<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.bnet.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Breakthrough may lead to 'limitless' supply of hydrogen fuel ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-22T14:40:38-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Sorry, bad example]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-100564]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The trade-off for grounding a commercial airliner is about a hundred cars making extended trips. It's a negative net outcome.2-5C? That kind of wild claim is debunked all the time.Do everyone a favor and educate yourself. You're obviously on the web; there's a lot of good material out there you can learn from (and bad examples to learn from, too).Don't stop trying, though. Remember Edison failed hundreds of times before his successes. Persistence can pay off.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-100564]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Suncat2000]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 09:02:43 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Indeed]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-90654]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[And the cooling process can produce clean water as well.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-90654]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[energy_guy]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:25:44 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[No you can not run cars on water.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-90640]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You obviously haven't got a clue about science have you.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-90640]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[energy_guy]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:22:29 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Want to slow global warming?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88412]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Ground all non-military, jet-powered aircraft. Air temperatures will drop from 2-5C within 5 days.Proof? Analyze US air temperatures during the the three weeks surrounding the September 11th terrorists attacks in 2001. This information should be readily available from NOAA.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88412]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[DWFields]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:08:30 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Aha! the energy source is compost.]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88370]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[You can create a warm base for your early seedlings, by putting manure and some easily rotted plant material under the compost where you sow the seeds, and glass over them. It's called a warm or cold frame. This process for &quot;making hydrogen&quot; is clever in its way, but it's limited  by the amount of vegetation you can provide to feed the bacteria. The first and second laws of thermodynamics say that the energy content of your &quot;free hydrogen&quot; cannot exceed what you'd get from drying and burning that vegetation.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88370]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[SmartAlbert]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2012 01:25:26 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Oh please, bacteria need to be fed]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88369]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[For instance, to make ethanol from monosaccharide sugars, you use yeast. As far as this discussion goes, it's  near enough a bacterium. Converting sugar to alcohol releases carbon dioxide, at a rate of one molecule for every two carbon atoms in the ethanol. So one third of the carbon is what supplies the energy the yeast uses.In due course, by my calculations, the energy will ultimately derive from thorium or uranium in nuclear breeder reactors. A ton of fissile isotope can do the work of about a million tons of coal.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88369]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[SmartAlbert]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2012 01:18:08 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Electrolysis anyone?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88288]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The funny thing is, there is already a limitless supply of hydrogen already available to us in the form of water. When you electrolyze water and separate the components, you can then run it on a closed-loop so that power from the battery/alternator can then run the electrolysis process. You can literally run cars on water at this point, but that's not what Big Oil or Big Auto would have you believe.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-88288]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[xXxinfidelxXx]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2012 12:09:47 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Look up liquid hydrogen on the web]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-83087]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Rephrased from Wikipedia:1) Although the energy/weight of LH2 is around twice that of other fuels, its energy/volume is remarkably low.  [This is problematic for passenger vehicles smaller than a bus.]2) Note that LH2 liquifies near absolute zero.  Therefore, it requires cryogenic storage technology such as special thermally insulated containers and requires special handling common to all cryogenic fuels. This is similar to, but more severe than liquid oxygen. Even with thermally insulated containers it is difficult to keep such a low temperature, and the hydrogen will gradually leak away (typically at a rate of 1% per day). It also shares many of the same safety issues as other forms of hydrogen, as well as being cold enough to liquefy (and possibly solidify) atmospheric oxygen which can be an explosion hazard.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-83087]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[dmm99]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 08:30:01 -0800</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Natural Gas and Propane]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-82524]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[are both fossil fuels that are normally gasses and are used as fuels. They are stored in a compressed form and rarely cause problems. Why do you claim the pressurized H2 is too dangerous for widespread use? What evidence do you have? I recall a video demonstration from many years ago. Three cylinders were filled with the equivalent (fuel energy content) quantities of gasoline, propane and H2. From behind cover, each cylinder was pierced by an armour piercing sniper round. The gasoline exploded and produced a large fire. The propane tank exploded, leaving a small crater and no tank fragments. The H2 tank had a small bullet hole and an invisible flame from burning H2 (H2 leaking from the hole) above the tank. The flame was detected using a wooden splint, which ignited when passed through the flame. H2 cannot combust without O2.Remember the damage to the WTC towers from two airliners almost fully loaded with fuel? The highjackings were performed before the flights had finished climbing. This was an important part of the terrorists plan to maximize the fuel load in the attacks.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-82524]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jwaustin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:06:34 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Critical problems with Hydrogen as a consumer fuel]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-82106]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Hydrogen as a fuel has an excellent energy density per mass, roughly 33.3kWH/kg. But hydrogen at standard temperature and pressure is a gas. As a result, it has an energy density of 0.53kWH/LIn comparison, diesel fuel has an energy density of 11.6kWH/kg and 9.7kWH/L. Gasoline is a little lower on both accounts.So in order to get enough hydrogen at standard temperature and pressure to do what we're doing with diesel or gasoline, we would be driving dirigibles instead of cars.The solution to this is to, of course, compress the hydrogen for storage, with optimum results being the production of liquid hydrogen. Even pressurised hydrogen gas is too dangerous a commodity for the average car owner. Liquid hydrogen would be even worse!Also, I think it was Stanford Univeristy that found that hydrogen caused its containment systems to become brittle.This is not to say that H2 doesn't have any uses, but those uses will need to be industrial, not consumer. So for everyone else, you might as well forget the hydrogen economy dream. H2 just isn't practical for the average Joe and never will be.