https://newatlas.com/aircraft/interview-zeroavia-val-miftakhov-hydrogen-aviation
ZeroAvia's Val Miftakhov makes a compelling case for hydrogen
aviation
By Loz Blain
June 15, 2020
One of the two ZeroAvia prototype six-seater Piper Malibu airplanes
ZeroAvia https://newatlas.com/aircraft/interview-zeroavia-val-miftakhov-hydrogen-aviation#gallery:1
View 2 Images
Everybody but the oil companies wants electric aviation to take off as quickly as possible, if you'll pardon the pun. The aviation industry
is a huge polluter, and electric aircraft will not only be cleaner,
but significantly cheaper in terms of energy and maintenance. The
problem is batteries, whose terrible energy density is simply not up
to any practical aeronautical purpose at this stage, and there's no
guarantee that the vast amounts of research going on in the battery
sector will change that any time soon.
Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> writes:
https://newatlas.com/aircraft/interview-zeroavia-val-miftakhov-hydrogen-aviation
ZeroAvia's Val Miftakhov makes a compelling case for hydrogen
aviation
By Loz Blain
June 15, 2020
One of the two ZeroAvia prototype six-seater Piper Malibu airplanes
ZeroAvia
https://newatlas.com/aircraft/interview-zeroavia-val-miftakhov-hydrogen-aviation#gallery:1
View 2 Images
Everybody but the oil companies wants electric aviation to take off as
quickly as possible, if you'll pardon the pun. The aviation industry
is a huge polluter, and electric aircraft will not only be cleaner,
but significantly cheaper in terms of energy and maintenance. The
problem is batteries, whose terrible energy density is simply not up
to any practical aeronautical purpose at this stage, and there's no
guarantee that the vast amounts of research going on in the battery
sector will change that any time soon.
If:
1. They create a hydrogen infrastructure that exists across the US at
most GA airports
2. They create high performance 300+ HP engines running on Hydrogen
3. 1 for 1 replacement of fuel tanks to IMPROVE the plane's performance
4. Conduct this upgrade at a cost similar to a replacement engine
Sign me up. At this point, hydrogen fuel cells in cars have failed
hard.
Meanwhile, electric powerplants on planes are in the infancy. My
bellanca super viking can take me comfortably 1000nm on full tanks.
Daniel,
That's because current fuel-cell automobiles use dirty gaseous H2 fuel derived from petroleum. Liquid H2 liberated from water by hydrolysis
has the potential to power aircraft efficiently and cleanly either
burned in your (300-hp) Continental IO-520-K or (300-hp) Lycoming IO-540-K1E5.
"Your analysis fails to consider liquid H2's ~3X better energy
density compared to gasoline. Further, cryo-coolers are able to
condense liquid H2 at atmospheric pressure with very modest power
requirements (~100W). Liquid H2 overcomes the high-pressure
storage requirement for H2 gas.
6Li is used to store hydrogen safely and efficiently. It is also
one of the key components in making a thermal-nuclear weapon, but
by itself is not dangerous. Because of crony capitalism and
ignorant politicians, the US government has banned 6Li and the
buying and selling of it. However, the making of 6Li H yourself
with your own particle accelerator IS NOT!
Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> wrote:
<snip>
That's because current fuel-cell automobiles use dirty gaseous H2 fuel
derived from petroleum. Liquid H2 liberated from water by hydrolysis
has the potential to power aircraft efficiently and cleanly either
burned in your (300-hp) Continental IO-520-K or (300-hp) Lycoming
IO-540-K1E5.
Hydrogen is hydrogen.
About 90% of hydrogen production comes from steam reforming of natural gas, >which involves the removal of hydrogen from hydrocarbons at very high >temperatures.
Burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine produces huge
amounts of oxides of nitrogen, i.e. smog, far in execess of
anybodys pollution laws, assuming the engine can withstand
the much higher flame temperature of hydrogen.
