Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Hydrogen Gas for cooking

K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
I was wondering about hydrogen gas used as the fuel for a gas stove? Has it
ever been done? Gas is a better cooking fuel but if solar power ever got
cheap and it looks like it could happen, I for one would prefer to use gas
for cooking. So one should be able to use solar electricity and make
hyrdogen for a gas stove.

Yeah I know electric stoves work fine. I just prefer gas. I'm just curious
if this has been done or how feasible it is.

Thanks
 
B

bw

Jan 1, 1970
0
Karl said:
I was wondering about hydrogen gas used as the fuel for a gas stove? Has
it ever been done? Gas is a better cooking fuel but if solar power ever
got cheap and it looks like it could happen, I for one would prefer to use
gas for cooking. So one should be able to use solar electricity and make
hyrdogen for a gas stove.

Yeah I know electric stoves work fine. I just prefer gas. I'm just
curious if this has been done or how feasible it is.

Thanks

Start with propane first and see how it works for you.
Where are you going to purchase the hydrogen?
 
N

Neon John

Jan 1, 1970
0
I was wondering about hydrogen gas used as the fuel for a gas stove? Has it
ever been done? Gas is a better cooking fuel but if solar power ever got
cheap and it looks like it could happen, I for one would prefer to use gas
for cooking. So one should be able to use solar electricity and make
hyrdogen for a gas stove.

Yeah I know electric stoves work fine. I just prefer gas. I'm just curious
if this has been done or how feasible it is.

Of course it's been done. I've done it myself. OK, I was using a
hydrogen/oxygen fire that I used to work quartz with but I did, in fact cook a
pot of chili :) I ran the flame with almost no oxygen and still it was hard
to keep from burning the food. Hydrogen is HOT.

Hydrogen is a cantankerous fuel. It's combustion velocity and range of
flammability is so high that it just LOVES to flash back into the burner
itself. The gas velocity has to be very high to prevent that. If you look at
the burner holes on an acetylene rosebud burner, you'll have a good idea of
what a hydrogen burner would look like.

In some imaginary world far far away where solar AND batteries became
dirt-cheap, I'd be cooking on either an induction range or a quartz burner.
Both closely approximate the gas experience of concentrated heat and
instantaneous changes in heat as desired.

Here in my cabin where propane costs a fortune, I'm all electric even though
I'd love a gas cooktop. I have an induction range for frying and other high
heat applications. I love it. I'm thinking about getting a commercial
version that will work with both aluminum and cast iron/steel pots. My
civilian-grade one will not work with aluminum.

Only problem I've ever had was cracking two different fajita pans. Both split
from the center to one rim, obviously from the magnetic forces involved in the
huge circulating current in the cast iron. Sounded like a pistol shot. No
problem from any other type of utensil.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com <-- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
If stupidity hurt then they'd be putting morphine in the water supply.
 
F

Frank

Jan 1, 1970
0
Karl said:
I was wondering about hydrogen gas used as the fuel for a gas stove? Has it
ever been done? Gas is a better cooking fuel but if solar power ever got
cheap and it looks like it could happen, I for one would prefer to use gas
for cooking. So one should be able to use solar electricity and make
hyrdogen for a gas stove.

Yeah I know electric stoves work fine. I just prefer gas. I'm just curious
if this has been done or how feasible it is.

Thanks
I can think of 3 serious drawbacks.
One is that you would not be able to store the hydrogen as high pressure
is required. Unlike propane or butane, hydrogen does not liquify at
room temperature no matter what the pressure.
Two is cooking would be limited to sunny days.
Third, the energetics are probably unfavorable as only a fraction of
sunlight is converted to electricity.
Better to have a solar cooker that just focuses the light to a point
where you cook.
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Karl said:
I was wondering about hydrogen gas used as the fuel for a gas stove?

I'm sure it could but better be aware of the near invible flame scorching you.
How would you judge the heat if you can't see the flame ?

