Select to expand quoteImax1 said..
Electric will have to work , we won't have fossil fuel options . Were not serious yet , every day I drive one hour to work on clogged roads in a V8 and every car has only one person in it. It's sad because we are whinging pigs. 
Hope our kids can work it out.
I have just spent a few days in Vietnam on the way somewhere else.
There, everyone has mopeds or motorbikes, with very few people now using bicycles. It works extremely well. I thought it would be chaos, but it flows well and instead of every individual person being in a car, every individual person is on a motorbike, or in a lot of cases there are multiple people on the one motorbike.
I sat there at lunch one day counting people and the number of people flowing through an intersection would be dozens of times more than you could do with cars. The difference in flow is incredible.
So, after seeing that experience, I really think the future is something like electric motor bikes. You don't need much power, but enough to get you up to a reasonable speed. You can fit far more people on these in the same stretch of road and overtaking is a breeze.
Part of this I think would also be separating the cars from the motorbikes. If they have to share the same lane, or even if they have to be constrained into lanes, the flow would be reduced a lot.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..
Total energy left after conversions and shipping - 10 kwh
I doubt that there is something really ingenious in those membranes too, That is a well-known fact that hydrogen atoms are so small that could easily pass through steel bottle walls. Why not to use a steel bottle instead? That is the problem with hydrogen. There is nothing in this world to keep compress hydrogen from escaping and liquification is outside technical means. The whole story looks like a big scam for me. Hopefully will not be sold to our retirement funds as an investment for hard cash.
The good news is that if its economic, people will do it. If not, they won't. You don't even need to agree with them.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..Mark _australia said..
Thus I don't know whatyour objection to the wonderful Australian invention is...
Just interest me what is the total efficiency of such conversion.
Let us assume that you have 1000Kwh free electric energy manufactured by our wind or solar plant in Perth.
1. Now you need to electrolytically split water to hydrogen. ( What do you do with oxygen byproduct anyway at this massive scale)
2. Then you synthesize ammonia from your hydrogen
3.Transport ammonia few hundred km on land in cisterns to the port
4.Load ammonia onto the ship
5.Transport ammonia on the sea 15,000 km
6. Unload ammonia onto cisterns and transport on land to Shanghai 200km inland
7. Now you could use your ingenious membrane to separate hydrogen after quite complex thermal ammonia destruction
8,.Now you have plenty of gaseous hydrogen ... and do what exactly with that? I could see that the whole logistic cost more then the product is worth.
Total energy left after conversions and shipping - 10 kwh
I doubt that there is something really ingenious in those membranes too, That is a well-known fact that hydrogen atoms are so small that could easily pass through steel bottle walls. Why not to use a steel bottle instead? That is the problem with hydrogen. There is nothing in this world to keep compress hydrogen from escaping and liquification is outside technical means. The whole story looks like a big scam for me. Hopefully will not be sold to our retirement funds as an investment for hard cash.
So wrong in so many ways.
Firstly, you assume that the invention is "lets use hydrogen" - no, it is already used. The invention is to make the transport better,cheaper and safer. You say hydrogen can't be stored- well, it already is. Helium is smaller and it is stored too.
Stay on the argument man.
Next, no you don't have to use energy to dissociate water to make hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen is commonly produced using steam to make hydrogen from methane. Methane comes from intensive farming and rubbish tips. Its a greenhouse gas, using it is great!!!!
(As an aside you said and what to do with the left over oxygen?? Are u for real? Ummm enviro friendly bleaching,killing germs, industiral gases. All sorts. Geez......)
So what we have so far is
use sh!t gas from our leftovers, farming, sewers etc to make H2
use it to make NH3 which is safer to transport
then use the membrane to make H2 at the fuel station and is goes straight into your car.
If u say its not possible, how is it any different to the fact your petrol came from the other side of the world via a few processes?
Leave the pseudo-science and doubting proven facts to PM33 mate.
Compressors needed at all stages of the production line. Biogas or H2O splitting then for the NH3 and for the H2 after the NH3 is split again at the local servo. So the TAFE system better gear up to train refrigeration technicians.
Hydrogen fuel is energy and water intensive'But University of Queensland civil engineering research fellow Dr Jake Whitehead sounded a note of caution about the efficiency of hydrogen cars."The main challenge with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is they are extremely energy and water intensive," he said."You're looking at the equivalent of more than $2 per litre compared to $1.50-$1.60 for petrol and diesel at the moment, or for a battery electric vehicle as little as little as 40c."
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
There, everyone has mopeds or motorbikes,
The future is obviously autonomous or self-driving vehicle.
