Society's misguided fear of hydrogen; a result of oil corporation?

[FilesFM_Announcements]

Hydrogen will go right through tanks, and the phenomena known as "hydrogen embrittlement" makes fittings unsafe over time.

Jewett, R.P. (1973). Hydrogen Environment Embrittlement of Metals. NASA CR-2163.

https://books.google.lv/books?id=K7agHFmzfbAC&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=Jewett,+R.P.+(1973).+Hydrogen+Environment+Embrittlement+of+Metals.+NASA+CR-2163.&source=bl&ots=gLefw0uTCv&sig=-FO3HATdym957VXmgbk5aWfUtCk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjM4NzauKHeAhXi-ioKHfv1DloQ6AEwBHoECAQQAQ#v=onepage&q=Jewett%2C%20R.P.%20(1973).%20Hydrogen%20Environment%20Embrittlement%20of%20Metals.%20NASA%20CR-2163.&f=false

"Steel with an ultimate tensile strength of less than 1000 MPa (~145,000 psi) or hardness of less than 23 HRC is not generally considered susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement."

Sounds good to me!

[1714863821]

1714863821

[1714863821]

1714863821

[TECSHARE]

I am not saying LPG is not a viable alternative, but it is a valid point that it is inherently more dangerous based on some simple mechanisms. Pressurized gas, if there is any puncture will evacuate nearly all of the fuel in the container, presumably resulting in a flame plume. Depending on the rate of escape, tank orientation, fuel levels, etc it could easily erupt resulting in aerosolization of the fuel mixture with the oxygen in the atmosphere. This is an EXTREMELY destructive effect. It does not always happen, no, but the chances are never zero.

Now lets look at liquid gas fuel. Most of these fuel tanks are not pressurized, and have special bladders to prevent punctures and leaks. If they are leaking the fuel will only empty to the level of the puncture at a generally slower rate. Most liquid fuels also have the added safety benefit that the liquid itself is very difficult to ignite. It requires it to first vaporize and get a proper fuel air mixture, then have a spark be introduced.

So again, I am not saying we cant use these alternative fuels, but lets argue facts please. Pressurized fuels will be inherently be more dangerous to use in vehicles just based on simple physics.

[Spendulus]

Hydrogen will go right through tanks, and the phenomena known as "hydrogen embrittlement" makes fittings unsafe over time.

Jewett, R.P. (1973). Hydrogen Environment Embrittlement of Metals. NASA CR-2163.

https://books.google.lv/books?id=K7agHFmzfbAC&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=Jewett,+R.P.+(1973).+Hydrogen+Environment+Embrittlement+of+Metals.+NASA+CR-2163.&source=bl&ots=gLefw0uTCv&sig=-FO3HATdym957VXmgbk5aWfUtCk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjM4NzauKHeAhXi-ioKHfv1DloQ6AEwBHoECAQQAQ#v=onepage&q=Jewett%2C%20R.P.%20(1973).%20Hydrogen%20Environment%20Embrittlement%20of%20Metals.%20NASA%20CR-2163.&f=false

"Steel with an ultimate tensile strength of less than 1000 MPa (~145,000 psi) or hardness of less than 23 HRC is not generally considered susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement."

Sounds good to me!

Ah, no. You can't cherry pick a quote and change reality. Reality is what it is. Hydrogen presents special problems in handling and materials. Let's just look at a Wikipedia clip on the problem.

If steel is exposed to hydrogen at high temperatures, hydrogen will diffuse into the alloy and combine with carbon to form tiny pockets of methane at internal surfaces like grain boundaries and voids. This methane does not diffuse out of the metal, and collects in the voids at high pressure and initiates cracks in the steel. This selective leaching process is known as hydrogen attack, or high temperature hydrogen attack, and leads to decarburization of the steel and loss of strength and ductility.
Copper alloys which contain oxygen can be embrittled if exposed to hot hydrogen. The hydrogen diffuses through the copper and reacts with inclusions of Cu2O, forming H2O (water), which then forms pressurized bubbles at the grain boundaries. This process can cause the grains to literally be forced away from each other, and is known as steam embrittlement (because steam is produced, not because exposure to steam causes the problem).
A large number of alloys of vanadium, nickel, and titanium absorb significant amounts of hydrogen. This can lead to large volume expansion and damage to the crystal structure leading to the alloys becoming very brittle. This is a particular issue when looking for non-palladium based alloys for use in hydrogen separation membranes.[21]

Sure, with care we can work around problems with hydrogen. This is routinely done with spacecraft H2O2 engines. So what is proposed here is literally "rocket science." It's simply not true that there is a "misguided fear of hydrogen."

[bluefirecorp_]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVNojwqylYM

Many explosion, such fear, wow.

--

No, but seriously, the youtube video shows a tank of compressed hydrogen being shot. The gases escape and quickly rise into the atmosphere.

If we tried that same test with either natural gas, gasoline, or pretty much any other carbon based fuel, it'd probably explode terribly.

Hydrogen is dramatically safer than petroleum.

[Spendulus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVNojwqylYM

Many explosion, such fear, wow.

--

No, but seriously, the youtube video shows a tank of compressed hydrogen being shot. The gases escape and quickly rise into the atmosphere.

If we tried that same test with either natural gas, gasoline, or pretty much any other carbon based fuel, it'd probably explode terribly.

Hydrogen is dramatically safer than petroleum.

Bah.

You have not shown that it is safer. Routine tests are done shooting bullets at tanks. All varieties of tanks.

https://auto.howstuffworks.com/car-driving-safety/accidents-hazardous-conditions/can-you-blow-up-a-car-by-shooting-the-gas-tank.htm

Go ahead and try again please.

[TECSHARE]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVNojwqylYM

Many explosion, such fear, wow.

--

No, but seriously, the youtube video shows a tank of compressed hydrogen being shot. The gases escape and quickly rise into the atmosphere.

If we tried that same test with either natural gas, gasoline, or pretty much any other carbon based fuel, it'd probably explode terribly.

Hydrogen is dramatically safer than petroleum.

If you are going to criticize my points at least address the correct scientific effect. Shooting tanks doesn't dismiss anything I said. Also the fact that you think liquid fuel tanks will explode when shot tells me you get most of your "scientific knowledge" from movies and TV.

Try watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM0jtD_OWLU

[Spendulus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVNojwqylYM

Many explosion, such fear, wow.

--

No, but seriously, the youtube video shows a tank of compressed hydrogen being shot. The gases escape and quickly rise into the atmosphere.

If we tried that same test with either natural gas, gasoline, or pretty much any other carbon based fuel, it'd probably explode terribly.

Hydrogen is dramatically safer than petroleum.

If you are going to criticize my points at least address the correct scientific effect. Shooting tanks doesn't dismiss anything I said. Also the fact that you think liquid fuel tanks will explode when shot tells me you get most of your "scientific knowledge" from movies and TV.

Try watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM0jtD_OWLU

Some years ago I helped a family who had the misfortune to have a propane cylinder stored in their garage malfunction. Their house blew up, there was not one piece of wood left standing. They were severely burned but all lived. This is no different if propane or LPG or h2.

It's just plain stupid to argue that hydrogen is safer than gasoline.

[bluefirecorp_]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVNojwqylYM

Many explosion, such fear, wow.

--

No, but seriously, the youtube video shows a tank of compressed hydrogen being shot. The gases escape and quickly rise into the atmosphere.

If we tried that same test with either natural gas, gasoline, or pretty much any other carbon based fuel, it'd probably explode terribly.

Hydrogen is dramatically safer than petroleum.

If you are going to criticize my points at least address the correct scientific effect. Shooting tanks doesn't dismiss anything I said. Also the fact that you think liquid fuel tanks will explode when shot tells me you get most of your "scientific knowledge" from movies and TV.

Try watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM0jtD_OWLU

You're just highlighting your ignorance. It's not liquid, it's compressed gas.

If you want to talk about liquid hydrogen, well, that's a different thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVNojwqylYM

Many explosion, such fear, wow.