Has it ever been done?

Not by anyone sane I would imagine.

Gas is a better cooking fuel but if solar power ever got
cheap and it looks like it could happen

And how did you come to that conclusion ?

I for one would prefer to use gas for cooking. So one should be able to use
solar electricity and make hyrdogen for a gas stove.

KooK alert !

Graham
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
bw said:
Start with propane first and see how it works for you.
Where are you going to purchase the hydrogen?

No I was just curious. I saw a story on TV about a guy who produces all his
own power and makes his own hydrogen, which I suppose would be from
electrolysis of water.

So more of an intellectual thing.
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Neon John said:
Of course it's been done. I've done it myself. OK, I was using a
hydrogen/oxygen fire that I used to work quartz with but I did, in fact
cook a
pot of chili :) I ran the flame with almost no oxygen and still it was
hard
to keep from burning the food. Hydrogen is HOT.

Hydrogen is a cantankerous fuel. It's combustion velocity and range of
flammability is so high that it just LOVES to flash back into the burner
itself. The gas velocity has to be very high to prevent that. If you
look at
the burner holes on an acetylene rosebud burner, you'll have a good idea
of
what a hydrogen burner would look like.

In some imaginary world far far away where solar AND batteries became
dirt-cheap, I'd be cooking on either an induction range or a quartz
burner.
Both closely approximate the gas experience of concentrated heat and
instantaneous changes in heat as desired.

Here in my cabin where propane costs a fortune, I'm all electric even
though
I'd love a gas cooktop. I have an induction range for frying and other
high
heat applications. I love it. I'm thinking about getting a commercial
version that will work with both aluminum and cast iron/steel pots. My
civilian-grade one will not work with aluminum.

Only problem I've ever had was cracking two different fajita pans. Both
split
from the center to one rim, obviously from the magnetic forces involved in
the
huge circulating current in the cast iron. Sounded like a pistol shot.
No
problem from any other type of utensil.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com <-- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
If stupidity hurt then they'd be putting morphine in the water supply.

What's a 'quartz burner'? I know about induction burners. They are nice
but EXPENSIVE! I was just thinking if in sometime in the future electricity
is real cheap but we still liked gas could we use hydrogen in an adapted gas
range of today.

Propane has issues too. It's heavier than air so you could have a leak and
the room could have loads of it at your feet and you would never know
until....

I just wanted to know what would need to done to gas ranges we see today in
stores to make them or future version hydrogen gas capable.
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Frank said:
I can think of 3 serious drawbacks.
One is that you would not be able to store the hydrogen as high pressure
is required. Unlike propane or butane, hydrogen does not liquify at room
temperature no matter what the pressure.
Two is cooking would be limited to sunny days.
Third, the energetics are probably unfavorable as only a fraction of
sunlight is converted to electricity.
Better to have a solar cooker that just focuses the light to a point where
you cook.

Your missing my point. What if say a utility made hydrogen and it was piped
into your house like natural gas is now. I just wanted to know are natural
gas stoves capable of burning hydrogen? I would imagine something would
have to be adapted since methane is different from hydrogen.

Cooking wouldn't have to be limited to sunny days either. You could have an
enormous array but if you were connected to the grid too you could draw all
the power you need to produce hydrogen when you need it.

Now all this would be moot if you could trade kwh for natural gas. but that
would make too much sense for the powers that be! :)
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
I'm sure it could but better be aware of the near invible flame scorching
you.
How would you judge the heat if you can't see the flame ?



Not by anyone sane I would imagine.



And how did you come to that conclusion ?



KooK alert !

Graham

I wasn't interested in DOING this today or next year. I was asking a
question. Tha'ts all. Feasibility was the issue.

But your odd response of:

"KooK alert !" ???

