Hydrogen Buses In Iceland 465
dapyx writes "As part of the shift away from the fossil fuels, Iceland began its switch to hydrogen-powered buses, which are now used on the streets of the capital, Reykjavik. About 70 percent of Iceland's energy is already met by green power. Iceland plans to become the first oil-free country by 2050."
Totally oil free? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Hydrogen? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hydrogen? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Hydrogen? (Score:4, Interesting)
If this country (USA) wants to get off its coal, natural gas, and petroleum dependency, it has to build new nuclear power plants to power homes and use that to generate hydrogen to power vehicles. No new nuclear power plant has been built since the Three Mile Island incident, which similar to Chernobyl, was a combination of untrained workers and poor design.
It's not a popular idea around here, but huge amounts of greenhouse gas and radiation could be saved from entering out atmosphere if we used more nuclear power.
Re:I hate the term "green power", article full of (Score:2, Interesting)
http://hotrock.anu.edu.au/cooper.htm
And the geothermal energy doesn't have to be next door. I'm sure there are plenty of geothermal sites in North America. They may not be enough to supply the whole nation's ebergy requirements, but they might cover some of it.
Re:Hydrogen from where? (Score:3, Interesting)
As you will notice, you'll have hydrogen bubbling and virtually NO heat. Heat is the waste product here. There is no heat, so there is no waste (more or less).
What you are referring to is the fact that it's a very energy-expensive process. But so is electrolysis in aluminium - the price of which is around 90% of the cost of the electricity - yet tonnes upon tonnes are made. The people that discovered how to get the aluminium we use today thought it'd never be used because all they had was batteries (in 1825) and as such put it down as an interesting, but not very useful, discovery. Nowadays the world wouldn't be the same without it.
What if we discover a 'cheap' nuclear fusion process in 5 years, after the G7 realise that yes, peak oil is a problem and pump trillions into research? Hydrogen would be a great energy carrier. Let's face it, if you could 'fill up' your hydrogen car overnight in the garage for $1 because electricity is so cheap thanks to fusion, everyone would choose it, even if it had a 270mile range (which I suspect will vastly increase with time).
This is a big deal. (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a big deal folks. Geothermal is quite abundant [doe.gov] but it is relatively low grade energy. If you can get drilling costs down and figure out how to use the low grade energy along the lines the Icelanders are doing, you can not only resolve most subsistence energy problems, you can localize most food production for consumption in colder climates with articficial hot springs [jardhitafelag.is] just as the Icelanders are doing.
Re:Misconception (Score:1, Interesting)
You are just trying to further the original propaganda that you shouldn't move to Iceland but you can try Greenland. It's a conspiracy man.
Re:Hydrogen? (Score:4, Interesting)
I mean, seriously people:
1) Hydrogen *does* explode far more readily than gasoline. That's why it is the fuel of choice for deflagration to detonation transition experiments. That doesn't mean that everything with hydrogen is a waiting timebomb, but it is a fact that hydrogen is a relatively easy substance to detonate.
2) The cause of the Hindenburg fire is still unknown, but it is *not* an open and shut case that the skin was the cause; there are a number of refutations out there for that theory which show that the skin, in fact, was not that flammable. Additionally, clearly on video, the hydrogen is burning; however, thanks to the properties of hydrogen, the flame tended to be carried up and away from the passengers. Also, thanks to the poor mixing and low pressure, it was a high intensity deflagration, not a detonation.
3) Gasoline does not explode in the vast majority of situations (hydrogen and propane - gasses at STP - are much greater deflagration and detonation risks). Now, gasoline will burn hot and for long periods of time, which is it's own risk - but life isn't a hollywood movie where cars explode at the drop of a hat.
4) Hydrogen is not this low-risk substance that you portray it as; if you don't believe me, read a manual of guidelines on how to deal with hydrogen some time. Hydrogen causes embrittlement of metals, collects under overhangs (and has been responsible for blowing many roofs off at research facilities), burns hot and invisible, leaks out of far smaller pinholes than other materials, tends to flow through plumbing if it leaks underground, and all sorts of other stuff that you don't want to happen.
This doesn't mean that it can't be dealt with! But it's not some wondrously safe substance, either.
Re:Totally oil free? (Score:4, Interesting)
By 2050, I'd expect so. Plenty of plastics, paints, and lubricants made from biomass today.
http://www.google.com/search?q=soy+plastic [google.com]
Now whether using soy-based plastic is actually more efficient than using oil-based plastic is a different story, but oil has all sorts of political/social/economic inefficiencies that just don't show up in the base cost of production.
Re:Oil free? (Score:2, Interesting)
Ship it the old fashion way.... (Score:2, Interesting)
It would make for a beautiful sight. Airships floating about the city, refueling the (literally now) Gas Stations.
Re:Err .... (Score:3, Interesting)
I was wondering, if a large number of vehicles on the road are hydrogen fuel cell powered, won't there be a big problem of the vapour affecting visibility for drivers? I wonder how that will be dealt with.
Just a thought.
Yeah but ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Iceland is the Saudi Arabia of the 21st Century (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone living with an islandur, and having worked in Iceland a few times, there is a lot of 21st century products they can export. Knowledge, information, and beautiful women (and guys, supposedly, I'm no judge).
Iceland has an amazing internet infrastructure and very cheap electricity. I'm always astounded when I visit, because everyone leaves the heat (100% electric) turned up 24 hours/day, leaves their computers on all the time, have broadband and use it as much as I do. Their electricity is about 3% the price of what I pay at home, basically close to free. If you live with an Icelander, its a constant battle to get her to turn off lights when leaving the room, keep the heat at a reasonable level and turn it down at night.
On top of extremely cheap energy, they have good schools, excellent health care, and a standard of living supposedly the best in Europe (couldn't possibly be, beer is too expensive). The only downside is the constant rain and occasional snow. With fish stocks in the north atlantic dwindling, they are turning their skills towards information, the petroleum of the 21st century. Reverse engineering and process improvement are becoming their stock in trade, and slowly they are coming around to the idea they have to train up their young people to the highest level possible in fields like Information Science. The biggest problem is that when they send their young people to universities in Europe and America, there is a tendancy to stay abroad. They return when starting a family to take advantage of the social safety net that doesn't exist in places like America.
Don't discount Iceland, they do have a political will to make significant changes, and a per capita GDP to make it happen.
the AC
I can't believe I'm defending Iceland on
Looks decieve... (Score:3, Interesting)
Those 300.000 people also operate one of the biggest and most modern fishing fleets on the planet. In view of that fact being oil free by 2050 becomes a bit more challenging. Running cars on alternative fuels is one thing but extending that to deep sea trawlers and bulk cargo carriers is quite another proposition and that is precisely what they are thinking about.