<snip>
"Your analysis fails to consider liquid H2's ~3X better energy
density compared to gasoline. Further, cryo-coolers are able to
condense liquid H2 at atmospheric pressure with very modest power
requirements (~100W). Liquid H2 overcomes the high-pressure
storage requirement for H2 gas.
Most airports don't even offer MOGAS and you think they are going
to install huge solar arrays and cryo-coolers to produce liquid
hydrogen?
<snip>
6Li is used to store hydrogen safely and efficiently. It is also
one of the key components in making a thermal-nuclear weapon, but
by itself is not dangerous. Because of crony capitalism and
ignorant politicians, the US government has banned 6Li and the
buying and selling of it. However, the making of 6Li H yourself
with your own particle accelerator IS NOT!
Right, airports that won't sell MOGAS are going to install particle >accelerators to produce a key component for nuclear weapons?
Utter fantasy.
<snip remaining>
Dear Jim,
I was hoping you might have some input on this.
My comments in-line below:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 17:37:38 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> wrote:
<snip>
That's because current fuel-cell automobiles use dirty gaseous H2 fuel
derived from petroleum. Liquid H2 liberated from water by hydrolysis
has the potential to power aircraft efficiently and cleanly either
burned in your (300-hp) Continental IO-520-K or (300-hp) Lycoming
IO-540-K1E5.
Hydrogen is hydrogen.
It's difficult to argue with that sagacious logic. However,
electrolysis produces hydrogen from water without producing CO2 or
other pollutants.
Burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine produces huge
amounts of oxides of nitrogen, i.e. smog, far in execess of
anybodys pollution laws, assuming the engine can withstand
the much higher flame temperature of hydrogen.
Yeah, I wasn't really serious about burning H2 in IC engines. I put a
:-) in my statement, but apparently it was lost during editing.
<snip>
"Your analysis fails to consider liquid H2's ~3X better energy
density compared to gasoline. Further, cryo-coolers are able to
condense liquid H2 at atmospheric pressure with very modest power
requirements (~100W). Liquid H2 overcomes the high-pressure
storage requirement for H2 gas.
Most airports don't even offer MOGAS and you think they are going
to install huge solar arrays and cryo-coolers to produce liquid
hydrogen?
Perhaps.
To be totally candid, I envision photo-voltaic powered liquid H2
production through electrolysis employing cryo-cooling technology for
use in fuel-cell electric generation to power electric motors, be they attached to wheels on the road, or propellers in the air. I'm
certainly no engineer, but the limited research I've done appears to
support this being feasible, with the possibility of 6Li use for
longer term H2 storage.
<snip>
6Li is used to store hydrogen safely and efficiently. It is also
one of the key components in making a thermal-nuclear weapon, but
by itself is not dangerous. Because of crony capitalism and
ignorant politicians, the US government has banned 6Li and the
buying and selling of it. However, the making of 6Li H yourself
with your own particle accelerator IS NOT!
Right, airports that won't sell MOGAS are going to install particle >>accelerators to produce a key component for nuclear weapons?
If you had watched the video, you'd be aware that it is the legal
system that necessitates the use of a particle accelerator to produce
6Li, as its sale is currently prohibited because it can be a
constituent of fission technology. If that law were to be rescinded,
an on-site accelerator wouldn't be necessary to create 6Li.
Utter fantasy.
Agreed, it's a fantastic idea.
So, I'm firmly on the side of the dreamers to lead us into the future.
I would dearly love to see your engineering analysis
6Li is used to store hydrogen safely and efficiently.
Former Area 51 employee Bob Lazar is interviewed by Visual Effects
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 12:56:07 -0700, Daniel <me@sci.fidan.com> wrote:
Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> writes:
https://newatlas.com/aircraft/interview-zeroavia-val-miftakhov-hydrogen-aviation
ZeroAvia's Val Miftakhov makes a compelling case for hydrogen
aviation
By Loz Blain
June 15, 2020
One of the two ZeroAvia prototype six-seater Piper Malibu airplanes
ZeroAvia
https://newatlas.com/aircraft/interview-zeroavia-val-miftakhov-hydrogen-aviation#gallery:1
View 2 Images
Everybody but the oil companies wants electric aviation to take off as
quickly as possible, if you'll pardon the pun. The aviation industry
is a huge polluter, and electric aircraft will not only be cleaner,
but significantly cheaper in terms of energy and maintenance. The
problem is batteries, whose terrible energy density is simply not up
to any practical aeronautical purpose at this stage, and there's no
guarantee that the vast amounts of research going on in the battery
sector will change that any time soon.
