Hydrogen Internal Combustion Engines

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I’m deadly serious about H-Power and incandescent lights… But I would think it obvious that the turtle joke was a joke. But nobody who owns a fiberglass boat, especially with twin turbo engines can honestly claim to be a conservationist. The environment is not happy about what it takes to produce fiberglass or it’s decomposition.
It’s very rare that I need to get-into the turbos but when I do it will make 400 gallons disappear. I cruise at trolling speed, 9 knots, because I’ve got lures out trolling. Have you ever been to an all you can eat sashimi and beer party?
 
Last edited:
Being a little misleading with your comments. Please provide verifiable and up to date proof of:1. Costs, 2. Cost of waste disposal 3. Time to build.
I believe current research may change your mind.
 
Porsche has also been doing some research into hydrogen combustion engines.
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/...-gas-engine-but-without-emissions-196504.html

I think it's great that research is being done into all this. I don't feel threatened by it, nor need to behave like some crazed fanboy trying to defend the status quo. Over HALF the energy of all fossil fuels burned in vehicles is WASTED as heat. The sooner we move away from using it in vehicles, the better. At least with power generating plants there's much better pollution management and potential for heat recovery.
 
wkearney99 said:
I don't feel threatened by it, nor need to behave like some crazed fanboy trying to defend the status quo. Over HALF the energy of all fossil fuels burned in vehicles is WASTED as heat. The sooner we move away from using it in vehicles, the better.
Click to expand...
Two thirds actually.

Weichai just developed, and is producing, a diesel truck engine that broke the 50% efficiency mark. World's first for this class of engine.
 
JRO said:
It’s very rare that I need to get-into the turbos but when I do it will make 400 gallons disappear. I cruise at trolling speed, 9 knots, because I’ve got lures out trolling. Have you ever been to an all you can eat sashimi and beer party?
Click to expand...

If you’re dragging lures at 9 knots you probably aren’t catching much.

Also, let’s try to be a little more civilized as to the content we post. That may have been a joke but it wasn’t a very tasteful one and didn’t really serve any purpose.

Back to our regularly scheduled program….
 
True, last I remember, we were dragging at 6 knots for marlin and 3 kt for pompano. I guess 9 knots is to catch flying fish!
 
Mako said:
True, last I remember, we were dragging at 6 knots for marlin and 3 kt for pompano. I guess 9 knots is to catch flying fish!
Click to expand...

Well I’m not going to call you a liar. I’m sure every species of fish has been caught off the beach at some time in world history. I only troll for tuna and mahi-mahi using live or pre-hooked frozen bait and a little lead. I use store-made lures when I have a set destination/deadline and can’t take time to check the bait often. If I hookup to an extra time consuming fighter… That’s when the turbos and credit card get me back on schedule.
I’m successful at 9 knots with the bait running just near 12” or less below the water. I use three poles and a reflective streamer array.
I copied other big game sports fishermen from the Bahamas and South Floriduh.

And if you are seeing flying fish you know you’re going to hookup.
 
In 1967-68 as an undergraduate I worked with a Dr. Charles Hill to power a Dodge/Chrysler slant 4 cylinder with hydrogen. Dr. Hill wrote most of the carburation articles for Hot Rod magazine in those days. He had cylinder liners, pistons, heads and valves specially manufactured to withstand the temperatures. You certainly wouldn't need diesel compression to ignite hydrogen. Many years later, as a sales and marketing type in the truck industry, I visited the Cummins Columbus IN plant and was shown a ceramic test engine running full speed to destruction. Now in academia, I am convinced that in the near-term over-the-road trucks will utilize hydrogen fuel-cell power while local trucking likely will utilize batteries.

No reason that boat, especially trawlers, couldn't run on hydrogen fuel cell electrical power, along with solar and batteries.
 
I love batteries… But batteries today are really converted burnt fossil fuel energy. And the cobalt used in batteries is mostly coming from the Democratic Republic of the Congo using slave and child labor.
The big banana will be using hydrogen to power all the power plants now burning fossil fuel. Nuclear power was never a smart solution but international construction companies paid pennies on politicians and scientists to make $billions building and operating them. Now they are targets for natural disaster and terrorist attack… Not to mention we still do not have a 20,000 year plan to deal with its deadly waste. GE (General Electric) and other international power providers are working diligently on hydrogen turbines, and other methods, to use hydrogen technology to finally end the primitive madness. It’s looking good!
And there will be a day when separating the the O from the H2O will be easy, fast and cheap.
 
wfleenor said:
In 1967-68 as an undergraduate I worked with a Dr. Charles Hill to power a Dodge/Chrysler slant 4 cylinder with hydrogen. Dr. Hill wrote most of the carburation articles for Hot Rod magazine in those days. He had cylinder liners, pistons, heads and valves specially manufactured to withstand the temperatures. You certainly wouldn't need diesel compression to ignite hydrogen. Many years later, as a sales and marketing type in the truck industry, I visited the Cummins Columbus IN plant and was shown a ceramic test engine running full speed to destruction. Now in academia, I am convinced that in the near-term over-the-road trucks will utilize hydrogen fuel-cell power while local trucking likely will utilize batteries.

