# Electric cars are a pipe dream

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Syzygys, May 20, 2010.

1. ### jimWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
24
small technology update , today Nov 24 Gore admits ethanol was a mistake,,( I include all biofuels as well) Batteries are good for small vehicles and short trips in warm weather or else you need a fuel heater or??, I test drove a hydrogen fueled mazda in the 80s, It is fun for 5 minutes then you get thinking about the ten thousand psi tank, embrittleing under your ass and if there is no spark it wont explode, only leak, hydrogen flame speed 3km/sec. ??? PS,, you cant get insurance..If hydrogen could be safe it would be my choice,I keep coming back to this GreenGas.cc ,, (3 parts H)To me it seems the only one as of today, Some people think it wont work but I saw them at the show in kansas city last year and it seemed to be working fine,. And yes you can buy a machine and make your own at your house<<<

3. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
Was he speaking of US's corn based ethanol or also of sugar cane based? Sugar cane is making fuel for about 80% of the cars driving around in Brazil now and is significantly cheaper than gasoline per mile driven. The US would be lucky to have such a "mistake," but could import it instead fund the terrorists.
Yet the higher temperature, (~500 C), high pressure and high toxicity of the NH3 production process running in your home is OK????

You never tell how hot and how high is the temperature and pressure required to make ammonia, but it is a well known Chemical fact - discovered more than 100 years ago. Of course it will "work" - but will be legally restricted (if not already) to well regulated industrial sites. Much too dangerous for home use.

Also there is no way small scale units can economically compete with industrial production -Obviously if there were then industry would be using many small units not enormous units where the volume to surface ratio (heat loss factor and capital cost of pressure tanks etc.) is more efficient. I.e. if you want NH3, just buy it and pay much less.

To illustrate the danger in home fuel production: Note you could also buy crude oil and process it into gasoline in a home unit, with much less danger as neither gasoline nor crude oil is a deadly toxin, and both the temperatures and the pressures required to refine gasoline from crude oil are much, much, lower than to make ammonia (NH3) from hydrogen and N2 .

You simple want to ignore the dangerous of home production of NH3. After a few dozen die, that will be illegal nationally.
It is clear to me you have some commercial interest in the company you always give the web link to.

*It has been working for more than 100 years to produce ammonia. During those 100 years the process has been refined to become cheaper and more productive.
-------------------
the high temperature and pressure process and the very toxic nature of NH3 is given here: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2635199&postcount=573 where you can also read the basic chemical formation requirements:
In 1909 Fritz Haber established the conditions under which nitrogen, N2(g), and hydrogen, H2(g), would combine using

medium temperature (~500 C)
very high pressure (~250 atmospheres, ~25,500kPa)
a catalyst (a porous iron catalyst prepared by reducing magnetite, Fe3O4).
Osmium is a much better catalyst for the reaction but is very expensive.

This process produces an ammonia, NH3(g), yield of approximately 10-20%.

Also explained and given there graphically are the FUNDAMENTAL LAWS for this chemical reaction, which GreenNH3.com = GreenGas.cc can not change:

Reason why lower temperature and pressure is not used is reaction rate then is very low (Great cost to wait years).**
(Graph shows equilibrium state)

If you are not part of this scam to collect funds from well meaning, but ignorant people, read here: http://www.ausetute.com.au/haberpro.html
before you send them any money.

-----------
** A tank filled with hydrogen and oxygen is safe even though H2O is the equilibrium state. Wait a few million years and then tank will have only H2O in it.
Same problem with 200C reaction between hydrogen and nitrogen, only worse as N2 is much less reactive than O2.

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 25, 2010

5. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
I missed this post until now.
The graph is the equilibrium state of H2+N2 --> NH3. To reach it at 200 C would require waiting many billions of years. That is not an economical NH3 production rate. (At 200C the reaction rate is essentially zero. Perhaps every month or so a molecule of NH3 might form when the most energetic pair of H2 molecules in the tank both collide "head-on" with the most energetic molecule of N2 in the tank at the same time.)

Even at much higher temperature, say 500C, the reaction rate is far too slow to be economical without the reaction taking place on the surface of a catalyst. Even then with the catalyst, you only get about 15% conversion in an economical waiting time.

It is much like a mixture of H2+O2 --> H2O which is the equilibrium state, only much worse as N2 is much less reactive than O2.
I suspect that a 200C tank of H2 + O2 will be mainly H2O after only waiting a few million (not billion) years.

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 25, 2010

7. ### jimWRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
24
no I have no money to invest in GReenGas, but I wish I did and yes I would like to have a machine, Bill You could crack your own petrol from oil as long as there is oil but at some point we know there wont be any. (Scientific American says 2014) They calculated ethanol and biofuel and there is not enough arable land on earth to create I believe ten percent of the fuel we need today, and then what do you eat? Also you dont put the GreenGas.cc machine in your house or car, it would sit alone away from problems like an outside woodstove only no smoke since there is no carbon. I believe they have figured a way to run it at lower temp and pressure using catalysts. One reason they make the GreenGas fuel decentral is to avoid the problems of large centralized petrol, (terrorism, trucking accidents, spills ect) Any how, being able to move myself in a vehicle and get food to my table becomes less likely as the alternatives get less. So the view forward, as of today (after oil and gas is gone ) it looks like Electric to move people close to cities, and this GreenGas.cc to do the rest? (heavy trucks, aircraft ect. ) Unless you guys know of a fuel I dont??

8. ### SkepticalRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,449
Jim

In spite of your last post, there are a number of alternatives. We have discussed electric cars, so let us look elsewhere.

1. Biodiesel from algae.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae_fuel
This technique can produce vast amounts of fuel in much lower acreage than normal biofuels, such as ehtanol from corn.
I quote :
"One biofuels company has claimed that algae can produce more oil in an area the size of a two car garage than a football field of soybeans, because almost the entire algal organism can use sunlight to produce lipids, or oil.[8] The United States Department of Energy estimates that if algae fuel replaced all the petroleum fuel in the United States, it would require 15,000 square miles (40,000 km2).[9] This is less than 1⁄7 the area of corn harvested in the United States in 2000"

2. Hydrogen gas.
This technique is still a long way from practical, but in theory nuclear generated electricity could permit production of unlimited amounts of hydrogen gas, which can be burned directly, or used in fuel cells.

3. Synthetic fuel.
Anaerobic pyrrolysis of biomass releases organic volatiles. If these are mixed with hydrogen gas and passed over a suitable hot catalyst, the end result is hydrocarbons that can power a car. A by-product is carbon that can be plowed into soil to create long term reduction of greenhouse gases.

4. Liquid fuel from coal.
The United States already has a pilot plant that makes 8000 barrels a day of diesel from coal. Nazi Germany, and later, South Africa under apartheird, ran their entire economies from this.

5. Liquid fuel from natural gas.
My country, New Zealand, made 50% of its liquid fuel for decades from such a plant - now mothballed.
http://www.methanex.com/ourcompany/locations_newzealand.html

6. Bacterial liquid fuels from garbage.
Genetically modified bacteria can convert waste into liquid fuels. See December 2010 Scientific American page 28.

7. Photosynthetic bacteria.
Scientists are working on bacteria that can convert sunlight, CO2 and water directly into fuels.

And so on.

Not all of these methods will be used, but we can almost guarantee that enough will be practical to provide for the world's liquid fuel needs.

Last edited: Nov 27, 2010
9. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
Why would you think that they have a better catalysts than ones hundreds of Ph.D. chemists, working during the last 100 years testing / trying 10,000s of possible catalysist have found?

If they had a more economical catalyst to use - it would be worth a billion dollars, just in license fees. Why are they asking for funds to help their projects? Use you brains and think instead of dream.

10. ### SkepticalRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,449
To Jim

I subscribe to, and read New Scientist, Scientific American, and ScienceDaily. None of these science magazines has discussed your GreenGas process. Bearing that in mind, I regard them as probable con artists. If I were you, I would make damn sure I never send them so much as one red penny.

11. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
US will not get cheap Lithium from world’s largest and richest deposit (70% of known supply is in Bolivia):

1st shows cutting blocks & 2nd Li rich brine being sun dried.

“… Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp, JOGMEC, has agreed with the Bolivian government to participate in an experimental project to pave the way for commercial extraction of lithium in Bolivia. … JOGMEC clinched the deal ahead of rivals, such as South Korea, China and France, following its joint participation with Japanese trading houses {names given} to develop technology to produce lithium from brine water in the Uyuni salt lake in southwestern Bolivia. …”
From: http://www.japantoday.com/category/...e-in-lithium-extraction-experiment-in-bolivia

“…Jogmec, as the agency is known, Mitsubishi Corp. and Sumitomo Corp., Japan’s largest and third-biggest trading companies, have jointly developed technology to extract lithium and the agency has proposed sharing the technology with Bolivia.
Bolivia is home to about 5.4 million metric tons of lithium, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. That’s enough of the metal to make batteries for more than 4.8 billion electric cars. {BT adds: and world’s cheapest production due to highest Li concentration}…”

“Iranian experts, Brazil's Ministry of Science, and researchers from companies such as France's Eramet SA and Bollore SA conducted a joint study on Bolivia's lithium reserves. … Iran is one of Bolivia's main partners in the area of lithium production and has inked a number of agreements on the exploitation of the country's lithium mines. … Last year, Iran signed a deal with Bolivia to help the Andean nation conduct research on the exploitation of lithium in the Salar de Uyuni desert. … {Last month – see post http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2648222&postcount=312} Tehran and La Paz inked five {more} memoranda of understating following talks in the Iranian capital. … Iran will render technical and engineering assistance for the projects and will also cooperate with Bolivia in producing other lithium products {especially Li-ion batteries for electric cars}.

