Featured California to boycott Toyota products

People are confusing specific energy with energy density. The first is energy per mass, and second energy per volume.

A kilogram of hydrogen has the about same energy as a gallon of gasoline. That gallon of gas is about 2.72 kg. So hydrogen has a higher specific energy, but its energy density is worse. A gallon of liquid hydrogen is only 0.27 kg. It will take 3.7 gallons of it to equal one gallon of gas in terms of energy.

A tanker hauling liquid hydrogen will hold less energy than one of the same size hauling gasoline. There is different specific risks between the two in the event of a crash or spill, but I wouldn't worry about hydrogen's invisible flames. If there is a fire, something else will start burning.

 

Are you seriously impersonating Rip van Winkle?

See link to Bush's 2003 Hydrogen plan:
A New Generation of American Innovation

Mike

 

I said WORLD leaders not Bush from 2003.

 

‘Your statement was :

.

Showing a world leader from almost 20 years ago touting Hydrogen seems to be at odds with your “just now” qualifier.

 

New leadership from 20 years ago. New needs.

 

Hydrogen was touted back then for the same reason it is touted now. Well, hydrogen for cars was.

Much of the new touting is about replacing dirty hydrogen with green hydrogen in the current uses of the element. None of which are cars.

 

Well at least there are people in the world who can see a positive vision of Hydrogen. This is great news.


City News & Updates | City of Lancaster

 

What's wrong with using renewable natural gas as is?

 

People here have recognized a positive vision of Hydrogen. It just doesn't include cars.
As the article mentioned, they are looking at taking their large amount of renewable energy sources and storing excess energy in the form of Hydrogen.
This a great use of hydrogen. They do mention light duty vehicles, if those include personal cars, I think that is a waste of the resources. If that is just fleet vehicles, not a terrible solution.

 

Waste of resources, let’s skip all transportation and use are legs to get around, then there will be resources galore.

 

Gas has been tried, and failed. Hydrogen has been accepted by more persons than gas has for personal transportation.

 

That would reduce the need for resources immensely. However, I think that is impractical.

 

Mother Nature would disagree.

 

If you have a way to implement removing all mechanical transportation, great.
I am assuming you don't though.

As for compressed natural gas vehicles, their are 250,000 in the United States. Let me know when Hydrogen gets there.

 

What do you know - Hydrogen news keeps coming daily.
Iwatani Corporation of America and Toyota Motor Collaborate to Bring Seven New Hydrogen-Refueling Stations to Southern California

 

250k personal transportation - I think not.

 

It will keep Carbon cycling in the end, and other emissions regarded as pollutant. Every combustion process has its losses, and NOx/VOC.
Green Hydrogen is just Energy cycling.

 

Lancaster, one of the armpit / meth lab capitals of the world. Ask anyone that has worked for the public defender in Southern California blighted desert communities

DA: Meth use approaching 'epidemic status' in Lancaster County as fatal opioid overdoses decrease | Local News | lancasteronline.com

Not exactly a shining example of wise decisions or progress going on out there
.

 

Amazing