No reason that boat, especially trawlers, couldn't run on hydrogen fuel cell electrical power, along with solar and batteries.
Click to expand...


I think we would all be running on hydrogen today if creating the hydrogen fuel wasn't so inefficient. It's a big net energy loss. That's what's holding it back.
 
JRO said:
And there will be a day when separating the the O from the H2O will be easy, fast and cheap.
Click to expand...


This is the catch. Until magic occurs and this becomes true, hydrogen powered devices will remain a niche because they consume sooooo much more total energy for work produced.


The only prospect for getting more energy out of hydrogen than it takes to produce the hydrogen, is fusion. Otherwise it's always a net negative process.
 
What's needed is better cheaper catalyst to lower the energy needed to dissociate h2o. There is a lot of effort going into this, example:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/01/220114153429.htm
Water is burnt hydrogen, and will always take more energy to unburn than will be had reburning it, but finding a reaction path that lowers the energy required is noble effort.
 
GoneFarrell said:
What's needed is better cheaper catalyst to lower the energy needed to dissociate h2o. There is a lot of effort going into this, example:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/01/220114153429.htm
Water is burnt hydrogen, and will always take more energy to unburn than will be had reburning it, but finding a reaction path that lowers the energy required is noble effort.
Click to expand...

In the link you gave it says:
". . .the Department of Energy-led initiative seeks to cut the cost of "clean" or green hydrogen to $1 per kilogram by 2030. "

Since 1 kilogram of hydrogen contains (approx) 40 kW-hr of energy (see my post #28) this would mean selling energy at 2.5 cents per kW-hr !

Don´t believe everything you see written !!
 

Attachments

  • Capture9.JPG
    Capture9.JPG
    26.2 KB · Views: 135
Last edited:
Nick F said:
In the link you gave it says:
". . .the Department of Energy-led initiative seeks to cut the cost of "clean" or green hydrogen to $1 per kilogram by 2030. "

Since 1 kilogram of hydrogen contains (approx) 40 kW-hr of energy (see my post #28) this would mean selling energy at 2.5 cents per kW-hr !

Don´t believe everything you see written !!
Click to expand...

The key is "seeks to". That's no guarantee they'll actually reach that goal.
 
I'm not expecting miracles. It's tough to lower the energy required to dissociate a molecule as simple and robust as di hydrogen oxide.
It's worth some effort to try.
 
GoneFarrell said:
I'm not expecting miracles. It's tough to lower the energy required to dissociate a molecule as simple and robust as di hydrogen oxide.
It's worth some effort to try.
Click to expand...

The dream continues . . . you can never lower the energy of dissociation below the energy that you get back when you recombine the hydrogen with oxygen.

There is no free lunch!
 
Nick F said:
The dream continues . . . you can never lower the energy of dissociation below the energy that you get back when you recombine the hydrogen with oxygen.

There is no free lunch!
Click to expand...
There is no need to as long as the energy used to do so comes from renewables.
As has been noted before, hydrogen functions as a portable form of stored
energy, much like methanol from biomass or batteries.
The main benefit from burning it in an engine is that it produces no CO2.
 
Last edited:
wkearney99 said:
More interesting news about hydrogen:
https://www.sciencealert.com/clean-fuel-breakthrough-turns-water-into-hydrogen-at-room-temperature
Click to expand...

Yes, saw that too. Gallium is interesting stuff. All known gallium, refined or in the ground, would fit in a small room. Will be interesting to see if this can scale up. I think the reaction path oxidizes AL to get free H2. OK. But reducing AL take a bunch of electricity, so I need to see the total energy path picture on this novel idea. If the reaction can go forward with aluminum oxide that would be a huge deal. And I know nothing about making nanoparticles of AL. Still, its thinking like this that leads to progress, even if every lab white paper doesn't scale up easy, never does. Been there, done that.
 
Keep dreaming, fellas !
 
wkearney99 said:
More interesting news about hydrogen:
https://www.sciencealert.com/clean-fuel-breakthrough-turns-water-into-hydrogen-at-room-temperature
Click to expand...

Good to hear someone else has their eyes on the future. Older folks have difficulty accepting there are scientific advancements happening all the time on everything. Advancements in the science of stripping the O out of H2O is critical and will surely be the global game changer soon. It’s a terrible shame humans allowed oil profits to divert science from providing the globe of unlimited green hydrogen power. On the nano level using even rare metals goes a long long way. Plus the technology going hydrogen-electric will be grand.
 
It's no dream Nick. The reaction in with gallium and aluminum to generate H2 happened. Whether it can scale up commercially takes time and $$ to ascertain. No risk, no reward.
My name is on patents that nobody thought could happen, clearly you're glass is half empty. The thinking that got us to this point will not get us a solution going forward.
 