Bolivia possesses about 70 percent of the world's lithium and should thus be able to supply the international market for the next 500 years. … “
From: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/150052.html

Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2010
12. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
Oh so there some new blockade around the USA such that lithium and lithium products can't be sold to the USA?

13. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
For cheap Bolivian lithium, yes.* The very left wing Bolivian government, is headed by its first native president, Moraes. (90% of the population hates the US.)

I am not saying that some countries like Japan, S.Korea, Brazil, even Iran, who will have access to the raw material will not make batteries with Bolivian Lithium and sell them to USA. I'm just saying that the US will not make batteries with Bolivian Lithium and sell them to anyone. It is, however, Bolivia's plan that before a decade passes, all batteries made with their lithium will be made in Bolivia (for the badly need jobs). I.e. Bolivian Li will have a export "peak Li" in about 7 years and rapidly decline past the peak.

*It is called a "secondary boycott" and the US has often used it. I.e. if country X can buy cheap Li from Bolivia and then at small mark up reship it to USA, then country X soon will not be allowed to buy any more.

Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2010
14. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
And we should care because...? Most lithium ion batteries aren't made in the states anyways so its not going to change anything.

Well great for them! Though peak lithium is not like peak oil as lithium is recyclable.

15. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
In general, yes. It would take a great reduction in US living standards to allow the US to compete on price of low tech , low value added goods. The US has, I fear, already lost the economic struggle as we have let others develop the new technology in many fields. Li-ion batteries is just one more.

Soon (when it is to China's advantage) we will not be able to buy real goods and services with pieces of green paper, as we have for several decades.
Above is part of my post here: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2657306&postcount=334
In theory,yes. but not currently well done for the smaller batteries. Probably car li-ion car batteries will do much better. The fraction of Li in batteries of all types recovered I would guess will be 85% + or - 5% when half the cars are using Li-ion batteries, if that day ever comes.

Recycling really only works well with many poor. In Brazil an amazing 96% of aluminum is recovered. You can not walk 5 blocks in Sao Paulo, on main traffic streets, without seeing some homeless bum with his plastic bag picking thru street trash cans to recover Aluminum, mainly soft drink cans. There are even "inverse vending machines" for AL cans in some super market parking lots. I.e. you stick the can IN and machine prints your receipt, which is good immediately for small part of your purchase. Few middle class bother but kids do. I don't and rationalize that the bums need the income. (Machine crushes the can so can hold many thousands, before any cost to empty it.)

Last edited by a moderator: Dec 3, 2010
16. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
No I mean, why and so as in why are you talking about the US, and so what?

In theory is all I was asking for, because a lithium battery EV world is also in theory.

17. ### X-Man2We're under no illusions.Registered Senior Member

Messages:
403
December 06,2010, Nissan Leaf Launched!

"The Nissan Leaf, which was recently named as the 2011 European Car of the Year, has officially launched in Japan and the response is overwhelming. The new electric vehicle is so popular that it has been overbooked until March of next year. In fact, Nissan said that the Leaf is so sought after that 6,000 Japanese customers have already placed orders and, despite it not being released in the US yet, over 20,000 US customers have pre-ordered the car"

http://tinyurl.com/29fk49g

Lets see what comes of this.Somewhere I read if your not babying the Leaf to get the most range,real world mileage is around 73 miles.Otherwise maybe 12 -15 miles more if conservative.

Messages:
53,966

Messages:
53,966
At $5.00 a gallon, that's still enough money to get you to 100,000 miles assuming 30mpg. So, basically free gas for the average operating life of the car. For the average person, it makes no financial sense. 21. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member Messages: 7,829 You do realize that for many hundreds of thousands of people in the US that$15,000 means NOTHING don't you?

Early adopters always pay a lot, but the reality is we have so many rich people in the US that this is a pittance for them.

How many people pay that for a tube stereo to listen to sounds their ears can't even hear?

http://www.audiovisionsf.com/?page=detail&product_id=1533

Volume will drive down prices and the price of gasoline will keep increasing.

Arthur

22. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
Luckily cars aren't bought by AVERAGE persons.
Don't you realize that's why there are so many friggin different models of cars?
Clearly there ARE hundreds of thousands of buyers who will find this car just what they are looking for.
Why even bring up what the "average" person needs?
When you go buy pants, do you buy what fits or what the average person wears?
We, and our cars, aren't average anything.

Arthur

23. ### spidergoatLiddle' Dick TaterValued Senior Member

Messages:
53,966
Agreed. They will sell, but they won't change anything until they become cheaper than a gas equivalent (including gas).