Here's those 'KooK's in Australia proposing in 2006:
http://www.aad.gov.au/default.asp?casid=22401
"

Hydrogen to power Australia's Antarctic field camps

13 July 2006





Expeditioners working in Australia's remote Antarctic field camps will soon
be baking bread, heating their huts and powering their laptops with clean,
green hydrogen.


The Australian Government's hydrogen demonstration project, led by the
Australian Antarctic Division (AAD), will operate out of Mawson station and
a nearby penguin-monitoring field camp at Béchervaise Island, this summer.


The project - the first of its kind in Antarctica - aims to investigate
safety and operational aspects of using hydrogen, with a long-term view to
running Australia's Antarctic field camps and stations without fossil
fuels."
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
I'm sure it could but better be aware of the near invible flame scorching
you.
How would you judge the heat if you can't see the flame ?



Not by anyone sane I would imagine.



And how did you come to that conclusion ?



KooK alert !

Graham

Here's something more from Home Power Magazine:
http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech/alternative-energy/homepower-magazine/archives/32/32p42a.txt
Hydrogen Basics
Amanda Potter
Mark Newell

c. Mark Newell and Amanda Potter

Home Power is gearing up to use hydrogen fuel for cooking. We've been
hoping to eliminate or at least reduce our propane use for a long time now
and have been encouraged by the interest and enthusiasm in hydrogen
that we've seen in our readers.

Hydrogen does not produce energy; rather, it is a non-toxic means of
storing and transporting energy. Any energy source can be stored in the
form of hydrogen. Solar, wind and hydro power can be used to break
down the molecular bonds which bind hydrogen in hydrocarbons and
water. Hydrogen, unlike electricity, is efficiently transported over long
distances (through pipelines, for example). It enables energy produced in
areas where renewable energy resources are abundant to be safely
transported to areas with high energy use. Part of hydrogen's virtue as an
energy storage medium is the fact that energy stored in the form of
hydrogen can be converted into different forms of usable energy without
producing pollutants; heat or electricity can be produced with water as the
primary by-product.

Catalytic Combustion
Hydrogen can be recombined with oxygen to produce heat in the normal
combustion process or it can be recombined in a fuel cell to produce
electricity. In both cases the primary by-product is water. Burning
hydrogen produces some nitrous oxides because of the high burning
temperature. However, using a catalyst (such platinum or nickel) lowers
the temperature and decreases the surface area of the reaction, which
increases efficiency and reduces the nitrous oxides to a negligible
amount. Pure catalytic combustion uses a catalyst to cause the hydrogen-
oxygen recombination to occur without the input energy of a flame. There
is a 100% efficient conversion of hydrogen to heat when temperatures are
kept below 100 degrees Celsius or 212 degrees Fahrenheit.

Converting a propane stove to run on hydrogen is a fairly simple process.
Low tech, inexpensive catalysts such as stainless steel wool (3% - 22 %
nickel) work well and are easy to use However, stainless steel wool is not
as effective in eliminating nitrous oxides as more expensive catalysts. For
more information on these operations see Fuel from Water by Michael
Peavey. Also look in your local library under hydrogen.

The Electrolyzer
An electrolyzer is a device that uses electric current to lyse or split
water
(H2O) into hydrogen and oxygen. (See Electrolyzer sidebar.) Electrolysis
is currently the cheapest, simplest, and most efficient method of home
scale hydrogen generation. Well-made and relatively inexpensive
electrolyzer cells from Hydrogen Wind in Iowa are available. Each
electrolyzer cell requires 2 Volts; the current determines how much
hydrogen they produce. (See HP #22 and 26.)

How Much Hydrogen Would We Use?
We plan to use electrolyzers to produce hydrogen, but how much
hydrogen do we need? Ideally we would like to supply the gas needs for
the eight of us that live here on Agate Flat. That, however, is no small
feat!
In order to determine how much hydrogen we need to produce and store,
we calculated how much hydrogen we would use on a daily basis. Here's
how much hydrogen we would need to run the cookstove, our only gas
appliance:

There are 82,000 British thermal units (BTU) per gallon of liquid propane.
We go through our 5 gallon tank of propane approximately every twenty
days. We therefore use:

82,000 BTU/gal x 5 gal = 410,000 BTU every 20 days,
or 410,000 BTU/20 days = 20,500 BTU every day.