How do you imagine self-driving motorbike? Unless you have one of those
www.facebook.com/edgeneo/videos/744992582334707/
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..So wrong in so many ways. (?)
1. You say hydrogen can't be stored-( withot some escaping constantly) well, it already is. 2.Helium is smaller and it is stored too. (?)
Stay on the argument man.
Sometimes we don't need to argue about something, Because facts are readily verifiable.
1) Hydrogen do escape from your container trough walls. You need a refill, Like your battery not used get discharged.
2) Which one is smaller?
a) hydrogen H2 (or
b)Helium ?
Besides, you may misunderstand my position here.It is not about total critics of all good ideas but rather cold, scientific skepticism.Good ideas always win - later or sooner.
Electric energy storage from renewable sources - the problem seems today non-resolvable - could resolve by itself almost without any specially build storage facilities.
1. Let's imagine that one day all cars, truck buses, motorbikes are electric, Even your computer, tools in the shed - all have a battery
2. Now all those devices are constantly connected to the grid, if not used.
3.Smart chipset setup every device into:
a) accepting mode- when there is excess energy in the grid and energy is cheap. Your device is charging at 10c per kw
b) at peak power demand - energy prices rising- your device ( car or electric drill in your shed) start selling energy back to the grid at 20c.
This way every electric device connected to the grid you earn you money! Buying energy when is cheap and selling when expensive. Because there are so many you don't need any other storage. All we need is more electric cars and smart energy distribution system that allow you to sell energy everywhere. You could earn money even if the price of energy during the day is the lowest.at10c per kw.Because you could recharge your car using your solar panel for free then sell collected energy from your car to the grid at top price.
So one day all cars standing on parking lots and garages will be constantly wired to the grid, buying and selling energy.
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
use sh!t gas from our leftovers, farming, sewers etc to make H2
Yep, that is true. In some clean countries like New Zealand - the most greenhouse gases come not of power plant chimney, or pipes in the car but at the rear of Sheep.
There was a project to attach plastic bags and capture all these methane gases, then use them on the farm.
Having been to NZ long time so not sure how idea progress?
It could happen that Kiwis have other priorities right now- like winning next Americas Cup.But if we could capture this gases escaping for the rear of sailors - running usually on beans- then use to power hydrofoil racing yachts- that could be worth idea.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..FormulaNova said..
There, everyone has mopeds or motorbikes,
The future is obviously autonomous or self-driving vehicle.
How do you imagine self-driving motorbike? Unless you have one of those
www.facebook.com/edgeneo/videos/744992582334707/
yep your in your self driving car , a truck is heading straight at you ..the machine/computer makes a life decision for you ...have a head on with certain death /injury or risk plowing into the pedestrians on the footpath..the computer is programmed to make decisions with the least risk to human life ...you loose... check out time ...!
Select to expand quote
The future is obviously autonomous or self-driving vehicle.
How do you imagine self-driving motorbike? Unless you have one of those
www.facebook.com/edgeneo/videos/744992582334707/
yep your in your self driving car , a truck is heading straight at you ..the machine/computer makes a life decision for you ...have a head on with certain death /injury or risk plowing into the pedestrians on the footpath..the computer is programmed to make decisions with the least risk to human life ...you loose... check out time ...!
You're presenting that like it's a bad thing?
Select to expand quotebazz61 said.
computer makes a life decision for you ..
Not necessary.
1. Firstly we could program a computer to follow strictly our rules agreed by society. For example, the car will obey a request to kill the driver/passenger and save pedestrian crossing on a red light.
That dilemma is not really robots or computer tasks. Moral dilemma like that must be resolved by society and implemented into robotic cars later on
2. We could program the car to flip a coin. Anytime you have 50/50 % chance for one party to be saved and other sacrificed.
But robots most likely do not drink. smoke a pot, engage in text messaging, argue with wife and kids... so should be much safer on road
Select to expand quotebazz61 said..
Hydrogen fuel is energy and water intensive'But University of Queensland civil engineering research fellow Dr Jake Whitehead sounded a note of caution about the efficiency of hydrogen cars."The main challenge with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is they are extremely energy and water intensive," he said."You're looking at the equivalent of more than $2 per litre compared to $1.50-$1.60 for petrol and diesel at the moment, or for a battery electric vehicle as little as little as 40c."
He is talking about hydrogen fuel cells - the invention refers to hydrogen powered internal combustion engines does it not?
