Here is the source of my question: during several discussions with my colleagues, they maintain that hydrogen is a much more practical and powerful fuel than petroleum, but that if we do not use it, it is because of lobbies etc etc (tanker plot).
I looked around a bit and I'm not sure I understood everything.
It would seem that this is true in the case where one speaks of liquid hydrogen vs 1 L of petroleum (liquid also therefore)
But not when comparing volume for volume.
Is it this?
So hydrogen should be kept in the liquid state with all the complexity and energy that it requires, and when it is gaseous, it is also quite difficult to contain without leaks etc.
+ question of yields? But then, they say that since hydrogen is more energetic, the yields are necessarily better ...
One of them also talks about hydrogen doping for car engines, but I haven't really found a source on the net.
Does it exist? Is it working? Is it a mixture with pantone technology?
Finally, they also take as an example the fact of being able to produce natural gas yourself from its compost (they have a friend who does) and thus of being able to drive with its self-production.
I imagine that it is possible, but that it takes insane amounts of bio mass to manage to replace the normal consumption of a car in usual use?
Thank you for your clarifications
Dreamer