How much electricity do we need to run through electrolyzers to produce
20,500 BTU of hydrogen? We have a number for converting BTU into
kilowatt-hours (kW-hr) of electricity but it assumes 100% efficiency. With
the kind of electrolyzers we are looking at, we expect the efficiency to be
about 50%.
1 BTU = 2.9287 x 10-4 kW-hr
20,500 BTU x (2.9287 x 10-4kW-hr/BTU) / .50 eff. = 12.0 kW-hr

This means we would need 12 kW-hr input to the electrolyzers each day
to produce hydrogen for our daily cooking needs. This is a lot of
electricity!
There are a lot of us up here now, but we are going to need to find more
efficient ways of our cooking and heating hot water if we hope to power
our entire stove with hydrogen. We are planning on installing a solar hot
water heater. We presently use our solar oven almost every sunny day
and we are planning on building a larger one to further cut down on our
propane use.


A Realistic Approach
We can begin by supplementing our propane use with hydrogen. The
next question is how much hydrogen we can produce. Home Power will
soon be adding two trackers to test. With our additional loads, this will
add about 1.5 kw-hr surplus power per day. We use the following
conversion factors to determine how many cubic feet of hydrogen (at
atmospheric pressure) 1.5 kW-hr will produce and how much energy in
BTU this amount of hydrogen will give us.

1cu. ft. H2=0.791 kW-hr or 1 kW-hr=12.6cu. ft. H2
1 cu. ft.=270 BTU
Electrolyzer efficiency = 50%

Using the above conversion factors,

1.5kW-hr/day x 12.6 cu. ft./kW-hr x .5 eff.=9.45 cu. ft. H2/day.
9.45 cu. ft. H2.x 270 BTU/cu. ft. H2=2551.5 BTU/day.

We will be able to produce 9.45 cubic feet of hydrogen at atmospheric
pressure (or 2550 BTU hydrogen) each day from our 1.5 kW-hr/day
surplus energy. This will only run our cookstove burner (assuming 10,000
BTU/hour) for a little more than 15 minutes.

Storage
Now that we have the hydrogen, how do we save it until we need it?
Hydrogen storage can be complicated and costly. Hydrogen can be
stored as a liquid, in a metal hydride or as a pressurized gas. Liquid
hydrogen at -253øC requires costly and complex storage containers and
the energy required to liquify hydrogen is 20-40% of the energy being
stored. Certain metals like magnesium, titanium, and iron absorb
hydrogen when cooled and release it when heated. In these metals,
hydrogen remains a gas but is confined in the spaces between molecules
in the metal. When the metal is "charged" with hydrogen, it is called a
metal hydride. Metal hydrides are the safest way to store hydrogen,
especially in transportation applications, but are also more costly and
complex than pressurized gas. Pressurized storage of hydrogen is the
most straight forward. The advantage of this method of storage is that
larger quantities of the voluminous can be stored in smaller tanks, saving
on space and tank cost.. However, compressing hydrogen to any sort of
high pressure ( pressures greater than 100 pounds per square inch)
would require an expensive gas compressor. We have chosen low
pressure storage because we would like to keep our storage system as
simple as possible.

To determine the size of our storage container, we've converted cubic feet
into gallons.

gal H2 =9.45 cu. ft. H2 x 7.5 gal/cu. ft.= 70.88 gallons

The Ideal Gas Law
When we talk about storage, we also need to talk about the pressure. The
above equation assumes we are storing the hydrogen at just above
atmospheric pressure. Hydrogen, stored as a gas, follows the ideal gas
law, PiVi=PfVf. The law states that the initial pressure times the initial
volume of a gas is equal to the final pressure times the final volume of the
gas.

