Toyota's Developing A Hydrogen Combustion Engine

[lumen8]

Could Toyota's hydrogen engine save combustion by converting engines? Pros and cons in the vid...



I recall there was a BMW 750 V12 many years ago converted to run on H, So its not a new idea. Here is a vid of that one and a link.



https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wbp4l6m/

and here's johnny...

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by lumen8

Could Toyota's hydrogen engine save combustion by converting engines? Pros and cons in the vid...



I recall there was a BMW 750 V12 many years ago converted to run on H, So its not a new idea. Here is a vid of that one and a link.



https://www.carthrottle.com/post/wbp4l6m/

and here's johnny...

Circa 2007 BMW had the Hydrogen 7 prototype, it did like 50L/100km on hydrogen, its not really suitable for burning in an internal combustion engine, or at least how BMW had implemented it, also had issues around safely storing the hydrogen in the tank, had to be at -253 degrees Celcius or something like that.

[slowsnake]

Wow,50L per 100klm, that's what my 6 cylinder AU11 Fairmont gets, lol Hahaha, you only have to look at a mighty Saturn Rocket to see how much hydrogen is needed, just to lift a little capsule sitting on top!..

Nah, sounds good on paper but not practical, and it don't substitute for cubic inches, nothing does!


Cheers King Billy

[Crazy Dazz]

Yes, but considering Hydrogen is a gas and can be compressed, you can get a lot more than 50L into a tank.

But again, the whole argument for Hydrogen, being Fuel Cell or Combustion, comes from the fairytale notion of "cheap electricity from Nuclear Power" that weenies keep prattling on about, despite decades of proof that it simply doesn't exist. Sure, in terms of output, Uranium is a cheap fuel, but the power station itself costs 20 times as much to build and maintain, and a relatively small accident can wipe out a city.

Perhaps the scariest thing, is that the politicians, drunk on their own farts, are starting to believe their own BS, with talks of establishing a so-called "green hydrogen industry."

And hydrogen as a fuel remains ridiculously dangerous to store and carry.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by slowsnake

Wow,50L per 100klm, that's what my 6 cylinder AU11 Fairmont gets, lol Hahaha, you only have to look at a mighty Saturn Rocket to see how much hydrogen is needed, just to lift a little capsule sitting on top!..

Nah, sounds good on paper but not practical, and it don't substitute for cubic inches, nothing does!


Cheers King Billy

https://www.bmwblog.com/2016/08/17/b...rogen-7-model/

The Hydrogen 7 was based on the 760Li model and featured two tanks: one for hydrogen and one for gasoline. The 6-liter V12 engine under the hood was modified so that it could use both fuels. Unfortunately, the efficiency the car had on hydrogen was extremely low, returning about 5.6 mpg (50 l/100km) on average, mostly due to the difference in energy density between petrol and hydrogen. Even so, the green character of the car was evident as CO2 emissions were eliminated completely.

Two fuel systems, one 12-cylinder engine

Powering the Hydrogen 7 is a 256-hp 6.0-liter V-12 (the same engine in the 760Li makes 438 hp) with a "dual-mode drive system" that allows it to tap either its 19.5-gallon gasoline tank or a 17.6-pound liquid hydrogen tank for its juice. The driver can switch between fuel sources via a dashboard switch; if one tank runs empty, the system will automatically switch to the other. This complex switching involves not just separate tanks, but unique delivery channels and an additional network of valves in the cylinder head. The hydrogen tank carries enough liquid hydrogen for 125 miles of squeaky-clean motoring, with the gasoline tank good for another 300 miles.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a1...en-7-car-news/

Uses more fuel that a yellow AU Falcon on mixer ring LPG setup and is still slower

[lumen8]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Perhaps the scariest thing, is that the politicians, drunk on their own farts, are starting to believe their own BS, with talks of establishing a so-called "green hydrogen industry."

And hydrogen as a fuel remains ridiculously dangerous to store and carry.

I watched birmingham going on about that today.

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Circa 2007 BMW had the Hydrogen 7 prototype, it did like 50L/100km on hydrogen, its not really suitable for burning in an internal combustion engine, or at least how BMW had implemented it, also had issues around safely storing the hydrogen in the tank, had to be at -253 degrees Celcius or something like that.

So about 2x what they usually use.

ok so perhaps not 25 L /100 in all seriousness, but those v12s are thirsty, I had one once upon. Modern v8's are less thirsty and more powerful so one of those on H would be a bit better than the big bimmer boat anchor im thinking. A turbo 4 banger better again of course.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by lumen8

I watched birmingham going on about that today.





So about 2x what they usually use.

ok so perhaps not 25 L /100 in all seriousness, but those v12s are thirsty, I had one once upon. Modern v8's are less thirsty and more powerful so one of those on H would be a bit better than the big bimmer boat anchor im thinking. A turbo 4 banger better again of course.

She's a 0-100 in a lightning fast 9.5 seconds, given it has 6 litres and 12 cylinders this AU Falcon on LPG isn't too far behind at a leisurely 11.11 seconds for half the amount of cylinders and half the green credentials but two thirds the performance



Bothdon't even hold a candle to the pride of the AFF fleet, the mighty Hybrid Camry though.

[lumen8]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Both don't even hold a candle to the pride of the AFF fleet, the mighty Hybrid Camry though.

Yes all other rides are crap, hail the 160kw camry.

[Wretched]

I doubt Toyota would bother. They're investing heavily in hydrogen fuel cell technology.

https://www.toyota.com.au/electrified/hydrogen

[slowsnake]

Just out of curiosity what would a litre of hydrogen cost at the bowser?
And is it a environmental issue or a cost issue?


Cheers King Billy

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by slowsnake

Just out of curiosity what would a litre of hydrogen cost at the bowser?
And is it a environmental issue or a cost issue?


Cheers King Billy

Well I'd hazard guess we'd make hydrogen with electrolysis which is very energy intensive.

Maybe we should call it 'brown hydrogen' because we generate our electricity by brown coal in VIC

[slowsnake]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Well I'd hazard guess we'd make hydrogen with electrolysis which is very energy intensive.

Maybe we should call it 'brown hydrogen' because we generate our electricity by brown coal in VIC

And could that hydrogen be harvested from solar powered batteries?


Cheers King Billy

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by slowsnake

And could that hydrogen be harvested from solar powered batteries?


Cheers King Billy

It could, but that's not happening today, tomorrow or in the next 25 years

Might work for SA though but it doesn't for VIC given how we generate power.

We should investigate the 'N word'

then off the back of that develop a nuclear weapons program

[slowsnake]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

It could, but that's not happening today, tomorrow or in the next 25 years

Might work for SA though but it doesn't for VIC given how we generate power.

We should investigate the 'N word'

then off the back of that develop a nuclear weapons program

I thought Lucas's Heights produced all our needs?
Or did they close that down after the terrorist threat a few years ago?
And it takes an awful amount of Nuclear power stations to make even a teaspoons worth of weapons grade uranium, the uranium here in Oz is U309, that's a long way off making a bomb!

Cheers King Billy

[b0son]

I see no point to this. There is a mass exodus away from combustion, period. So why would you start investing in a technology that at best has a finite lifespan and is infrastructure-intensive? It makes more sense to scale up renewable hydrocarbon fuel (a technology that already exists) to provide the fuel for the ageing ICE fleet. New vehicles are moving toward BEV, so the people driving ICE in 10-15 years will be the same people driving clapped out LPG AU Falcons... havent bought a new car in years and unlikely too.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by slowsnake

the uranium here in Oz is U309,

Fortunately such a thing doesn't exist, or we might all have exploded a long time ago.
The bulk of Uranium is U238, which in and of itself is almost useless.
U235 is the useful stuff, it can extracted by gas centrafuge, and used for either Nuclear Power or Nuclear Bombs (highly enriched)

However when U238 is subject to "fast Neutrons" (eg in a "fast breeder" reactor) if can absorb an extra Neutron to become Plutonium. (U239 > Np239 > Pu239)

[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Well I'd hazard guess we'd make hydrogen with electrolysis which is very energy intensive.

Maybe we should call it 'brown hydrogen' because we generate our electricity by brown coal in VIC

Not as much power in Vic is being generated from brown coal as it used to. Right at this point in time, only just over half of the Vic generation is being generated from brown coal.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/nem-watch/

Perhaps we could call it 'murky hydrogen'.

[Bossxr8]

They already have the hydrogen powered Mirai. How is this different from that?

