One point I've seen made several times is that hydrogen, because it is lighter than air, tends to rise as it burns. Pertroleum based fuels stay on the ground and tend to cling to things as it burns. Also, the smoke from petro combustion tends to be highly toxic. While explosive trauma can kill, a lot more people die from asphyxiation.

It's not so black and white.

One system is to combine a hydrogen fuel cell with an electric battery system. Electric over hydrogen fuel cell? The idea is that you can use a much smaller fuel cell because the battery handles the peaking demands. A few things to be worked out for sure.

Ok, I have a PDF several pages long a book with a bunch of stuff in it. How do I post it.

The Hindenburg was basically painted in jet fuel which was said to be a much bigger factor than being filled with hydrogen.

Originally Posted by arrie

3v0, do you have some documentation, or link, on this combination technology?

I do not even recall where I read or heard about it. But it makes sense in that it is a combo of two things that work. The big hangup is the cell cost. A while back I seen people were working on DIY fuel cells. That is all I recall.

People are still trying to blame the paint! I'm sorry but a sanity check should be instated at this point! Yes, the doped paint skin could possible have aided in the initial ignition, or shortened the total combustion time by a few seconds but it wasn't more dangerous that 7 million cubic feet of hydrogen gas that the blimp held.

Have you found information on what frequency and duty cycle generates the most hydrogen per watt of power. Efficiency?

Originally Posted by Sceadwian

People are still trying to blame the paint! I'm sorry but a sanity check should be instated at this point! Yes, the doped paint skin could possible have aided in the initial ignition, or shortened the total combustion time by a few seconds but it wasn't more dangerous that 7 million cubic feet of hydrogen gas that the blimp held.

My point is/was that it is over hyped. There is more crap surrounding it then the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa or the death of JFK. To point to it as a reason not to use hydrogen is questionable at best.

The video shows the fire burned for aprox one minute if anyone is interested. It was a slow burn comparted to explosion one sees when propane is vented form a vehicle in a closed building. I expect hydrogen does make a good fuel air explosive given the right ratio.