Pressure in the ideal gas law must include atmospheric pressure. When
we inflate a tire to 35 pounds per square inch (psi), we are actually
inflating it to 35 psi above atmospheric pressure. Atmospheric pressure is
the pressure per square inch exerted on us by the atmosphere above us.
It varies according to elevation and temperature but is about 14.5 psi.
Anything less than that is a vacuum; anything more is pressurized. So, the
tire we inflated would actually be at 35 + 14.5 psi or 49.5 psi. The tires
walls only "feel" 35 psi because atmospheric pressure presses on it.

We have 70 gallons of hydrogen at just above atmospheric pressure, at
say 0.25 psi above atmospheric, or 14.75 psi. If we choose to store the
hydrogen at 50 psi above atmospheric pressure or, 64.5 psi we can
determine the resulting volume by applying the ideal gas law:

P1V1=P2V2
V2=P1V1/P2=14.75 psi x 70.88 gal H2/64.5 psi= 16.2 gal H2

The 70 gallons of hydrogen we produce can be stored in a 16 gallon
storage tank at 64.5 psi. The advantage of the higher pressure tank is the
low volume storage tank. Hydrogen at 64.5 psi could be stored in a
propane tank. Propane tanks, however, are expensive and a compressor
might be necessary to increase the pressure of the hydrogen. Since
hydrogen storage becomes more expensive and complicated as we
increase the amount of hydrogen stored, we decided to start our system
with only one day's worth of storage. Our options are to either store 16
gallons of hydrogen in an empty 10-20 gallon propane tank at 64.5 psi or
store the 70 gallons of hydrogen in two 55 gallon drums at slightly greater
than atmospheric pressure (See HP#26).

Hydrogen For Home Power Users
Hydrogen offers many possibilities for home power users. Indefinite, long
term storage becomes possible with hydrogen. Many home power
systems produce more power than can be used during only one season.
PV's produce surplus power in the summer; micro-hydro systems
produce surplus power in the winter. Hydrogen allows for the storage of
the surplus energy produced during one season to be used in another.
Hydrogen can be combusted to produce heat for cooking or space
heating with no pollutants; it gives home power producers the option of
eliminating the last of their fossil fuels. Because hydrogen and propane
are compatible, hydrogen can be mixed directly into an existing propane
tank and can be used in a propane appliances year-round, without any
modifications. (See HP#22).

In the foreseeable future, we may see fuel cells become a cost effective
method of producing electricity with stored hydrogen. Hydrogen could
then be used as an alternative to batteries which require proper
maintenance and employ toxic heavy metals which eventually need to be
disposed of or recycled.

This exercise has given us a good idea of the what it will take to replace
all of our propane use with hydrogen. It's brought home the importance of
conservation; our solar oven and solar hot water heater will determine if
our transition will be possible. There is little information on "home scale,
home budget" hydrogen systems. We welcome any advice or experience.


Access: Mark Newell and Amanda Potter, c/o Home Power, POB 520,
Ashland, OR 97520 ù 916-475-3179

Fuel From Water by Michael A. Peavey, (ISBN 0-945516), Merit Products,
Inc., Box 694, Louisville, KT 40201. Also available from Alternative Energy
Engineering (see ad on page 5 of this issue).
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
I'm sure it could but better be aware of the near invible flame scorching
you.
How would you judge the heat if you can't see the flame ?



Not by anyone sane I would imagine.



And how did you come to that conclusion ?

The cost for Solar power is going down. And new companies are innovating
everyday pushing prices lower. Also we have a new administration which
could also help push prices lower through expanded tax credits. personally
i am hoping for innovators from the likes of nanosolar, first solar, and
many other start ups who allege solar is going to get competitive with
fossil fuels.

That's how I cam to that conclusion.
 
