Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010

From: G. R. L. Cowan (gcowan_at_eagle.ca)
Date: 09/25/04 

Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 14:31:05 -0400

Tkalbfus1 wrote:
>
> >I do believe that if the end of cheap oil is inevitable, and the best
> >alternative is twice as expensive as oil is today - say nuclear power
> >plants.
>
> A nuclear power plant is twice as expensive because of safety considerations.
> if the power plant was built where safety was not a consideration, say on a
> remote Pacific Atoll, then safety would not be a consideration and the only
> consideration would be the most economic way to produce power with a nuclear
> power plant. If the power plant is totally dedicated to producing hydrogen,
> then the hydrogen can be shipped to where its needed much like oil is shipped
> today. Alot of oil is drilled in remote places too. The Indian point power
> plant is a case in point of what not to do. the power plant is right in the
> middle of a populated area where million would have to be evacuated if
> something were to go wrong. On a remote Pacific island, this is not the case
> and a nuclear power plant can be built and operated cheaply. Nuclear reactions
> are much more energetic than chemical ones, so if a nuclear power plant can
> compete on an equal basis with a coal fired plant for instance, it would be
> cheaper. That electricity in such a remote place would have nowhere to go
> except into the production of hydrogen, so what really the plant would produce
> is hydrogen, it would be a nuclear powered hydrogen plant. the fact that a lot
> of a little energy was wasted in the production of hydrogen would not matter to
> the customers as the only form of energy that would be available to them from
> this power plant would be in the form of hydrogen. Energy would be wasted, but
> then alot of energy is wasted throughout the universe, and it bothers hardly
> anyone that the Sun radiates most of its energy out into space.

Waste of energy that cost time and trouble to get hold of
is a little different.

Many parts of the hydrogen economy have been demonstrated,
but trans-global shipment of liquid hydrogen is not one of those parts.
Why wouldn't the Pacific island nuclear plant not react its hydrogen
with CO2 to make synthetic oil, and ship that to the mainland
exactly as oil is shipped today?

--- Graham Cowan
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/Paper_for_11th_CHC.doc --
How individual mobility gains nuclear cachet

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Which is your favorite?
    ... We have not built a nuclear power plant in 30 years. ... As you can see, Big Oil is virtually ... non-existent in electricity generation. ...
    (comp.sys.hp.mpe)
  • Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010
    ... >I do believe that if the end of cheap oil is inevitable, ... A nuclear power plant is twice as expensive because of safety considerations. ... of a little energy was wasted in the production of hydrogen would not matter to ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: To whom "Romeo and Juliet" makes no sense?
    ... As long as there is such a thing as war, nations that wish to survive ... power plant by a nuclear power plant in 20 years. ... on how long it takes to build a nuclear power plant. ... prevent any and all future terrorist acts. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Lessons from Japan
    ... running Japan's now-hobbled nuclear power plant dismissed important ... the Jogan tsunami. ... about 25 miles north of the plant. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: OT: Spiked Article/Atheists and EcoChristians
    ... If a nuclear power plant explodes, ... very long-term bad stuff, and it will never go away (in our lifetime, ... Google for Wildlife near Chernobyl and you'll get a lot of hits. ... and you will find that a large coal fired power plant emits MORE ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)