dont be evil

[Plane]

There are TWO huge dams on the huge Paraná River, one is the Itaipú Dam near Iguazú Falls, between Brazil and Paraguay and another, the Yacyretá Dam downstream, between Ituzaingó, Provincia de Corrientes, Argentina and Ayolas, Paraguay. The latter is 880 meters long, with a four-lane highway running along the top. Spectacular. There are seven sets of massive towers running to the west, south and east to other cities in Argentina, and just one on the Paraguayan side.

Good , good....

I think that the choice of powersorce depends on what is naturally there . A custom fit for each situation.

Brazil has a lot of river , hydropower seems like a really good fit.

I was a bit surprised to learn that Germany has a lot of Solar power , more there than in many sunnier lands.

[kimba1]

isn`t windmills cheaper to set up than nuclear?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Duh. We have a carbon economy but do not rely on the elemental state of that element, either. There are other useful hydrogen compounds outside of H2.
=====================================
I think what we have is called a HYDROCARBON economy. And when one burns coal, coal is mostly elemental carbon, isn't it?

By "Hydrogen economy", I think it is generally understood that this is when h2 is used in fuel cells.
Hydrogen compounds that do not include carbon must be made by using elementary Hydrogen, mustn't they?

I know you are far superior in intellect to God Himself, but please have compassion and stop it with the "Duh" remarks. Thank you, it will be appreciated.

[Kramer]

isn`t windmills cheaper to set up than nuclear?

what difference does it make? Overall cost is the bottom line. One Nuke power plant on 100 acres verses millions of windmills on miles of square miles, then factor in maintenance cost over say 20 years. It's simple math combined with economics 101. What happens on the days the wind stops blowing?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Nuclear costs vastly more than wind because of the plant construction costs. There are also disposal costs of highly toxic nuclear waste. And nuclear plants are regularly shut down for maintenance. And so that's the big difference. To be energy independent, we need both safe nuclear and wind energy. It is not an either/or issue.

[Kramer]

Nuclear costs vastly more than wind because of the plant construction costs. There are also disposal costs of highly toxic nuclear waste. And nuclear plants are regularly shut down for maintenance. And so that's the big difference. To be energy independent, we need both safe nuclear and wind energy. It is not an either/or issue.

In CA about 5 or so  years back I was offered Wind Power to be PC. If I would have chose Green Power my electric bill would have gone up about 30%. Right up the road about 20 miles is San Anofre Nuke plant, it's been there since I was a child. Still works.

[Amianthus]

By "Hydrogen economy", I think it is generally understood that this is when h2 is used in fuel cells.

Only among those who haven't bothered to study it. BTW, fuel cells can be fed by a reformer that takes in hydrocarbon fuels (such as alcohol or gasoline) and strips off the needed H₂. A hydrogen economy can also be fusion based - which is really the only sustainable energy source for very long term needs.

Hydrogen compounds that do not include carbon must be made by using elementary Hydrogen, mustn't they?

No. They can be made from any source of hydrogen, not just elemental gas.

I know you are far superior in intellect to God Himself, but please have compassion and stop it with the "Duh" remarks. Thank you, it will be appreciated.

ROFLMAO

THIS from YOU?

[kimba1]

look to me, all energy leads to higher cost

[Xavier_Onassis]

No. They can be made from any source of hydrogen, not just elemental gas.

=======================================================
Okay, what hydrogen compounds are used other than those you can call "hydrocarbons"? And in what processes are they used that produces energy.

I have heard of using H2 as fuel in combustion engines and fuel cells. I have not heard of using any non-hydrocarbon hydrogen compounds in any other process.

[kimba1]

wouldn`t water be the cheapest and easiest to use?

[Amianthus]

Okay, what hydrogen compounds are used other than those you can call "hydrocarbons"? And in what processes are they used that produces energy.

Well, one is sodium borohydride (NaBH₄). It can either be burned as fuel, or used with a direct borohydride fuel cell. Use with a direct fuel cell allows the collection of sodium metaborate (NaBO₂) as a waste product, which can be converted into more sodium borohydride.

[Xavier_Onassis]

wouldn`t water be the cheapest and easiest to use?
========================================
That would be a steam engine. You need to heat the water to make steam. But that is not what most people would consider a Hydrogen technology.

I have never heard of sodium borohydrate as an energy source. If you replace the H2 with O2, to reverse the process with more H2. Then you would need a process to add the H2. This reaction sounds rather like a perpetual motion process. I think that violates at least some law of Physics. At any rate, it sounds like it would take more energy to cause the reaction and reverse the reaction than is obtained from the reaction.

[Amianthus]

I have never heard of sodium borohydrate as an energy source.

Like I said, you apparently haven't actually studied the subject. And it's sodium borohydride.

If you replace the H2 with O2, to reverse the process with more H2.

The reaction is a bit more complex than that.

Direct borohydride fuel cells decompose and oxidize the borohydride directly, side-stepping hydrogen production and even producing slightly higher energy yields:

    Cathode: 2O₂ + 4H₂O + 8e⁻ → 8OH⁻ (E⁰ = +0.4V)
    Anode: NaBH₄ + 8OH⁻ → NaBO₂ + 6H₂O + 8e⁻ (E⁰ = 1.24 V)

        Total E⁰ = +1.64V

Then you would need a process to add the H2. This reaction sounds rather like a perpetual motion process. I think that violates at least some law of Physics.

Not at all. Sodium metaborate (commonly called "borax") can be hydrated back into sodium borohydride with a number of different processes and, while hydrogen gas *can* be used, there are a number of other hydrogen donors that can be used including alcohol and water.

At any rate, it sounds like it would take more energy to cause the reaction and reverse the reaction than is obtained from the reaction.

Yes, this is a known law of physics - one of the laws of thermodynamics, specifically. This is true of all energy releasing reactions - more energy went into the reactants than you can possibly get out of it. (I avoided using the "duh" this time.)

[Amianthus]

wouldn`t water be the cheapest and easiest to use?

Unlike XO, I guess you mean extracting H₂ from water. Water, however, is a very stable molecule and it takes a lot of energy to extract H₂ from it. Water as a source for H₂ will become more feasible when fusion becomes practical.

[kimba1]

fusion becomes practical.

uhm
forget practical
when did we get fusion !!!???
damn I`m behind