If:
1. They create a hydrogen infrastructure that exists across the US at
most GA airports
2. They create high performance 300+ HP engines running on Hydrogen
3. 1 for 1 replacement of fuel tanks to IMPROVE the plane's performance
4. Conduct this upgrade at a cost similar to a replacement engine
Sign me up. At this point, hydrogen fuel cells in cars have failed
hard.
That's because current fuel-cell automobiles use dirty gaseous H2 fuel derived from petroleum. Liquid H2 liberated from water by hydrolysis
has the potential to power aircraft efficiently and cleanly either
burned in your (300-hp) Continental IO-520-K or (300-hp) Lycoming IO-540-K1E5.
But there are is new fuel-cell technology on the horizon:
https://hypoint.us/
Meanwhile, electric powerplants on planes are in the infancy. My
bellanca super viking can take me comfortably 1000nm on full tanks.
Daniel,
Thank you for your comment. But, it would appear that you are doing
the equivalent of comparing a ability of a newborn baby to that of a
full grown adult. Consider this:
"Your analysis fails to consider liquid H2's ~3X better energy
density compared to gasoline. Further, cryo-coolers are able to
condense liquid H2 at atmospheric pressure with very modest power
requirements (~100W). Liquid H2 overcomes the high-pressure
storage requirement for H2 gas. So, a membrane hydrolyzer powered
from a photo-voltaic array employing a cryo-cooler
https://trc.nist.gov/cryogenics/cryocoolers.html could produce
"green" liquid H2 fuel for fuel-cell use rather inexpensively. To
wit, the US Navy flew a liquid H2 powered aircraft for three days:
https://www.nrl.navy.mil/lasr/sites/www.nrl.navy.mil.lasr/files/pdfs/AIAA%20liquid%20hydrogen%20paper%202013%5B12-1231-4608%5D.pdf
And then there is this possible option at improving hydrolysis
efficiency:
http://rexresearch.com/microwavehydrogen/microwavehydrogen.html
If you object to liquid H2 storage, here's a novel technology:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytg23mDd1a4
Former Area 51 employee Bob Lazar is interviewed by Visual Effects
Supervisor Jon Farhat. In this video, they discuss what H1
(hydrogen) is, how it is created and it’s potential in the
automotive sector. In addition, Bob show us he has his own
particle accelerator which he uses to create 6Li (lithium-6) H
(hydride) for H1 storage.
6Li is used to store hydrogen safely and efficiently. It is also
one of the key components in making a thermal-nuclear weapon, but
by itself is not dangerous. Because of crony capitalism and
ignorant politicians, the US government has banned 6Li and the
buying and selling of it. However, the making of 6Li H yourself
with your own particle accelerator IS NOT!
Bob uses solar panels to power an H1 generator which produces H1
from H2O (water). For the safe and efficient storage of the
dangerous H1, 6Li H must be created with a particle accelerator
and used for H1 storage in high compression tanks. With the H1
generator, H1 is forced into the 6Li H tanks through the syringe
compression process. FYI, „hydrogen vehicles” are also known as
„fuel cell” vehicles.
Bob is the owner of United Nuclear Scientific and
Switch2Hydrogen. Jon is the owner of ODEMAX and director of this
video."
All that said, I envy you buzzing around in your luxuriant Viking even
if it is made of wood. Have fun, and inspect for dry-rot. :-)
Best regards,
Larry Dighera
By saying "dirty gaseous H2" you were trying to say H2 produced
without other emissions or byproducts.