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-82106]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[mheartwood]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:37:38 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Pie in the Sky]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-81856]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Just another pie-in-the-sky idea that can't be scaled up. Lots of processes can be used to get the H2, but none is commercially viable, hence reforming methane to extract H2. The only idea I know of that could do it involve NIMBY nuclear reactors, and isn't going to be approved in my lifetime, if ever.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-81856]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Starman35]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2012 08:54:05 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Global Worming?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-80706]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Probably caused by all of the Spice Mining.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-80706]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jwaustin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:49:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[H2 is 75 percent of the matter in the Universe]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-80696]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Helium is the other 25 percent. Everything else is rounding error.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-80696]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[jwaustin]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:47:23 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[It still requires plant vegetation]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-80169]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[There are a couple of things wrong with the process as it is presented.The first is that it still uses waste plant material to create acetic acid. While we have a certain amount of that already, to really create lots of hydrogen we will need to grow it. That means land and that means fresh water, neither of which we have in the quantities to replace much of the electric power we use. It's why ethanol doesn't work. But since this process produces CO2, the only way to not produce net CO2 is to capture it first with vegetation.Also, while it's a fun science experiment to use the voltage difference between fresh and salt water, the question is why? Since it apparently doesn't need a lot of energy but just voltage, you can get the voltage from many places. You can even take some of the hydrogen output to feed a fuel cell to create the voltage. Modern power plants do that all the time. Once they're generating they use their own output to run cooling pumps, equipment, etc. Nuclear power plants even use up to 25% of their own power for operations just to keep the plant running. Mixing salty water with fresh won't work in the country's interior, and transporting hydrogen from the coasts to the interior is an unnecessary cost.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-80169]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[rjmore]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2012 08:41:23 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Microbial fuel production]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-79528]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The hydrogen is generated in the nature by many fermentative bacteria in anaerobic conditions. This production is having a positive net energy balance, and it could exploit the biomass resources, also wastes, for the fuel manufacturing. Therefore, it would be highly advantagoeous to investigate the potential that is in the microbiological applications for future energy alternatives. This road would be completely sustainable! Elias Hakalehto, Adjunct Professor in Biotechnical Microbe Analytics, University of Eastern Finland]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-79528]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Elias Hakalehto]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:17:42 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Try to remained the humanity that we are grown up]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-79078]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Dear Follow in g+     I would like to introduce to you a very interesting and important subject and I want your support and collaborations.   Hello All        My subject will be about that the humanity have passed its infancy, childhood and adolescence and now the humanity are in the maturation stage and we must push this mature humanity farther to the full maturation, and to enhance the awareness of unity and the feeling of responsibility .                                                                                                                           Part One  Do you think my friends that the global worming was due to the carbon dioxide and alike only? The answer is NO. Why? Because there is a very dramatic factor that we create but we do not understand its effects, and not aware of it. And that is the urbanization of the area where it should be green and this will tern this area that was a carbon dioxide consumer and an oxygen and humidity producer to a new type of desert + carbon dioxide]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-79078]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[A S Zachi]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:03:35 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Energy lost...???]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-72157]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[How is energy lost? The salt water and waste water are ultimately going to mix any way you slice it, so why waste that? We can use it. It's no different in principle from sunlight falling on solar cells instead of the ground below. Even if it were true that energy were somehow lost from the ocean (although the water got there via rivers after solar evaporation from the ocean, so it's really solar energy), how much greater the loss when we burn fossil fuels representing limited stores of solar energy garnered over millions of years. For whatever reason, some of the comments here fail to recognize that almost any form if not all forms of energy we use are ultimately solar energy. It's just that using forms of solar that are short cycles instead of millions of years and that are inherently balanced in terms of our current global conditions don't unleash carbon dioxide from the past to upset our current balance, such as it may be. (See the second paragraph of my comment in reply to the worry that CO(2) gets generated when in fact it is net zero for the whole process.)]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-72157]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[robert_13]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 08:57:16 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[CO(2) Comment Below]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-72156]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[If you study the graphic model of the process, you will see that any CO(2) that gets &quot;generated&quot; is CO(2) that was taken away by the original plant sources that produced the waste the bacteria ultimately digest. The contribution of CO(2) by this process is net zero. The biggest problem in getting people to understand anything about the natural, technological, or political realities that impact us all is fragmented, short-circuited thinking. This kind of thinking produces huge political problems for the whole population because it is currently the dominant mode of thought in the general public.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-72156]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[robert_13]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 08:44:51 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[What about the CO2?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-54376]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[The figure shows that CO2 is generated in the process, and I was wondering how much. If it's significant, this could obviously be another potential problem.  Judging from the previous comment, perhaps you could do a follow-up article that addresses some of the issues brought up.....]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-54376]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[klassman6]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sat, 01 Oct 2011 22:57:26 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[New technology]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-54078]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Let's get it right...too much information on &quot;new&quot; that's not new, incomplete, and just lacking credibility. &quot;Green&quot; has gone to the news media's head. Get real.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.smartplanet.com/forum/discussions/1-7573-54078]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[cavalierking55@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 11:28:36 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

