Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!



Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

Concerning hydrogen cars and such.

Jbird

New member
The post below about cars that could run on sea water reminded me of my experiences in the late 70's of using hydrogen gases to fuel steam furnaces.

The PPG plant at Lake Charles, La, where I am retired from used salt water as the basic feed stock. An amazing amount of products was created from salt water. PVC pipe for instance...we put the "C", (Cloride) in with the Poly Vinyl to make the Poly Vinyl Cloride pipe material as well as lots of other PVC products. Clorine gas was another product. A slick slimy gel to put down oil wells to make drilling easier was another. A solution that mixed with silica, (melted sand) became a powder used to harden shoe soles, tires, and other rubber like products. I could go on and on. It is amazing how many products that plant created, or helped to create, out of salt water.

That part of Louisiana was known for its salt domes. Huge domes of salt in the ground at Sulphur and Starks, La. We got our raw product of salt water by pumping water down into the salt domes and sucking out salt water and piping it into the plant.

We used a tremendous amount of electricity to boil the salt water and convert it to all these by products. We had three electrical power plants inside the chemical plant. The chemical plant actually was three seperate plants. Plant A had steam driven electrical generators dating back to about 1940. Plant B had steam generated electricity dating to 1954. Plant C was built while I worked there in the 1970's and had huge jet engines driving generators. The jet engines were eight feet in diameter.

OK.....Im finally getting to it.:) All this boiling salt water gave off a tremendous amount of hydrogen gas. It had always been just vented to the atmosphere until about 1975 when they decided to try to burn some of it in a furnace that was creating steam. I was one of the electricians assigned to modify the furnace so it would safely burn hydrogen. The engineers came up with a good design and we got it all installed.

Hydrogen by itself is too volatile and explosive to burn just by itself. So the trick was to have the furnace running on natural gas and then slowly add the hydrogen. It worked fine, although we had one kind of minor explosion. It bulged the sides of the furnace walls and scared the heck out of us but was really a minor thing compared to what we gained. We could get a lot of "free" heat from the hydrogen gas which for so many years before had been a waste product. And of course that plant is still venting a tremendous amount of hydrogen gas to the atmosphere.

The new electrical power plant for Plant C constructed in the late 70's was really a work of art. First, I should say that a lot of steam heat is required in a chemical plant and we had quite a few steam furnaces running on natural gas. In Plant C, we had those humongous jet engines, eight feet in diameter, putting out a tremendous blast of hot air from their tail pipes. The tail pipe exhaust temperatures were about 900 degrees Centigrade.

So the 900 degree jet exhaust was directed over into a steam furnace. Bingo!! 900 degree steam. But our requirements were for steam at 1250 degrees. No sweat, just add some natural gas heat to the furnace to get it on up to 1250 degrees. The Jet exhaust heat was now being put to productive use rather than being blasted out into the atmosphere. It still blew out the top of the furnace and into the atmosphere but a least we were making use of some of its heat.

Since a poor grade of heating oil was cheaper than natural gas, these furnaces were designed to operate on both natural gas and the cheaper heating oil all at the same time......or...just gas....or just oil, plus the jet exhaust. Another Bingo! Mucho savings on the high cost of natural gas.

The crowning glory was when the waste product of hydrogen gas was also piped into the furnaces. You couldn't use it by itself but we had all kinds of safety features built in to make sure that hydrogen gas could never come in untill either some natural gas or oil had created a stable fire condition. Once it was fired up and running, you were using a small amount of natural gas or heating oil while getting your 1250 degree steam created mostly by the "waste products", jet engine exhaust and hydrogen gas.

I havent studied up on how hydrogen cars work but I have often wondered about how they have figured out a safe way to use the hydrogen gas. Probably a much different way from the way were using it. Anyway, thats my story for tonight.....Im going back to beddy bye.
 
n/t
 
I cannot remember exactly where he lived. I do remember that it was on a farm that had been in his family. He used batteries to run everything [some were glass cased] and many were 60-80 years old. He had been off the grid since 1935, if I remember correctly.

But he also had fixed his old truck up to run off hydrogen. And all he did was to do that 'experiment' that we all did in high school. He broke water down, via electrolysis, in hydrogen and oxygen. How he compressed the hydrogen either I do not remember or they did not show.

I sure would like to find more info on this but I am probably asking the questions incorrectly on google.

Sunny skies

M
 
it would be nice if those with bigger brains than mine,or maybe more efficent:biggrin:,could find an energy source that was clean and plentiful.industry finds ways to save money and keep costs down,you can still get PVC pretty cheap.intersting jbird.
 
I researched hydrogen power for automobiles on the Internet and discovered that it requires huge amounts of electricity to break water down into hydrogen, and I'm not sure I want to drive on an Interstate highway with cars -- some operated by near-morons -- carrying tanks of hydrogen in any form!

Wind generators can produce enough electricity to power almost all of our industry and vehicles, but a U.S. Wind Chart shows that generally only the Northwestern States have enough wind to be efficient, and that it would require a Manhattan-type multli-billion dollar project to build the millions (!) of wind generators required and the transmission lines needed to bring the electricity to the rest of us. I've concluded that it's more efficient to use electricity directly Rather than convert it into hydrogen:

Note that many years ago General Motors built a superb electric car, the EV-1, (check it out on Google) 25,000 of which were leased to California drivers, who generally loved them because they had great acceleration, would go over 80 MPH and could travel 80 to 120 miles without being plugged into household electricity to recharge. By the way, most of our electrical power generation capability is is idle at night -- they must keep the generators turning in case I want to check the fridge for goodies at midnight!

Those EV-1 GM cars used large NIHM batteries which could be recharged many hundreds of times. One day, GM recalled ALL of the EV-1's and sent them to the crusher -- very few escaped, and are mostly in museums now. GM IMMEDIATELY sold the battery patent to Texaco (!) and it was subsequently acquired by Chevron and thence to Exxon, which currently prohibits use of this patent in anything except commercial vehicles with the stipulation that they must get 50% of their mileage from gasoline!

Panasonic attempted to sell large NIMH batteries in the U.S. but the oil company sued them and stopped the imports. Note that the Toyota Prius and similar hybrid cars are forced to use flashlight-sized NIHM batteries as a result! True.

I'm currently trying to get our beloved Beltway legislators to change U.S. Patent Laws so that an invention cannot be purchased with the intent of withholding technology from the market. Lotsa luck, huh?

Hope this is useful. -- Ol' Frank
 
Sorry, but my typing outraced my ageing brain -- the actual number of EV 1's leased to the public was no more than 1100!

Note that on the internet, Wikipedia has information supplied by GM that contradicts my conclusions, but states at the bottom of that section that the information given "may be biased!" Conversely, the www.EV1.org site takes the other side of the issue, so take your pick.

Anyway, here's a graph of electric power usage in one California location:
 
....and all those idling generators at night time during off peak hours are burning a tremendous amount of energy just so we can always have electricity available on demand. I have read recent articlles where they are really pushing car designs that use plug in charging during those off peak hours. Making use of all the available off peak electricity wouldn't be free but it would sure improve the efficiency of the whole electrical grid system.

The 3 power plants at our chemical plant put out enough electrical power to power a large portion of southwest Louisiana. We were tied into the area grid of 263,000 volts and our surplus power was feeding out thru it. In case of some catastrophe happening to civilian power sources, we could shut down plant operations and fill in during the emergency. On the other hand, if we had problems, we could draw from the local grid. The grid tie-in system had instrumentation to show whether we were supplying the grid or using from it and money would change hands accordingly once a month. PPG is a smart company and never missed a chance make things more efficient.
 
Yeah, J-bird, there ain't no free lunch! Have you looked into the process for making coal into high-quality diesel fuel, with small efficient plants located at the coal source? Check out www.rentech.com
-- that's a Colorado company that's now producing fuel for $30-40 a barrel with a pilot plants operating in Commerce City and Pueblo: it's excellent quality! Germany made diesel fuel from coal in the 1940's, and WE have 25% of the world's coal supply, sufficient to run our economy for 300 years. Note that many enviro-whackos would like to shut down our use of coal, so that we may freeze and starve in the dark, but why should we do so when China and India are building one coal-fired power plant a week for the next several years? Actually, it's more efficient to clean the coal conversion process at the source than worry about excess tailpipe emissions later. and oh, yes: There are reportedly new diesel emission systems that produce cleaner exhaust than our current gasoline engines. I sorta expect future cars to be 70 MPG three or four-cylinder turbocharged diesel hybrids for highway use, with a choice of small electric battery-powered town cars instead... but my wife sez I'm usually wrong. Regards from Ol' Frank
 
Check this link out. Them is sneaky folks up north of the border. They got too much time on their hands, suffering from snowbounditus, and come up with some weird ideas.:wacko:
 
Check this link out. Them is sneaky folks up north of the border. They got too much time on their hands, suffering from snowbounditus, and come up with some weird ideas.:wacko:

http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h20car2.htm
 
it seems. we just have to do them. It looks like PPG was in the an early leader and it just had to pay off them them:thumbup:
 
learn from reading the posts on this forum never ceases to amaze me. Thanks for sharing your stories and wisdom. It's much appreciated.:clap:
 
Top