Why didn't you just say that instead of the silly "dirty gaseous H2"?
Yeah, I wasn't really serious about burning H2 in IC engines. I put a
:-) in my statement, but apparently it was lost during editing.
Yeah, sure.
Most airports don't even offer MOGAS and you think they are going
to install huge solar arrays and cryo-coolers to produce liquid
hydrogen?
Perhaps.
Yeah, sure, when hell freezes over and hippopotamus fly.
On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 23:36:54 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Most airports don't even offer MOGAS and you think they are going
to install huge solar arrays and cryo-coolers to produce liquid >>>>hydrogen?
Perhaps.
Yeah, sure, when hell freezes over and hippopotamus fly.
If my preliminary calculations are near correct, I would expect LH2 generating facilities to reside on-premises to avoid the loss of
efficiency in transporting it for delivery.
Your conclusion that 'huge solar arrays' would be necessary may be
incorrect. Have a look here
On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 23:36:54 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
By saying "dirty gaseous H2" you were trying to say H2 produced
without other emissions or byproducts.
Why didn't you just say that instead of the silly "dirty gaseous H2"?
I guess senescence has impacted my ability to accurately express my
thoughts.
Or, perhaps I was expecting the less pedantic to get the idea. :-)
To be totally candid, I envision photo-voltaic powered liquid H2
production through electrolysis employing cryo-cooling technology for
use in fuel-cell electric generation to power electric motors, be they
attached to wheels on the road, or propellers in the air. I'm
certainly no engineer, but the limited research I've done appears to
support this being feasible, with the possibility of 6Li use for
longer term H2 storage.
As a real engineer, I call this an utter pipe dream.
Lots of things are "feasible", but that does not mean they are
economic, practical or even legal.
It is feasible to make a motor from a birthday candle, a permanet
magnet, and a Zippo lighter flint, but you will not find such
motors powering anything other than a physics class demonstration.
<snip>
6Li is used to store hydrogen safely and efficiently. It is also
one of the key components in making a thermal-nuclear weapon, but
by itself is not dangerous. Because of crony capitalism and
ignorant politicians, the US government has banned 6Li and the
buying and selling of it. However, the making of 6Li H yourself
with your own particle accelerator IS NOT!
Right, airports that won't sell MOGAS are going to install particle >>>accelerators to produce a key component for nuclear weapons?
If you had watched the video, you'd be aware that it is the legal
system that necessitates the use of a particle accelerator to produce
6Li, as its sale is currently prohibited because it can be a
constituent of fission technology. If that law were to be rescinded,
an on-site accelerator wouldn't be necessary to create 6Li.
You are mixing apples and oranges.
ALL the methods of producing 6Li are complex and expensive but
the main point is that 6Li is a key compenent to make nuclear
weapons and all the major powers are opposed to it's production.
Utter fantasy.
Agreed, it's a fantastic idea.
Fantastic as in pixie dust, flying bull frogs, unicorns,
and pots of gold at the end of rainbows.
So, I'm firmly on the side of the dreamers to lead us into the future.
I'm sure that is going to happen, all while riding unicorns.
I would dearly love to see your engineering analysis
My detailed engineering analysis can be had for $150/hr.
My back of the envelope analysis is that there are far too many
engineering, safety, economic, and international political issues
over making thermonuclear bomb components for this to EVER happen.
On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 23:36:54 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Lots of things are "feasible", but that does not mean they are
economic, practical or even legal.
It is feasible to make a motor from a birthday candle, a permanet
magnet, and a Zippo lighter flint, but you will not find such
motors powering anything other than a physics class demonstration.
Well, consider that Michael Faraday created the first electric motor
with a piece of wire dangling into a cup of mercury. That ultimately
lead directly to Tesla electric automobiles achieving astounding ~three-second zero-to-sixty-mph automobile acceleration.
Even the brilliant scientist may not appreciate what he has
discovered. To wit, Heinrich Hertz, after discovering and proving the existence of radio waves, postulated,
"I do not think that the radio waves I have discovered will have
any practical application."
Fantastic as in pixie dust, flying bull frogs, unicorns,
and pots of gold at the end of rainbows.
Perhaps. Lacking any supporting objective evidence/documentation to
support your allegation, it's difficult to take it seriously. Perhaps,
you'd care to provide quantifiable facts that support your contention.
Ah, free advice; worth every penny. :-)
When you mention 'safety,' I hope you're not thinking Hindenberg
Disaster. After all, we routinely use highly flammable, if not
explosive, gasoline with reasonable safety in our current
transportation vehicles.
When you mention 'economic,' I agree there will be significant expense
in developing a network of fueling stations, however Nikola Motor
Company intends to just that for compressed H2. See: https://nikolamotor.com/hydrogen
The 'political' issues you mention may be significant for the use of
6Li, but 6Li is not crucial for the system I envision. Let's forget
about it for now.
So, how many hours would you estimate you might require to do a
serious analysis of the requirements to electrically split water into
its component molecules, and produce LH2 from that pure H3 with a cryo-cooler, and quantify a comparison of LH2 feeding fuel-cells to
produce motive electric power, taking into consideration the reduced weight/mass of LH2 (density: 0.07099 g/cm3) compared to kerosene
(density: 0.78?0.81 g/cm3)?
My detailed engineering analysis can be had for $150/hr.
So, how many hours would you estimate you might require to do a
serious analysis of the requirements to electrically split water into
its component molecules, and produce LH2 from that pure H3 with a
cryo-cooler, and quantify a comparison of LH2 feeding fuel-cells to
produce motive electric power, taking into consideration the reduced
weight/mass of LH2 (density: 0.07099 g/cm3) compared to kerosene
(density: 0.78?0.81 g/cm3)?
Already done, many, many, many times by many, many people.
Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 23:36:54 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Most airports don't even offer MOGAS and you think they are going
to install huge solar arrays and cryo-coolers to produce liquid >>>>>hydrogen?
Perhaps.
Yeah, sure, when hell freezes over and hippopotamus fly.
If my preliminary calculations are near correct, I would expect LH2
generating facilities to reside on-premises to avoid the loss of
efficiency in transporting it for delivery.
Your conclusion that 'huge solar arrays' would be necessary may be
incorrect. Have a look here
Don't forget the energy required to do something with the
hydrogen to make it usefull, such as compression.
And again, if airports won't offer MOGAS, what in the world makes
you think there is any motivation to install a hydrogen production
facility?
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 00:00:07 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Larry Dighera <LDighera@att.net> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 23:36:54 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
Don't forget the energy required to do something with the
hydrogen to make it usefull, such as compression.
Liquid H2 doesn't require compression, only cooling; LH2 is stored at
ambient atmospheric pressure.
You are correct to mention the power required to produce LH2. It is surprising how little power is required by a cryo-cooler. The
cryo-cooler in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PWESWqhD8s
only required ~150 Watts for ~one hour to produce ~four oz of liquid
air.
And again, if airports won't offer MOGAS, what in the world makes
you think there is any motivation to install a hydrogen production >>facility?
You are thinking in the immediate present; I'm thinking in the future.
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 02:15:58 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
My detailed engineering analysis can be had for $150/hr.
So, how many hours would you estimate you might require to do a
serious analysis of the requirements to electrically split water into
its component molecules, and produce LH2 from that pure H3 with a
cryo-cooler, and quantify a comparison of LH2 feeding fuel-cells to
produce motive electric power, taking into consideration the reduced
weight/mass of LH2 (density: 0.07099 g/cm3) compared to kerosene
(density: 0.78?0.81 g/cm3)?
Already done, many, many, many times by many, many people.
So, your offer was insincere, eh?
I noticed that you failed to provide even one reference to support
your allegation that the engineering had already been "many, many,
many" times.
It's become difficult to take you seriously. Oh well ...
Stay safe, and be well, my friend.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 335 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 150:23:25 |
Calls: | 7,411 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,670 |
Messages: | 5,613,280 |