/litre (28 MJ/kg) and yields more than 10% less CO2 per energy unit at combustion compared to petrol."

There are low sulphur formulated heating oils that'll also offer 44 Mj/ kg as road fuel.

Somewhat like extracting oil from oily sand, whereas coal liquefaction or gasification along with natural gas as used in order to make such viable petrochemicals is what unavoidably creates a substantial dosage of carbon dioxide in the process, as great as 4:1 consumption of medium/low grade coal per given unit of liquified syngas seems unacceptable at most any price. But what do I know, within a century from now such synfuel becoming worth $100/gallon could be just the best ever energy ticket to ride, especially nifty if you're in the business of making and selling such spendy synfuel.

BTW, big-energy lie No.1 is that trillions upon trillions of biological fossils in some way created such fuel, when in fact fossils have damn little if anything to do with their having contributed to the vast bulk of such global fuel reserves, and that's not my saying that terrestrial fossils are not incorporated within certain situations. Instead, most terrestrial fuels are a direct result of Earth's planetology as having been exposed to and/or having interacted with a much greater stellar influx than we have as of today. I bet you folks thought all known life evolved purely right here on good old mother Earth, and with having but that one and only same old passive sun.

- Brad Guth -

Reply to
BradGuth

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.