--

No, but seriously, the youtube video shows a tank of compressed hydrogen being shot. The gases escape and quickly rise into the atmosphere.

If we tried that same test with either natural gas, gasoline, or pretty much any other carbon based fuel, it'd probably explode terribly.

Hydrogen is dramatically safer than petroleum.

If you are going to criticize my points at least address the correct scientific effect. Shooting tanks doesn't dismiss anything I said. Also the fact that you think liquid fuel tanks will explode when shot tells me you get most of your "scientific knowledge" from movies and TV.

Try watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM0jtD_OWLU

Some years ago I helped a family who had the misfortune to have a propane cylinder stored in their garage malfunction. Their house blew up, there was not one piece of wood left standing. They were severely burned but all lived. This is no different if propane or LPG or h2.

It's just plain stupid to argue that hydrogen is safer than gasoline.

Only an idiot would think LPG = hydrogen. That's like saying "COPPER IS IDENTICAL TO IRON IN EVERY WAY".

It's two entirely separate chemicals.

===

Yall gotta go back to 8th grade chemistry.

[TECSHARE]

If you are going to criticize my points at least address the correct scientific effect. Shooting tanks doesn't dismiss anything I said. Also the fact that you think liquid fuel tanks will explode when shot tells me you get most of your "scientific knowledge" from movies and TV.

Try watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM0jtD_OWLU

You're just highlighting your ignorance. It's not liquid, it's compressed gas.

It's not liquid, it's compressed gas.

It's not liquid, it's compressed gas.

It's not liquid, it's compressed gas.

Uh huh. You don't know that elements have different states of matter, and that compressed gases such as hydrogen and LPG form into a liquid but I need to go back to 8th grade science.

Only an idiot would think LPG = hydrogen. That's like saying "COPPER IS IDENTICAL TO IRON IN EVERY WAY".

It's two entirely separate chemicals.

===

Yall gotta go back to 8th grade chemistry.

Literally no one said that they are the same in every way. However they are both compressed fuels subject to the explosive atomization effect I previously described. Keep digging that hole. You are SOOOOO CLOOOSE.

[bluefirecorp_]

Hydrogen's liquid state requires super cooling.

Maybe if you went to science class once, you'd know this.  

[TECSHARE]

Hydrogen's liquid state requires super cooling.

Maybe if you went to science class once, you'd know this.  

nice save. /s

[Spendulus]

Hydrogen's liquid state requires super cooling.

Maybe if you went to science class once, you'd know this.  

Seriously, you need to come back after some chemistry and physics. You are wasting your time on this subject.

Or grab a triple point diagram and come back, but be ready to learn some things.

.......Still waiting for that triple point diagram.

While you are at it how about some MSDS sheets?

[Spendulus]

Hydrogen's liquid state requires super cooling.

Maybe if you went to science class once, you'd know this.  

nice save. /s

You don't think that someone's level of ignorance and misunderstanding in science and politics would be equally astonishingly wrong, do you?

I mean, even a stopped clock....

[bluefirecorp_]

Lol. It's crazy how wrong you guys are about pretty much everything.

It's kinda cool having my own personal trolls though. Spendulus and TECSHARE both have their points refuted multiple times, yet they call "me" the idiot.

It's pretty obvious these guys are concern trolls.

Finding the MSDS is pretty easy; you literally just google element name + "msds".

Gasoline:


Many dangerous, no breath, keep away from so spark. Wow!

[TECSHARE]

Lol. It's crazy how wrong you guys are about pretty much everything.

It's kinda cool having my own personal trolls though. Spendulus and TECSHARE both have their points refuted multiple times, yet they call "me" the idiot.

It's pretty obvious these guys are concern trolls.

Finding the MSDS is pretty easy; you literally just google element name + "msds".

Gasoline:


Many dangerous, no breath, keep away from so spark. Wow!

So now you are saying liquid gasoline is safer? That... is exactly what we have been arguing. Thanks for going full circle with your retardation.

[bluefirecorp_]

Lol. It's crazy how wrong you guys are about pretty much everything.
...
Gasoline:

Retarded shit

Are you insane or just retarded? Nah, it seems you lack the ability to read. That's par the course.

If you think a chemical that causes leukemia is safer than one that does not, you probably deserve to have cancer.

I don't get how you think you're winning, you're just being more and more retarded by the post. Your arguments wane in strength each and every post. I prove you wrong, each and every post. You just troll, each and every single post. I don't understand why you're even bothering unless you're either doing this because you have no actual life (in which case, I recommend a shotgun to your head) or you're state sponsored, in which you should probably put a shotgun to THEIR head.

Maybe a corporate oil shill rather than state sponsored, then again doesn't Russia have a pretty strong interest in oil? Maybe you're just both.  

[Spendulus]

.....
If you think a chemical that causes leukemia is safer than one that does not, you probably deserve to have cancer......

Yes, that is certainly possible.

Lol. It's crazy how wrong you guys are about pretty much everything.

It's kinda cool having my own personal trolls though. Spendulus and TECSHARE both have their points refuted multiple times, yet they call "me" the idiot.

It's pretty obvious these guys are concern trolls.

Finding the MSDS is pretty easy; you literally just google element name + "msds".
.....

So now you are saying liquid gasoline is safer? That... is exactly what we have been arguing. Thanks for going full circle with your retardation.

Wow! I've now learned one can find an MSDS with a Google search!

And Gasoline's an element, lol!

[bluefirecorp_]

Wow! I've now learned one can find an MSDS with a Google search!

Use your new found skill to search an actual element like I was implying originally; hydrogen.

Compare and contrast with gasoline; make my arguments for me

[Spendulus]

Wow! I've now learned one can find an MSDS with a Google search!

Use your new found skill to search an actual element like I was implying originally; hydrogen.

Compare and contrast with gasoline; make my arguments for me

You are truly wasting your time, but I do have a question.

Just one quote from MSDS for liquid h2 (roughly equal to 8000 psi h2 gaseous)

"Isolate spill or leak area for at least 100 meters (330 feet) in all directions. "

THE QUESTION: Are you influenced by the combustion products of h2 being h20 and not predominately Co2, since you view that as a GREAT EVIL?

Because I do suspect that's your motive.

[bluefirecorp_]

Wow! I've now learned one can find an MSDS with a Google search!

Use your new found skill to search an actual element like I was implying originally; hydrogen.

Compare and contrast with gasoline; make my arguments for me

You are truly wasting your time, but I do have a question.

Just one quote from MSDS for liquid h2 (roughly equal to 8000 psi h2 gaseous)

"Isolate spill or leak area for at least 100 meters (330 feet) in all directions. "

THE QUESTION: Are you influenced by the combustion products of h2 being h20 and not predominately Co2, since you view that as a GREAT EVIL?

Wasting my time educating the uneducated bums like you? Ha, it's quite fun to educate people on misconceptions. It's just amazing you can muster up any response considering how retarded you actually are.

Liquid hydrogen is literally super cooled. It doesn't matter what liquid cooled material you leak. At least it doesn't cause cancer in its natural state. In reality, you walk away from the frozen cooled liquid that's quickly converting to hydrogen gas (cause air is warmer than literally -200+C). But anyway, other than venting the area, I don't really see what damage would be done by the actual material. It's the lack of heat energy and everything around it that's the problem. If you build a proper containment area for something like "massive huge liquid hydrogen" storage areas (50 liters 8000 psi of liquid hydrogen ~= 111 kwh, which is a crazy amount of energy).

Of course, we're talking about compressed hydrogen rather than liquid hydrogen which doesn't have that whole freezing problem.

Yeah, I actually joined a local fuel cell coalition mailing list. I'm learning about cool applications with hydrogen through those streams. When I started this thread, I didn't. It turns out, there's public funding for these programs, so I might be able to suck off the tit of the masses of people I'm fooling into making the world a better place.

Hydrogen compared to gasoline, propane, or pretty much any other fuel shows it's much safer, especially if you look at the MSDS.

Spendulus, if you're done trolling and willing to learn more about the benefits (because you're nearly to the right path), I'd recommend you join a local coalition for the support of hydrogen.