Greetings,
Mr. GF. Your post #50: "All known gallium, refined or in the ground, would fit in a small room." Better check your #'s.



From this article:https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2021/mcs2021-gallium.pdf


"High-purity refined galliumproduction in 2020was estimated to be about 220,000kilograms, a5%increasefromthat
of 2019"


Edit: "...cost of "clean" or green hydrogen to $1 per kilogram by 2030. " How does one weigh a substance that is lighter than air?
 
Last edited:
Quote:
so I need to see the total energy path
unquote

Alan - you are absolutely right that there are chemical reactions that can produce hydrogen, but you summed up the essence of the issue with your words quoted above. It still takes some 40 kW-hr (plus inefficiencies) to produce a kilogram of hydrogen. This can, of course, come from electricity or chemical energy - or solar, for that matter, but you will never do better than 40 kW-hr per kg. Sorry.
 
JRO said:
Good to hear someone else has their eyes on the future. Older folks have difficulty accepting there are scientific advancements happening all the time on everything.
Click to expand...


FYI I am 74 years old, and have no plans to start using Hydrogen in my boat any time in the distant future. :nonono:
 
Nick F said:
Quote:
so I need to see the total energy path
unquote

Alan - you are absolutely right that there are chemical reactions that can produce hydrogen, but you summed up the essence of the issue with your words quoted above. It still takes some 40 kW-hr (plus inefficiencies) to produce a kilogram of hydrogen. This can, of course, come from electricity or chemical energy - or solar, for that matter, but you will never do better than 40 kW-hr per kg. Sorry.
Click to expand...


At that point, the big question comes down to this: what's the better long term way to store power? Hydrogen or batteries? I don't have an answer to that, but it would need to factor in production and disposal impacts for everything required for both scenarios as well as input/output efficiency.
 
If MMCC is your concern look at the big ticket items. With proven technologies mass transport and large product transport could be entirely done using electricity. No conversion losses. Electric trains, buses, light train. Electricity can come from solar, wind, hydro whatever. The US is way behind Europe in renewing our infrastructure. Going this way would involve reopening existing right of ways and would be complimentary to existing EV personal and short haul vehicles.
Hydrogen needs to compete with pure and hybrid in many applications where release of NO or CO2 is limited by law. Examples include canal boats, infra city ferries and such. In these applications access to electrical charging exists. Need for renewing the grid in these sites exists for other compelling reasons so will happen and is already happening. It is not economically reasonable to develop a separate infrastructure for hydrogen when the competition will have its infrastructure supported for other reasons.
Boats are different than ships. Pure electric for ships seems problematic due to lack of on ship space for sufficient panels to allow autonomy. So supplementary energy for propulsion beyond sola/wind would be required. Here there maybe a place for H.
Boats as well have insufficient deck space to allow solar/wind to allow autonomy if pure electric regardless if used to power electric motors or develop H. But in the majority of use programs do have access to charging sources. Charging infrastructure can more easily be done with electric then H.
Like water always finding the easiest path think this is the same. In very limited settings H will be used. When feasible pure electric has the advantage. For new builds of recreational boats there will be a divid. Pure electric for small short range single day use and hybrid for more extensive travel. Hull forms stressing efficiency tied to lowering displacement will be increasingly important as the less energy required the less energy needs to be stored. Even in our prior sailboat with both wind generators and solar everywhere feasible we liberated hydrocarbons. Yes, except on very rare occasions we were autonomous for all hotel loads but not for propulsion. Any channels, anchoring, docking or other close maneuvering required the engine. Long range was sail dependent. The opposite issue exists for power. It’s range where electric or H fails. Space is a premium on cruising boats. Both to allow comfort but also self sufficiency. Don’t expect to see H driven recreational boats in my or my grandkids life times. Already see effective hybrid for ocean and pure electric for short hop coastal. If looking at new build think the question people face is whether to go hybrid mated to LDL or diesel mated to heavy displacement. H isn’t in the running now or for the foreseeable future.
 
Last edited:
fgarriso said:



FYI I am 74 years old, and have no plans to start using Hydrogen in my boat any time in the distant future. :nonono:
Click to expand...


Some smart guys at Harvard are working on the fountain of youth pill. Assuming they get it done soon, we'll see these cool things happen as we get younger. By the time you're 10 years old again all of our energy concerns will have been solved. :thumb:
 
RT Firefly said:
Greetings,
Mr. GF. Your post #50: "All known gallium, refined or in the ground, would fit in a small room." Better check your #'s.

From this article:https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2021/mcs2021-gallium.pdf

"High-purity refined galliumproduction in 2020was estimated to be about 220,000kilograms, a5%increasefromthat
of 2019"


Edit: "...cost of "clean" or green hydrogen to $1 per kilogram by 2030. " How does one weigh a substance that is lighter than air?
Click to expand...
As I'm sure you know, kilograms are a measure of mass, not weight.
Weight is determined by the presence of a gravitational field. Mass ain't. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom