Hydrogen more energy than oil?

[Fakir]

http://www.hylights.org/publications/re ... french.pdf

Sorry but H² does not explode in the air.

the best example is the Zeppelin Hindenburg. It burned but not exploded!

and a Wikipedia attack N2: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZ_129_Hindenburg.


Fortunately, otherwise there would have been no survivors.

Finally I quote chatelot16 rather opposed to H² ( )
https://www.econologie.com/forums/moteur-a-h ... 81-10.html

the hydrogen / air mixture does not explode stronger than the gasoline air mixture: and even less: the hydrogen takes up more volume than petrol vapor therefore decreases the maximum engine power

[chatelot16]

I am not opposed to hydrogen ... I am even rather the kind to use it ... to inflate balloons

Hydrogen is less dangerous than butane in certain ways: butane or propane is heavier than air: it spreads out on the ground and grates all over the world if it ignites ... the hydrogen rises to sky very quickly and if we don't light it at the right time 10 seconds later everything is gone and there is no more danger

conversely hydrogen has a serious danger: the minimum concentration for it to explode is very low: just 5% of hydrogen in the air for it to be explosive ... with other gases it takes much more if not It is not dangerous

it is not the danger that limits the use of hydrogen: it is the price of the necessary equipment ... when it is competitive we will find the solutions to master the danger

conversely we underestimate the danger of lithium batteries

[dedeleco]

Fakir denies reality

Sorry but H² does not explode in the air.

I call it a negation of reality, mostly deaths from explosive combustion of the hydrogen air mixture, many accidents !!

If H2 is well mixed with air before (not the case of the torn Zeppelin just before with a hundred deaths) explosive combustion breaks everything, as in Fukushima, and Japanese experts had believed this false claim that the explosion was impossible !!!

This negation of the reality of explosive dramatic accidents is criminal, like the negation HIV = AIDS (millions of deaths), like the negation that the ammonium nitrate fertilizer does not explode, thousands of dead, passed, with even some digging this fertilizer with a jackhammer, months, until the day tens of thousands of tons exploded !!!!

Chatelot16, rare true chemist on econology, is right:

5% hydrogen in the air is enough for it to be explosive

The explosion is combustion (as with any explosive reaction) with a speed of propagation of the combustion wave very fast, sometimes faster than the speed of sound of 330m / s, if the initial concentration of H2 mixed with air is much higher than this 5% H2 threshold, flash point.

I am surprised at the negation of the reality of the danger of H2 which in my opinion explains accidents, especially since luckily accidents do not happen until the day when the disaster occurs.

H2 pretty much passes through everything, plastics, plastic seals, etc., H2 weakens a lot of metals, and great care must be taken when handling it.

[Fakir]

Fakir denies reality

Sorry but H² does not explode in the air.

I call it a negation of reality, mostly deaths from explosive combustion of the hydrogen air mixture, many accidents !!

If H2 is well mixed with air before (not the case of the torn Zeppelin just before with a hundred deaths) explosive combustion breaks everything, as in Fukushima, and Japanese experts had believed this false claim that the explosion was impossible !!!

This negation of the reality of explosive dramatic accidents is criminal, like the negation HIV = AIDS (millions of deaths), like the negation that the ammonium nitrate fertilizer does not explode, thousands of dead, passed, with even some digging this fertilizer with a jackhammer, months, until the day tens of thousands of tons exploded !!!!

Yes, a stoichiometric mixture of dihydrogen and oxygen strongly explodes. A mixture of air and dihydrogen also in certain measures. For info it's 4% the lower limit: good reading http://www.google.fr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=& ... 60k0n_KAZw


Not the hydrogen released into the air!
Well i recognize i play on words

Why, the diffusion in the atmosphere of H² is very fast and avoids the deflagration.
It will burn very strongly but no boom.

If you're in your garage, it can boom.

The bottom line is that H² is less dangerous than petrol


By the way Dede, you made a bet to slip the word AIDS into all of the TOPICS.

[dedeleco]

Fakir finds it difficult to admit reality:

If you are in your garage, it can boom

in the open air, especially with mistral, this, with a low flow of H2, will not fizz because we will not get the 4 to 5% minimum.

But if bad luck, which confines, as in Fukushima, it will peter repeatedly, as soon as H2 exceeds the threshold of 4 to 5% from the first spark !!

Gasoline is much less complex to handle because liquid, and therefore fortunately explodes much more rarely than if you handled H2 without more precautions with as much leakage of H2 as gasoline vapors.

I do not accept the negations of reality, especially very dangerous, and that of HIV = AIDS on econology and elsewhere is one of the worst negations of reality.

[plasmanu]

Dede.
You go from one extreme to another.

You rely on the family who fucks their mouths with city gas without taking into account that millions of others use it without any problems


Obviously at the flash point it blows well.
As in a badly lit wood stove when the open door creates the fatal draft.
From there to make it a generality.
We're not going to ban wood heating.

[Leo Maximus]

... Experiment, H2 alone in the air, CH4, and many other explosive gases, (CO too, ask the dead firefighters), in ordinary air, it suddenly explodes from the flash point concentration, at the first spark ...

So what, so what? No one ever said otherwise (except the dead firefighters ). Fortunately, these gases are combustible.

[Leo Maximus]

.... The bottom line is that H² is less dangerous than petrol ....

This is what the firefighters conclude after their training in hydrogen fires.

[dirk pitt]

as usual, the discussion drifts off topic relative to the title of the post.
I pointed out that we could do 3 times more kms using direct electricity rather than going through hydrogen. If that is not striking enough in terms of energy, I do not know what it takes, but everyone prefers to chat and never stop on something else. that's why I come less and less on this forum, it becomes very painful to follow the threads.
go, one more reminder.

[Leo Maximus]

as usual, the discussion drifts off topic relative to the title of the post.
I pointed out that we could do 3 times more kms using direct electricity rather than going through hydrogen. If that is not striking enough in terms of energy, I do not know what it takes, but everyone prefers to chat and never stop on something else.

It's normal that there are reactions: what you say is absolutely wrong .

Refueling a car with PAC H² is done in a few minutes. The autonomy depends on the quantity of hydrogen stored in the tank. Generally, the range is 800 km.

So a few minutes of "recharging" and we have 800 km of autonomy, no heating problem since the heat pump can provide the necessary kW for hours, etc ...