SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"A gas supplier company in the Netherlands has effectively doubled the range of the Tesla Model S by adding hydrogen power to the electric luxury sedan. Dubbed the "Hesla," the modification adds a second charging supply to the existing electrical system, using a tank of hydrogen as an alternative fuel source.
Last week, the Holthausen Group announced that it had begun testing the prototype vehicle. With a fully charged battery and a tank of hydrogen, the Helsa can travel close to 620 miles — nearly twice the range of the stock Model S P100D." http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/11/13/meet-hesla-modded-tesla-model-s-that-runs-on-hydrogen-fuel.html
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Dutch Gas Company Adds Hydrogen Power to a Tesla
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 16 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
I don't want a pickle,
I just wanna ride on my motorsickle.
And I don't want to die,
I just want to ride on my motorcy.
Cle.
-- Arlo Guthrie
(Score: 3, Interesting) by captain normal on Thursday November 16 2017, @05:26AM (5 children)
From TFA: "there are only 39 hydrogen fueling stations in the U.S., with the vast majority located in California." I don't think TRDT would want to drive around that blue state.
The other problem (again FTFA #1) is that "The first problem with that rosy scenario is that hydrogen and oxygen love each other so much that free hydrogen doesn’t really exist in our atmosphere", but there is plenty of loose oxygen. Kinda like Hydrogen is the number of pretty girls in your bar,but as soon as a couple of them run in a bunch of loose oxygen dudes there is most likely a big kaboom! With the current DHS worried so much about explosive drones, delivery trucks and airport attacks, how will they feel about 200 MPH bombs running around the Highways.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by leftover on Thursday November 16 2017, @05:37AM (3 children)
An 'ordinary' tank of gasoline represents an enormously more powerful explosion than any tank of compressed hydrogen. The real problem with hydrogen is finding a way to get the stored energy density higher. And, of course, keeping the hydrogen contained. It really likes to sneak out of tanks.
Aside from the [BIG] problem of building a new generation/distribution network, high-density storage is The Critical Issue for hydrogen. My favored approach is metal hydrides, which offer high density plus controlled release. You need to add heat to get the hydrogen out.
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Unixnut on Thursday November 16 2017, @11:41AM (2 children)
> My favored approach is metal hydrides, which offer high density plus controlled release. You need to add heat to get the hydrogen out.
Not bad, as we are discussing favored approaches. My favorite is to bind the hydrogen with carbon atoms [wikipedia.org], ideally forming longish chemical chains. These chains can store an immense amount of energy (so good energy density), are liquid at room temperature, much cheaper and easier to store (not many hydrogen atoms trying to escape through every single gap), easy to use in existing infrastructure and cars, and you can release the energy directly in as controlled (or not) fashion as you want, most commonly by adding heat (although not the only way) :-)
(Score: 2) by leftover on Thursday November 16 2017, @03:31PM (1 child)
Yup. Gasoline and internal combustion Just Work and everything is in place to use them. Makes for one hell of a barrier to entry for transportation. Economic forces, particularly the common shortsighted version, will not support building a replacement.
Bent, folded, spindled, and mutilated.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Tuesday November 21 2017, @09:49PM
Doesn't have to be gasoline and internal combustion to make use of hydrocarbon fuel. There are many other hydrocarbons in there, some very easy to synthesize, and some that can be used in fuel cells to produce no exhaust but water.
The fact that they can be burnt in adapted IC engines just provides for a nice transition period, rather than this foolhardy attempt to completely build out a brand new infrastructure and distribution (electric charging systems), for a technology that is quite frankly poorer than the alternative in every way possible (except for "tailpipe emissions", which is a bit of a cop out really).
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday November 16 2017, @05:39AM
Yeah, right, like the LPG is much friendlier [wikipedia.org].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford