Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: don@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Don Klipstein)
- Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:06:35 +0000 (UTC)
In article <46EA3F1B.E5C9BEC0@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Eeyore wrote:
bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:
One could design aircraft that used liquid hydrogen as avaiation fuel
- no carbon emission there, though they would dump a lot of water in
the stratosphere, where it hangs around a bit before finally hitting
the surface as rain.
Liquid hydrogen is appreciably less dense than kerosene, so you'd
probably need to go to a blended wing-body design
What do you mean by that ? How will it help ?
to get enough room
for the fuel tanks, which means that such aircraft are going to take
some time to develop, but my guess would be that this is eventually
going to happen.
The problem is that hydrogen is so much less dense than kerosene that
you actually have to make the aircraft structure much larger to be able
to carry enough LH fuel. That results in more weight of course, so you
have to make it larger still and so on.
I suspect you'd have to forget the idea of aircraft with 8000 mi ranges.
Liquid hydrogen has about 8.5% of the density of kerosene, and about 3
times the heat of combustion (in per unit mass terms) as kerosene.
To have equal energy content, a quantity of liquid hydrogen would have
almost 4 times as much volume as kerosene, but 1/3 the mass.
- Don Klipstein (don@xxxxxxxxx)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Jonathan Kirwan
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Eeyore
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- References:
- OT: getting rid of the medieval warm period
- From: Eeyore
- Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: PeteS
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: bill . sloman
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Richard Henry
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: bill . sloman
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: bill . sloman
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: z
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: jfma
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: bill . sloman
- Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- From: Eeyore
- OT: getting rid of the medieval warm period
- Prev by Date: Help on Tesla Coil design
- Next by Date: Re: How to develop a random number generation device
- Previous by thread: Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- Next by thread: Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading