Water vapor

[Klayfish]

Yeah but you're talking just LA.
So that'd be 4380 to 5475 Olympic pools of water in LA alone a year if the vapor levels remained constant in the air..

L.A. has a lot more to worry about than putting some pure water into the air...

 

[rastahomie]

Yeah but you're talking just LA.
So that'd be 4380 to 5475 Olympic pools of water in LA alone a year if the vapor levels remained constant in the air..

Sure. And the Pacific Ocean contains, what, 200 million, 300 million Olympic pools' worth of water? We're talking about the difference between a cup of ice water and Lake Michigan.

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

But just to get back to my original question is it a worse pollutant. If you took all the fuel burnt so far running gas powered cars, and converted it to water emmissions, would it be Water World right now. It might be a better choice now and for the next 25 years but is it a more damaging pollutant.

 

[rastahomie]

But just to get back to my original question is it a worse pollutant. If you took all the fuel burnt so far running gas powered cars, and converted it to water emmissions, would it be Water World right now. It might be a better choice now and for the next 25 years but is it a more damaging pollutant.

No, it is not a worse pollutant. Fuel-cell cars produce a few drops per day, so the whole of L.A. might produce 30-40 gallons of water in a day from fuel cell cars. If every last vehicle in the USA converted to fuel-cell today, the amount of water vapor added to the atmosphere each year would be on the order of a few hundred thousand gallons per year. That's barely a pond.

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

I think my original question was about the hydrogen cars that create water. Don't fosil/natural fuel cells cars create a little water, but there main pollutant is carbon just like motor. Only the carbon is not left behind carbon dioxide its in some other form?
Again, I'm really bad at science so I am just figuring the carbon has to remain.

 

[rastahomie]

I think my original question was about the hydrogen cars that create water. Don't fosil/natural fuel cells cars create a little water, but there main pollutant is carbon just like motor. Only the carbon is not left behind carbon dioxide its in some other form?
Again, I'm really bad at science so I am just figuring the carbon has to remain.

No, as a previous poster pointed out, you create about a gallon of water vapor burning gasoline. Fuel-cell cars produce a few drops per hour, so they actually produce less water than fossil-fuel-burning cars. But yes, their main pollutant is carbon dioxide.

 

[bcla]

No, it is not a worse pollutant. Fuel-cell cars produce a few drops per day, so the whole of L.A. might produce 30-40 gallons of water in a day from fuel cell cars. If every last vehicle in the USA converted to fuel-cell today, the amount of water vapor added to the atmosphere each year would be on the order of a few hundred thousand gallons per year. That's barely a pond.

That's not quite accurate. It's putting more than just drops. If the water vapor was condensed it would be in the gallons. I can't find an exact amount, but if you had a gallon of liquid hydrogen burned, it would be well over a gallon of water vapor if condensed to liquid water.

In the end I don't think it matters so much. The environment regulates the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere better than it does CO2.

 

[rastahomie]

That's not quite accurate. It's putting more than just drops. If the water vapor was condensed it would be in the gallons. I can't find an exact amount, but if you had a gallon of liquid hydrogen burned, it would be well over a gallon of water vapor if condensed to liquid water.

Oh. Well either way it's a trifling amount of water in the Grand Scheme Of Things.

 

[xlxo]

Thoughts....

• I believe you are referring to hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell_vehicle
• depending on where you are.... you need hydrogen fuel stations. Big reason why I don't want one right now.
• I live in an area with cheap hydro electric power... I prefer an electric vehicle. Especially as range increase with better batteries each year. At nearly 100 miles for the average vehicle, it meets my commuting needs.
• Storing and manufacturing electricity is much safer than explosive hydrogen.
• Refueling hydrogen vehicles is much faster than recharging a car battery
  http://www.businessinsider.com/why-hydrogen-powered-cars-are-better-2016-1