Neke brojke za one koje interesira ova tema
R. M. Santilli
Hydrogen International Conference, Munich 2000.
(Excerpts)
We recall that the use of hydrogen as fuel does resolve the
environmental problems of fossil fuels due to excessive emissions of
carcinogenic substances and carbon dioxide. However, the combustion of
hydrogen originating from regeneration processes (e.g., from natural
gas) implies the permanent removal from our atmosphere of oxygen in a
directly usable form, a serious environmental problem called oxygen
depletion, since the combustion turns hydrogen and oxygen into water
whose separation to restore the original oxygen balance is prohibitive
due to cost. We then show that a conceivable global use of hydrogen from
the indicated regeneration origin in complete replacement of fossil
fuels would imply the permanent removal from our atmosphere of
2.8875×107 metric tons of O2 /day, with consequential termination of all
life forms in our planet in a few years.
As is well known, gasoline combustion requires atmospheric oxygen, which
is then turned into CO2 and various HydroCarbon (HC). In turn, CO2 is
recycled by plants via the known reaction
H2O + CO2 +(hv) -> O2 + (-(CH2O)-), which restores oxygen in the
atmosphere. Essentially this was the scenario at the beginning of the
20th century. The same scenario at the beginning of the 20th century is
dramatically different, because forests have rapidly diminished while we
have reached the following unreassuringly daily consumption of crude oil
74.18 million of barrel per day = (1)
= (74.18 million barrels/24h)x(55 gallons/barrel) = 4.08×109 gallons/24h
= 1.54x 1013 cc/24h (using 4 quarts/gallon and 946 cc/quart) =
= (4.08 x 109 gallons)x(4 qrt./gallon)x(946 cc/qrt.)/day = 1.5438 x
1013 cc/day
= (1.5438 x 1013 cc/day)x(0.7028 grams/cc)= 1.0850 x 1013 grams octane/day
= (1.0850 x 1013 grams)/(114.23 grams/mole) = 9.4984 x 1010 moles
n-octane/day,
(see, e.g., http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/energy.html) where
we have replaced, for simplicity, crude oil with a straight chain of
n-octanes CH3-(CH2)6-CH3 with the known density of 0.7028 g/cc at 20o C.
It should be indicated that data (1) do not include the additional large
use of natural gas and coals, which would bring the daily combustion of
all fossil fuel to the equivalent of about 120 million barrels of crude
oil per day.
The primary environmental problems caused by the above disproportionate
consumption of fossil fuel per day are the following:
1) Excessive emission of carcinogenic and other toxic
substances in the combustion exhaust. It is well known by experts that
gasoline combustion releases in our atmosphere the largest percentage of
carcinogenic and other toxic substances as compared to any other source.
The terms “atmospheric pollution” are an euphemism for very toxic breathing.
2) Excessive release of carbon dioxide. It is evident that,
under the very large daily combustion (1), plants cannot recycle the
entire production of CO2, thus resulting in an alarming increase of CO2
in our atmosphere, an occurrence known as green house effect. In fact,
by using the known reaction C8H18 + (25/2)O2 -> 8 CO2 + 9 H2O, we have
the following alarming daily production of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion:
(9.4984 x 1010 moles C8H18)x(8/1)/day = 7.5987 x 1011 moles CO2/day =
= (7.5987 x 1011 moles) x (0.044 Kg/mole)/day= 3.3434 x 107 Kg/day
= (2)
= (3.3434 x 1010 Kg/day)/(1000 Kg/metric ton) = 3.3434×107 metric tons/day
It is evident that plants cannot possibly recycle such a
disproportionate amount of daily production of CO2. This has implied a
considerable increase of CO2 in our atmosphere which can be measured by
any person seriously interested in the environment via the mere purchase
of a CO2 meter, and then compare current readings of CO2 with standard
values on record, e.g., the percentage of CO2 in our atmosphere at sea
level in 1950 was 0.033 % ± 0.01 % (see, e.g., Encyclopedia Britannica
of that period). Along these lines, in our laboratory in Florida we
measured a thirty fold increase of CO2 in our atmosphere over the
indicated standard. We assume the reader is aware of recent TV reports
of; an occurrence, which has never been observed before. Increasingly
catastrophic climactic events are known to everybody.
3) Excessive removal of directly usable oxygen from our
atmosphere, an environmental problem of fossil fuel combustion, which is
lesser known than the green house effect, even among environmentalists,
but potentially more serious. The problem is called oxygen depletion,
and refers to the difference between the oxygen needed for the
combustion less that expelled in the exhaust. By using again the
reaction C8H18 + (25/2)O2 -> 8 CO2 + 9 H2O and data (2), it is easy to
obtain the following additionally alarming daily use of oxygen for the
combustion of fossil fuel
(9.4984 x 1010 moles octane/day)x(12.5 moles O2/1 mole octane) =
= 1.1873 x 1012 moles of O2/day = (1.1873 x 1012 moles of O2)x(0.032
Kg/mole O2)= (3)
= 3.7994 x 1010 kg O2/day = 3.7994 x 107 metric tons/day.
Again, this large volume of oxygen is turned by the
combustion into CO2 of which only an unknown part is recycled by plants
into usable oxygen. Thus, the actual and permanent oxygen depletion
caused by fossil fuel combustion in our planet is currently unknown.
However, it should be indicated that the very existence of the green
house effect is unquestionable evidence of oxygen depletion, because we
are dealing precisely with the quantity of CO2 which has not been
re-converted into O2 by plants.
Oxygen depletion is today measurable by any person seriously
interested in the environment via the mere purchase of an oxygen meter,
measure the local percentage of oxygen, and then compare the result to
standards on record, e.g., the oxygen percentage in our atmosphere at
sea level in 1950 was 20.946% ± 002% (see, e.g., Encyclopedia Britannica
of that period). Along these lines, in our laboratory in Florida we
measure a local oxygen depletion of 3%-5%. Evidently, bigger oxygen
depletions are expected for densely populated areas, such as Manhattan,
London, and Tokyo, or at high elevation. We assume the reader is aware
of the recent decision by U.S. airlines to lower the altitude of their
flights despite the evident increase of cost. This decision has been
apparently motivated by oxygen depletion, e.g., fainting spells due to
insufficient oxygen suffered by passengers during flights at previous
higher altitudes.
The purpose of this note is to indicate that, whether used
for direct combustion or in fuel cells, hydrogen produced from
regeneration methods (e.g., from natural gas) does avoid the release
carcinogenic substances and carbon dioxide in the exhaust, but causes an
alarming oxygen depletion which is considerably bigger than that caused
by fossil fuel combustion under the same energy output. This depletion
is due to to the fact that gasoline combustion turns atmospheric oxygen
into CO2 part of which is recycled by plants into O2, while hydrogen
combustion turns atmospheric oxygen into H2O. This process permanently
removes oxygen from our atmosphere in a directly usable form due to the
excessive cost of water separation to restore the original oxygen balance.
By assuming, for simplicity, that gasoline is solely
composed of one octane C8H18, thus ignoring other isomers, the
combustion of one mole of H2 gives 68.32 Kcal, while the combustion of
one mole of octane produces 1,302.7 Kcal. Thus, we need 19.07 = 1302.7 /
68.32 moles of H2 to produce the same energy of one mole of octane.
In turn, the combustion of 19.07 moles of H2 requires 9.535
moles of O2, while the combustion of one mole of octane requires 12.5
moles of O2. Therefore, on grounds of the same energy release, the
combustion of hydrogen requires less oxygen than gasoline (about 76% of
the oxygen consumed by the octane).
The alarming oxygen depletion occurs, again, because of the
fact that the combustion of hydrogen turns oxygen into water, by
therefore permanently removing usable oxygen from our planet. When used
in modest amounts, the combustion of hydrogen constitutes no appreciable
environmental problem. However, when used in large amounts, the
combustion of hydrogen produced via regenerative methods is potentially
catastrophic on environmental grounds, because oxygen is the foundation
of life.
At the limit, a global combustion of hydrogen of
regenerating origin in complete replacement of fossil fuels would render
our planet uninhabitable in a short period of time. In fact, such a vast
use would imply the permanent removal from our atmosphere of 76% of the
oxygen currently consumed to burn fossil fuels, i.e., from Eqs. (2) and
(3), we would have the following permanent oxygen depletion due to
global hydrogen combustion:
76% oxygen used for fossil fuel combustion = (4)
= 2.8875 x 107 metric tons O2 depleted/day.
In addition, one should take into account the quantitatively similar
oxygen depletion caused by the production of electricity, resulting in a
truly catastrophic oxygen depletion which would imply the termination of
any life on Earth within a few years.
Predictably, the above feature of hydrogen combustion has
alarmed environmental groups, labor unions, and other concerned people.
As an illustration, calculations show that, in the event all fuels in
Manhattan were replaced by hydrogen, the local oxygen depletion would
cause heart failures, with evident large financial liabilities and legal
implications for hydrogen suppliers.
In addition to the above catastrophic oxygen depletion,
hydrogen produced via regenerating processes has additional, equally
serious environmental problems of carcinogenic and CO2 emission pointed
out by P. Spath and M. Mann of the U. S. National Renewable Energy
Laboratory at the recent International Hydrogen Energy Forum 2000 [1].
The combustion of hydrogen produced from the electrolytic
separation of water via electricity originating from conventional power
plants, has similar environmental problems. In fact, the original
separation of the water, and its subsequent recombination in the
combustion does indeed preserve the original oxygen balance. However, an
oxygen depletion greater than that of Eq. (4) is caused by the
combustion of fossil fuels to produce the electricity needed for the
separation of water. Moreover, the combustion of fossil fuels in primary
power plants implies the emission of large amounts of carcinogenic
substances and carbon dioxide. As a result, the automotive use of
hydrogen whose production requires electricity originating from
conventional power plants is more polluting than gasoline.
The only environmentally acceptable use of hydrogen as fuel
is that produced via the separation of water whose electricity
originates from clean, renewable, primary sources of energy, such as
wind and solar energies, as suggested by the BMW Group for their
hydrogen powered car [2]. Unfortunately, the latter sources of primary
energy have insufficient production capabilities for large scale
automotive use of hydrogen. This scenario implies that the primary
environmental problems currently rest with primary sources of energy,
thus suggesting primary research efforts in the search of new clean
energy for the production of electricity
Tu cekamo i napredak na polju supravodljivosti.
Zdravko Dokuzovic
distributed by CROWN – www.croatianworld.net – CroWorldNet@aol.com
Notice: This e-mail and the attachments are confidential information.If you
are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that
any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail and the attachments
is strictly prohibited and violators will be held to the fullest possible
extent of any applicable laws governing electronic Privacy. If you have
received this e-mail in error please immediately notify the sender by
telephone or e-mail, and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments.
