http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/ Autoblog Comments for Nanotech research stumbles on homemade hydrogen http://www.autoblog.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.autoblog.com en-us Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/Mar 3rd 2008 7:33AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/


http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/20/two-thirds-of-americans-think-nanotechnology-is-morally-unaccept/]]>Mar 3rd 2008 7:56AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
It might make sense if you were to use the nanotech to create hydrogen at home (from your tap water, perhaps). Then you would effectively be using your house's electricity to power your car. That would be great because you wouldn't have those massive battery arrays that run hybrids and electric cars.

-James]]>Mar 3rd 2008 9:22AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/Mar 3rd 2008 10:45AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/Mar 3rd 2008 11:02AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
Currently every argument about electric or hydrogen cars just seems stupid. Hopefully this technology can make battery packs smaller and more efficient for electric cars. I read about this technology before, problem is that while efficiency goes up the number of recharge cycles goes down. These batteries just do not last as long so you will have to replace the packs more often.]]>Mar 3rd 2008 11:27AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
Can't these folks get it through there thick skulls that hydrogen isn't going to be cheap, unless the U.S. starts building nuke power plants ASAP, like France and China, so we can have a surplus of "grid power", and can use the surplus electicity to crack hydrogen from water, and stockpile hydrogen like the French are doing.

Also we will be not spewing as much foul radioactive elements into the atmosphere via our 500+ coal burning power plants.

Yes, coal burning, at it's cleanest, actually creates and spews radioactive elements into the atmosphere in great quantities.

Nuke power is the safest, cleanest form of electric power. Even the Japanese who know the bad side of nuclear energy are less afraid and less constrained by hysterical greenies from the Sierra Club and their monstrous anti-nuke lobbies in Washington D.C..

France is freeing themselves from OPEC blackmail, by mass building Nuke power plants. At present, they have surplus power for their grid and are selling and using their surplus to break hydrogen from water for future automotice/industrial clean fuel burning.

We are spending so much research moneys on these extreme, and involved technologies, when right in front of our faces like a bright neon sign is clean, safe, nuclear energy.

Also remember that those old used fuel rods can be re-processed and new fuel rods will result from that. The amount of fuel left over is so minute and has a dangerous radioactive life of less than 100 years.

Spent fuel rods are not a danger. They still can be used via reprocessing.

Instead we are playing around with nano-tech to make better batteries. This is good research, but we have hydrogen available in infinite quantities if we would only get over the nuclear fear phobia that has been brainwashed into our boomer and later generations because of Green peace, and the Sierra Club and their propaganda that would drive us back to the Stone Age.]]>Mar 3rd 2008 11:58AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/Mar 3rd 2008 1:07PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/industrials/article555314.ece]]>Mar 3rd 2008 1:12PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
And making hydrogen using hydrolysis "on demand while driving" makes no sense, because hydrolysis is just converting one form of energy into another. If you have that much electricity available in the car, just supply it to the motor directly.

I think this product is comprised of largely snake oil.]]>Mar 3rd 2008 12:13PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/Of course we don't know if it really works so...]]>Mar 3rd 2008 12:55PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/Mar 3rd 2008 1:12PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
The way they talk you'd think they already invented the product and found it didn't work, but in fact most of them are just spouting off dribble they saw posted by someone else or read in a magazine. maybe its the winter blues.]]>Mar 3rd 2008 1:39PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
By the way.. Gas will be at $4 by summer nationwide (they say).]]>Mar 3rd 2008 6:51PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/It's "drivel", not "dribble".

And am I supposed to instead defer to your obvious huge mass of knowledge since you share your handle with a dead guy who all but invented AC?]]>Mar 3rd 2008 9:53PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/03/nanotech-research-stumbles-on-homemade-hydrogen/
Snake oil comes packaged in press releases like this often enough, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to dispute claims of physics defying technology (AKA perpetual motion machines and energy from thin air).

That said, if EVERYONE would just RTFA before posting, you might actually have an idea if it's seemingly snake oil or seemingly viable. In this case, the core technology sounds viable. For instance, they never claimed 1000x efficiency, they said 1000x surface area of "traditional materials" (whatever that means), but also said it would be 85% efficient for electrolysis (current systems are between 50-70% with a theoretical max of 80-94%). If they can get up to 96% (for both electrolysis and fuel cell conversion) like they are targeting, they will be competitive with most lithium ion batteries (for efficiency, but who knows about total cost, energy density, or power density).

Their little comment about producing hydrogen on-demand from a tank of water in your car "while you drive" was definitely snake-oily though (maybe their president Kevin Maloney is full-o-baloney just to pump up investors). Maybe water is an easy storage medium without needing high-PSI tanks, but you'd have a couple extra energy conversions (vs. just using power straight from the on-board batteries), and a lot of extra weight, so it just doesn't make sense. Maybe they (QuantumSphere Inc.) can elaborate.]]>Mar 4th 2008 12:48AM