S

Scott

Jan 1, 1970
0
Only problem I've ever had was cracking two different fajita pans. Both split
from the center to one rim, obviously from the magnetic forces involved in the
huge circulating current in the cast iron. Sounded like a pistol shot. No
problem from any other type of utensil.

Cast iron? Uneven heating can do that. If it were magnetism I'd expect to
see it warping your thin steel pans...? I've never had the pleasure of
cooking on an induction range.
 
N

Neon John

Jan 1, 1970
0
What's a 'quartz burner'?

IT's a flat top electric range with quartz-halogen lamps underneath each eye.
On and off as fast as a light bulb. IOW, almost as responsive as gas. I say
"almost" because the ceramic top over the lamps holds a little heat.
I know about induction burners. They are nice
but EXPENSIVE!

yep, but the price is coming down. A commercial 2kw one is now under a grand.
Significantly less than a grand. The ones I have are consumer grade ones that
QVC sold for $100. I bought a bunch of 'em for practically nothing ($5 each,
if I recall). They all had about the same problem

http://www.neon-john.com/Misc/Induction_range.htm

A quick shot with the soldering gun and they were up and running. This one is
about a kW. Enough power to get a 12" cast iron skillet to frying temperature
in under a minute.

I was just thinking if in sometime in the future electricity
is real cheap but we still liked gas could we use hydrogen in an adapted gas
range of today.

It would require pretty much a whole new burner head for each eye. Higher
pressure gas will be required so the orifice will be much smaller. The burner
holes will have to be pin-hole sized or maybe sintered brass or sintered
stainless. It'll have to be very heat resistant because when the flame is
turned down, it attaches itself to the burner and transmits a LOT of heat to
the metal. The burner will also have to be strong. Hydrogen is so energetic
that a flashback would probably burst the stamped sheet metal now used for
most burners.

Then there is the issue of the transparent flame. In the absence of any
impurities in the air, a hydrogen flame is transparent and essentially
non-luminous. Unless you're in a totally dark room, you won't be able to tell
if it is burning.

that's an occupational hazard when working with oxy-hydrogen lampworking
burners. When the hand torch is hung back on the economizer, all the oxygen
is turned off and the hydrogen is turned way down. A totally transparent
flame burns off the end of the torch. It's real easy to forget and let your
shirt sleeve or something hang over it.

there are ways to color the flame but they all involve consumables. A little
table salt dust induced with the air would turn it bright yellow, for example.
I don't know how the safety nazis would deal with that, as when the coloring
agent is depleted, the flame returns to transparent.
Propane has issues too. It's heavier than air so you could have a leak and
the room could have loads of it at your feet and you would never know
until....

That's really not an issue unless your house is absolutely air-tight and there
is no air movement. I've cooked on propane for years and the most I've ever
done from leaving an un-lit burner on (much more serious than a leak, gas
volume-wise) was "whoof" the area under the eyes. Startling but not terribly
dangerous.

It wouldn't be difficult to synthesize hydrocarbon gases with that same
energy. Before natural gas was widely available, many cities provided 'water
gas' to its citizens. It's a mix of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, made by
passing steam over hot coke or charcoal. Water gas, sometimes known as "city
gas", is where the notion of committing suicide by sticking your head in an
oven came from. Natural gas in the amount that comes out of the burner can't
suffocate you but just a little CO would.

Of course, with modern CO detectors, accidental poisoning wouldn't be much of
an issue. Besides, stove-top burners produce significant CO. I can use the
cook stove in my RV for about 15 minutes before my CO alarm starts indicating.
This, even though it has a nice proper blue flame. My propane range in my
last house was similar, only difference being that it took longer to build up
to the point where it registered on the CO detector. In both cases, my vent
hoods would take care of the problem - when I remember to turn them on.