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..Sometimes we don't need to argue about something, Because facts are readily verifiable.1) Hydrogen do escape from your container trough walls. You need a refill, Like your battery not used get discharged.2) Which one is smaller?a) hydrogen H2 (or b)Helium ?Besides, you may misunderstand my position here.It is not about total critics of all good ideas but rather cold, scientific skepticism.Good ideas always win - later or sooner.
Your argument that hydrogen escapes is ridiculous. Yes it permeates through walls but that does not mean it "cannot be stored"as you claim.
Saying that hydrogen is not good a s a fuel due to it escaping is like saying petrol is no good as it evaporates.
And yes helium is smaller just like I said. Hydrogen atoms are smaller but in the gas there is two of them stuck together (H2) and helium is just a single free atom. It is harder to contain helium ...... but balloons filled with it still stay up for days. So your arguments are silly ponderings not actually an argument against H2 power.
^^^ Because when you burn hydrogen it is clean. It just makes water.
Other people want to use hydrogen, and already do. But, it is dangerous to transport in bulk.
Ammonia is a bit less dangerous to transport and easier to make than hydrogen
The membrane easily turns ammonia into hydrogen, and nitrogen (which is inert and safe)
Its brilliant.
Using your logic, why develop solar, wind, wave, electric etc power as we have lots of gas.
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..bazz61 said..
Hydrogen fuel is energy and water intensive'But University of Queensland civil engineering research fellow Dr Jake Whitehead sounded a note of caution about the efficiency of hydrogen cars."The main challenge with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is they are extremely energy and water intensive," he said."You're looking at the equivalent of more than $2 per litre compared to $1.50-$1.60 for petrol and diesel at the moment, or for a battery electric vehicle as little as little as 40c."
He is talking about hydrogen fuel cells - the invention refers to hydrogen powered internal combustion engines does it not?
The invention by CSIRO is for converting NH3 to H2. Nothing about how you then use the H2.
A quick read of this article
www.autoblog.com/2009/08/20/greenlings-why-choose-a-fuel-cell-or-an-internal-combustion-eng/
tells us that Ford and BMW have been working on piston engines, Mazda on rotary engines and all the other companies are going with fuel cells because of the thermodynamic efficiency.
I wonder if fuel cells can deliver the torque advantage of an electric motor the same way batteries do.
Bring on the future , I think that there might be a mix of different ways to move people. We currently use electric and oil fuels to move stuff and were not going to use electric to move big ships or diesel to fly planes. So hydrogen is just another option.
I want my electric 4x4 as its the best solution to getting around in an off road situation....Bags of torque 
, and give me a 600km range. I don't care about a 15 min wait to charge to 80% Ill get a coffee or start smoking again (Maybe not) .
Electric cars are simple to make, cheap to maintain and offer a portable power solution to the grid.
Ships/trains power with hydrogen, planes are an interesting one and they might be oil and electric options. Long haul oil, short electric.
Mains power could be a mix of all depending on what you best resource is. Burning oil/coal is still a dumb idea cos you can do better things with it than making expensive smoke and potentially killing the planet.
To my climate non believers try this ..
If climate change is real and we do nothing .....................................we kill our planet and die
If climate change is not real and we change to renewable .......we change economies and the cities don't smell of smoke
Birth, change and death are always constants
Select to expand quoteSandS said..
hydrogen is the go !!! bring it on !!
Yep I love hydrogen but to airships filling.I still believe that you could build safe airships filled with hydrogen.After 100 years we should be able to make them safe now.
we could start with cargo airships only remotely operated and autonomous.
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..SandS said..
hydrogen is the go !!! bring it on !!
Yep I love hydrogen but to airships filling.I still believe that you could build safe airships filled with hydrogen.After 100 years we should be able to make them safe now.
we could start with cargo airships only remotely operated and autonomous.
No
Macro
Do you realise I can cite more examples of flour (ie the thing made from wheat) exploding in spectacular ways?
And that ammonium nitrate is not ammonia? FFS......
The trouble with folks like you is they google, look for the worst pic and post it. 
With no actual understanding......
Select to expand quotekato said..
Flour and wood dust make the best explosions
Diesel & Urea ..thats what was used in american bombing ...
Select to expand quotebazz61 said..kato said..
Flour and wood dust make the best explosions
Diesel & Urea ..thats what was used in american bombing ...
But that might get me on a naughty list
What is interesting that hydrogen is not that flammable/ explosive as most think.During last wars, the army has been testing blimp filled with hydrogen. How easy is blow up such a thing?
Its appear that ordinary bullets could easily puncture blimp, pass through and nothing happens.Even that hole remains so small that doesn't effect blimp performance much.
