Re: Hydrogen Cars, Trucks, and Buses Are the Answer Indeed



Willie.Mookie@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote::

In the 1980s steel manufacturers created new alloy steels that were
specifically formulated to resist embrittlement as stainless steels
resist corrosion. Both Lockheed and Boeing explored the possibilty of
using thin sheets of this stuff to make liquid hydrogen fuel tanks for
airliners and estimated costs of supplying those airliners with
hydrogen.

And of course hydrogen is completely unsuitable as an aircraft fuel since its VOLUME is some
FOUR times that of kersosene.

For fuels that you have to LIFT through the AIR its energy per unit
weight, not energy per unit volume that is the issue.

Completely WRONG.

That's now what BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRLINE division had to say. Are you
saying Boeing doesn't know ***, and you know more?

The huge volume of hydrogen storage required for an airliner would either require
a more massive structure (which itself is then much heavier)

You are the one who is wrong because you're not thinking about this
clearly..

Aside from the pipedreaming in the BOEING report you provided a link to they said only a couple of things of any real value about
hydrogen as a fuel.

Here they are from ...
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/environment/pdf/alt_fuels.pdf

" alternate fuels may suffer from the lack of one or the other characteristic, i.e. hydrogen shows a superior energy content per unit
weight, but exhibits a high specific volume."

i.e. it's inferior to Jet-A (kerosene)

And

"Compromises are necessary to the airframe to address fuel tank insulation requirements and pressure issues. The need for heavy
insulated fuel tanks would result in a decrease in the aircraft?s energy efficiency on short range flights."

Not sure why they reckon it's only less efficient on *short* range flights to be honest.

So, only negatives for hydrogen from Boeing. Which makes sense becasue there only ARE negatives for hydrogen as an aviation fuel when
compared to kerosene.

You might at least bother to read the sources you cite !

Graham

.

Quantcast