Comments on: Hydrogen As A Fuel Source http://www.mantegh.org/hydrogen-as-a-fuel-source Sat, 02 Oct 2010 08:01:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Ann Coulter's Nemesis http://www.mantegh.org/hydrogen-as-a-fuel-source/comment-page-1#comment-248 Ann Coulter's Nemesis Fri, 29 Jan 2010 14:52:27 +0000 http://www.mantegh.org/hydrogen-as-a-fuel-source#comment-248 Hydrogen has a similar flash point to gasoline, so the chance of igniting a flame is similar. It is harder to contain since hydrogen molecules are so small they leak out of microscopically small holes, but the gas dissapates instead of pouring on the ground where it can ignite, like gasoline. In a sealed tank with no oxygen, there is no chance of it expoding, so some system to keep air out as the H2 is removed is important. The advantage that H2 has over gasoline is that H2 has a lower radiant heat - fires burn at the same temperature as with gasoline but burning H2 gives off less heat to surrounding objects so it is less likely to catch something else on fire. The problem with the Hindenberg was a large static electric charge zapped the hydrogen and set it off. This would happen with a floating ungrounded ship, where a big charge differential between it and the ground could build up. I don't know if there would need to be some grounding on a H2 powered automobile - I think that a sealed tank is good enough to protect the fuel. If you notice all the signs at gas stations, they warn you about the danger of a electric spark from a cell phone or other device potentiall igniting the fuel. If you fill a plastic gas can, you are supposed to put the can on the ground so it is grounded and no spark jumps. Gasoline trucks drag chains from the chassis to the road to ground it and prevent explosions when the tank cap is opened. Also, the material containing the fuel on the zepelin was flammable - If you look at photos of the disaster, it burned rather than exploded. This would not happen on a H2 car. so, is H2 a danger. Yes, but so is gasoline but the latter is one danger we have grown to be accustomed to being around. Hydrogen has a similar flash point to gasoline, so the chance of igniting a flame is similar. It is harder to contain since hydrogen molecules are so small they leak out of microscopically small holes, but the gas dissapates instead of pouring on the ground where it can ignite, like gasoline. In a sealed tank with no oxygen, there is no chance of it expoding, so some system to keep air out as the H2 is removed is important.

The advantage that H2 has over gasoline is that H2 has a lower radiant heat – fires burn at the same temperature as with gasoline but burning H2 gives off less heat to surrounding objects so it is less likely to catch something else on fire.

The problem with the Hindenberg was a large static electric charge zapped the hydrogen and set it off. This would happen with a floating ungrounded ship, where a big charge differential between it and the ground could build up. I don't know if there would need to be some grounding on a H2 powered automobile – I think that a sealed tank is good enough to protect the fuel. If you notice all the signs at gas stations, they warn you about the danger of a electric spark from a cell phone or other device potentiall igniting the fuel. If you fill a plastic gas can, you are supposed to put the can on the ground so it is grounded and no spark jumps. Gasoline trucks drag chains from the chassis to the road to ground it and prevent explosions when the tank cap is opened.

Also, the material containing the fuel on the zepelin was flammable – If you look at photos of the disaster, it burned rather than exploded. This would not happen on a H2 car.

so, is H2 a danger. Yes, but so is gasoline but the latter is one danger we have grown to be accustomed to being around.

]]>