[slowsnake]

Sorry about my U309 mistake, I was on another thread talking about exhausts and I mentioned SS 309 which is known as straight chrome, had 309 on the brain

I really meant U308, easy mistake to make, Australia does not produce the Uranium isotopes, except at the old Lucas Heights Reactor, and I think its obsolete now to our needs.


Cheers King Billy

[lumen8]

Ive watched various discussions about BEV's in the US, if everything went to battery EV's do we have the power grids to support it?

A good number of american commentators/car guys certainly dont think the current grid can support large numbers of them over there.

This can be offset with hydrogen fuel cells, but perhaps they are tinkering with hydrogen ICE engines so not all eggs are in one basket who knows. And again to make H its going to need power in many instances so its a bit of a vicious cycle... and with all that considered it will be interesting to see just how quickly petrol and diesel disappear.

How well do EV's function in very cold weather also, some say not so well when full electric.

[xb74_black]

Oil companies will be observing hydrogen engines very very closely. They really want to continue the business model of us filling tanks on our cars with their product - whether its hydrogen, E10 or chocolate milk.



Car companies aren't that concerned with the oil companies business model - ask Elon Musk - he doesn't even care about car company business models (no Tesla dealers).

Hydrogen has advantages in range through fast refueling. If electric car manufacturers can address that in the next few years, hydrogen will be a niche fuel, if it gets off the ground at all.



It really is an exciting time for car technology, even if it means those that grew up smiling at the aroma of super outlive the petrol station.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by xb74_black

Oil companies will be observing hydrogen engines very very closely. They really want to continue the business model of us filling tanks on our cars with their product - whether its hydrogen, E10 or chocolate milk.



Car companies aren't that concerned with the oil companies business model - ask Elon Musk - he doesn't even care about car company business models (no Tesla dealers).

Hydrogen has advantages in range through fast refueling. If electric car manufacturers can address that in the next few years, hydrogen will be a niche fuel, if it gets off the ground at all.

It really is an exciting time for car technology, even if it means those that grew up smiling at the aroma of super outlive the petrol station.

Bit of marketing spin but here you go.

https://www.shell.com/energy-and-inn...-charging.html

Shell is already converting service stations in Europe and UK, removing fuel bowsers and changing them to EV charge stations. These companies will move away from petroleum fuel as their bread and butter to consumers. There will be some kind of liquid fuel (Porsche and co working on a synthetic one) to power bespoke vehicles.
Moving to EVs will then give them the opportunity to buy time for hydrogen technologies to mature.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Bit of marketing spin but here you go.

https://www.shell.com/energy-and-inn...-charging.html

Shell is already converting service stations in Europe and UK, removing fuel bowsers and changing them to EV charge stations.

Marketing Spin is right, and that's what people forget.
Car companies (and Fuel Companies) want to be perceived as being at the forefront of technological advances. So they will make all kinds of announcements, publish a few glossy photos, and setup web pages, all whilst "Spending more money on toilet paper" than on these new innovations.
Meanwhile putting most of their efforts into relabelling and flogging the same old carp.

FoA should have painted the Barra Turbo Green instead of Red, called it an "EcoBoost" and pointed out that it used less petrol than a GTHO. Same with the S/C Miami.
Hippies and Governments would have been lining up to buy them.

[Fordman1]

So if not mistaken ( correct me if I’m wrong guys ), it takes more Energy to create Hydrogen for this process then the Energy that Hydrogen creates.

[ivorya]

Much more efficient if the h2 was being used in a cell that creates e's for the electric motor.

Even more efficiency gains if NH4 is used in the fuel cell

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Fordman1

So if not mistaken ( correct me if I’m wrong guys ), it takes more Energy to create Hydrogen for this process then the Energy that Hydrogen creates.

That's kinda like Biofuels like ethanol - E85 takes more resources compared to the energy it provides, in the case of the corn type in the USA anyway.

Still an epic fuel though

[slowsnake]

Originally Posted by Fordman1

So if not mistaken ( correct me if I’m wrong guys ), it takes more Energy to create Hydrogen for this process then the Energy that Hydrogen creates.

I'm sure the issue is pollution in the atmosphere!
What we don't see dont hurt us apparently, lol, that's what the politicians say anyway, and we all know they streeeeeetch the truth a little.


Cheers King Billy