I wonder if mild CO poisoning might be the reason so many housewives had so
many headaches? :)

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com <-- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -Darwin
 
N

Neon John

Jan 1, 1970
0
Karl, the first thing you need to do to enjoy this group is to kill file
eyeore. He's our token asshole. Frankly, I'd forgotten about him until you
quoted his stuff.
Here's something more from Home Power Magazine:
http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech/alternative-energy/homepower-magazine/archives/32/32p42a.txt
Hydrogen Basics
Amanda Potter
Mark Newell

c. Mark Newell and Amanda Potter

Home Power is gearing up to use hydrogen fuel for cooking. We've been
hoping to eliminate or at least reduce our propane use for a long time now
and have been encouraged by the interest and enthusiasm in hydrogen
that we've seen in our readers.

Hydrogen does not produce energy; rather, it is a non-toxic means of
storing and transporting energy. Any energy source can be stored in the
form of hydrogen. Solar, wind and hydro power can be used to break
down the molecular bonds which bind hydrogen in hydrocarbons and
water. Hydrogen, unlike electricity, is efficiently transported over long
distances (through pipelines, for example). It enables energy produced in
areas where renewable energy resources are abundant to be safely
transported to areas with high energy use. Part of hydrogen's virtue as an
energy storage medium is the fact that energy stored in the form of
hydrogen can be converted into different forms of usable energy without
producing pollutants; heat or electricity can be produced with water as the
primary by-product.

this is the classic example of the arrogance of ignorance or IOW, not knowing
enough to know what you don't know. HP magazine is like that. A lot.

Hydrogen is NOT easily transported. Pumping losses are a little less than
with methane but significantly higher than electrical transmission. That's
ignoring the dismal efficiency of electrolysis. Hydrogen diffuses into steel
causing something called hydrogen embrittlement. It makes steel become as
brittle as glass. There are alloys resistant to the effect but they don't
include the low carbon steel used in natural gas pipelines. Hydrogen
embrittlement is a problem with pipeline steel in the trace concentrations
found in natural gas.

Electrolysis, depending on the configuration and materials used, is somewhere
around 20% efficient. A rule of thumb for today's grid is about 10% loss,
generator to outlet. It used to be less but the successful eco-nazi against
new transmission lines has resulted in existing ones being overloaded with
correspondingly higher losses.

I could go on and on about that article but that gives you an idea of just how
far off-base they are.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com <-- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
Daddy, why doesn't this magnet pick up this floppy?
 
B

Bob F

Jan 1, 1970
0
there are ways to color the flame but they all involve consumables. A little
table salt dust induced with the air would turn it bright yellow, for example.
I don't know how the safety nazis would deal with that, as when the coloring
agent is depleted, the flame returns to transparent.

A thermocouple and a warning light?
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Karl said:
The cost for Solar power is going down.

From the insanely high existing prices.

And new companies are innovating
everyday pushing prices lower.

How many are ? How much are they producing ? Cite please.

Also we have a new administration which
could also help push prices lower through expanded tax credits.

NO. That's just taking money out of OTHER peoples' pockets. Stealing would be
another word for it. The real price is the same.

personally i am hoping for innovators from the likes of nanosolar, first
solar, and
many other start ups who allege solar is going to get competitive with
fossil fuels.

They can allege the moon is made of green cheese for all I would trust them.

Ever heard of investment scams ? Nanosolar refuse to release their actual
figures. Would YOU trust them ?

Graham
 
B

Bob F

Jan 1, 1970
0
Neon John said:
Karl, the first thing you need to do to enjoy this group is to kill file
eyeore. He's our token asshole. Frankly, I'd forgotten about him until you
quoted his stuff.

It's funny, but in another group, he actually makes useful, reasonable and
courteous suggestions.
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
Neon John said:
IT's a flat top electric range with quartz-halogen lamps underneath each
eye.
On and off as fast as a light bulb. IOW, almost as responsive as gas. I
say
"almost" because the ceramic top over the lamps holds a little heat.


yep, but the price is coming down. A commercial 2kw one is now under a
grand.
Significantly less than a grand. The ones I have are consumer grade ones
that
QVC sold for $100. I bought a bunch of 'em for practically nothing ($5
each,
if I recall). They all had about the same problem

http://www.neon-john.com/Misc/Induction_range.htm

A quick shot with the soldering gun and they were up and running. This
one is
about a kW. Enough power to get a 12" cast iron skillet to frying
temperature
in under a minute.



