Talk:Liquid hydrogen

Requested move

The current article is at an abbreviation and the full name, liquid hydrogen, is a redirect to it. They should be switched. -- Kjkolb 09:32, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

---

• Support -- Kjkolb 09:32, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
• Support, obviously. Sjorford (talk) 19:56, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request.

Material to expand material article with

After a brief google search I found two articles that would be useful sources.

The first is on the different liquification processes: http://www.enaa.or.jp/WE-NET/ronbun/1997/e5/sanso1997.html

The other is on the significance between ortho and para hydrogen: http://www.cchem.com/opcat/index.html

Unfortunately I am short of time right now or I would incorporate the material andperhaps track down the references for the material that is already here. I am against merging this article with the Hydrogen article because I think there is enough material out there to make this a solid stand alone article. For a start, there needs to be sections for properties, history, applications, production methods, references. Badocter 05:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Expanding the article:

Okay, I agree with Badoctor (above). This article could really be expanded. I propose the following categories:

History:

- Invention/discovery

- Major advances in creation

Creation/Production

Chemical Properties

Uses:

- In industry

- In vehicle propulsion:

--- Spaceflght/rocketry

--- Hydrogen cars

--- maybe its' use in fuel cells

- Others?

I'd do all this myself, but I don't know enough about it and I'm not very good at digging through pages of Google results that may or may not be relevent. In any event, if someone would be willing to start on this, I'd be glad to help out.

Mistake?

The last sentence of the "drawbacks" section says that "The advantage remains, however, that pollution is decentralised to the hydrogen production facilities and power plants and for example, therefore kept away from centres of population.". However, wouldn't the pollution be centralized to the hydrogen power plants, as it is not the cars, but the productions facilities that would be emitting pollution? Any thoughts? 71.227.195.32 (talk) 21:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

moved from article

Hydrogen burns with a very high flame temperature but which emits light which is nearly invisible to the naked eye and is a safety hazard. Typical piston engines burning hydrogen in ambient air (not simply oxygen) produce high amounts of NOx pollution.

The fact that the byproducts of combustion are mainly water is commonly used as an argument that the use of hydrogen as a fuel is not harmful to the environment, however this does not take account of the energy intensive methods required to produce, compress/liquefy and store it. In thermodynamic terms, as these methods can never be perfectly efficient, until a ready source of hydrogen is identified, its use as a fuel should be considered more harmful to the environment than most fossil fuels. The advantage remains, however, that pollution is decentralised to the hydrogen production facilities and power plants and for example, therefore kept away from centres of population.

Both sections are not about liquid hydrogen. Mion (talk) 06:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Water vapor is a greenhouse gas far more potent than CO2.

"The byproduct of its combustion with oxygen alone is water vapor. Since water is considered harmless to the environment, the engine is considered "zero emissions.""