It would require pretty much a whole new burner head for each eye. Higher
pressure gas will be required so the orifice will be much smaller. The
burner
holes will have to be pin-hole sized or maybe sintered brass or sintered
stainless. It'll have to be very heat resistant because when the flame is
turned down, it attaches itself to the burner and transmits a LOT of heat
to
the metal. The burner will also have to be strong. Hydrogen is so
energetic
that a flashback would probably burst the stamped sheet metal now used for
most burners.

Then there is the issue of the transparent flame. In the absence of any
impurities in the air, a hydrogen flame is transparent and essentially
non-luminous. Unless you're in a totally dark room, you won't be able to
tell
if it is burning.

that's an occupational hazard when working with oxy-hydrogen lampworking
burners. When the hand torch is hung back on the economizer, all the
oxygen
is turned off and the hydrogen is turned way down. A totally transparent
flame burns off the end of the torch. It's real easy to forget and let
your
shirt sleeve or something hang over it.

there are ways to color the flame but they all involve consumables. A
little
table salt dust induced with the air would turn it bright yellow, for
example.
I don't know how the safety nazis would deal with that, as when the
coloring
agent is depleted, the flame returns to transparent.


That's really not an issue unless your house is absolutely air-tight and
there
is no air movement. I've cooked on propane for years and the most I've
ever
done from leaving an un-lit burner on (much more serious than a leak, gas
volume-wise) was "whoof" the area under the eyes. Startling but not
terribly
dangerous.

It wouldn't be difficult to synthesize hydrocarbon gases with that same
energy. Before natural gas was widely available, many cities provided
'water
gas' to its citizens. It's a mix of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, made by
passing steam over hot coke or charcoal. Water gas, sometimes known as
"city
gas", is where the notion of committing suicide by sticking your head in
an
oven came from. Natural gas in the amount that comes out of the burner
can't
suffocate you but just a little CO would.

Of course, with modern CO detectors, accidental poisoning wouldn't be much
of
an issue. Besides, stove-top burners produce significant CO. I can use
the
cook stove in my RV for about 15 minutes before my CO alarm starts
indicating.
This, even though it has a nice proper blue flame. My propane range in my
last house was similar, only difference being that it took longer to build
up
to the point where it registered on the CO detector. In both cases, my
vent
hoods would take care of the problem - when I remember to turn them on.

I wonder if mild CO poisoning might be the reason so many housewives had
so
many headaches? :)

Thanks, good post there. I like that induction type. I saw one that was
thousands of dollars. Granted that was a commericial one.

Oh they are making methane now too. I saw one article that referenced San
Antonio using some system to digest sewage into methane. And Waste
Management always has those ads on TV about capturing methane from
landfills, which I had heard was of a higher quality. We do have a lot of
methane in this country though.

I guess hydrogen may appear but maybe not. I have to watch out for dropping
prices for induction ranges. I just hate those old electric coils burners.
They just don't last long, at least the new ones don't.
 
K

Karl

Jan 1, 1970
0
I wasn't interested in DOING this today or next year. I was asking a
question. Tha'ts all. Feasibility was the issue.

But your odd response of:

"KooK alert !" ???

Pay no attention to individuals with limited experience and similarly
limited imagination. You were asking a valid question when an
identified kook presented himself to our attention. He speaks for
himself only.

Yeah I was just curious about the technology. Actually I had read an old
issue of Popular Science or Popular Mechanics and they got into the
"hydrogen" economy and I was just thinking cooking was a good app and
wondered if it was doable.
 
Top