Anti-nuclear quote of the day…

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3877#comment-334713

With concentrated solar, high temperature electrolysis of hydrogen is more than 100% efficient. Nuclear reactors for making hydrogen have temperature limitations.

Emphasis is mine. I’m sure there have to be a few TOD readers who aren’t going to let that stand unchallenged.

April 25, 2008 - Posted by Luke Weston | The Oil Drum, anti-nuclear quote of the day, hydrogen, thermodynamics | anti-nuclear quote of the day, hydrogen, The Oil Drum, thermodynamics | 2 Comments

2 Comments »

Heh, I think that those idiots over at The Oil Drum are actually getting dumber.

Comment by bryfry | April 25, 2008 | Reply
Actually, it is not COMPLETELY wrong. The poster just does not know what he is talking about. High temperature electrolysis is endothermic. At high temperatures the electrical energy required to break the H-O bonds is less than the resulting H2 energy content (lower heating value). So yes, from a purely electrical energy standpoint, there’s more energy in the H2 than supplied electrically to the electrolyzer. But that is just as stupid as claiming that nuclear driven Sulfur-Iodine cycle H2 production would be infinitely efficient because no electrical input is required. Only thermal.

Comment by Klaus A | April 25, 2008 | Reply

« Previous | Next »

About

I’ve started this blog as my contribution to the online pro-nuclear-energy grass roots blog-based community i’ve seen developing, which I’ve followed with great interest.

Like many, i’ve decided that as a scientist, I simply can no longer in good conscience just sit idly by and watch things that are not scientifically true be spread on an astonishing scale, when it comes to this debate over the world’s fission energy renaissance.

Well, that is one of my areas of interest, but I certainly have nothing against blogging about other areas of politics, technology, science and society.

I’m a student at the University of Melbourne, Australia, majoring in Physics and Computer Engineering. Don’t worry, I’ve *almost* graduated. Perhaps I should stop blogging and get back to the books?

As far as nuclear energy is concerned. I have no commercial or professional ties or conflicts of interest with regards to the nuclear energy, nuclear fuel or Uranium mining industries what so ever. Still, that doesn’t change anything. Some people will call me a shill, but some people can convince themselves of anything they dream up.

I’m a Liberal, (and an atheist) and usually a voter for the Australian Labor Party. That said, however, I can not at all disagree with John Howard’s policies of rationally investigating the feasibility of nuclear energy for Australia – although I didn’t vote for him in 2007, for other reasons.

That said, however, I generally seem to disagree with “far Left” politics, such as the Australian Greens and other “Green” Parties, and I certainly seem to find myself at odds with the far-leftist socialist political organisations that seem to breed like rabbits around universities in particular the world over.

Recent Comments

Luke Weston on Thinking about “nuclear…
Demian on Thinking about “nuclear…
ShowsOn on Blog Action Day
Photomaniacal … on Blog Action Day
Coriedord on Case-control study of lung can…
Blog Stats
- 78,088 hits
Blogroll

Physical Insights

An independent scientist’s observations on society, technology, energy, science and the environment. “Modern science has been a voyage into the unknown, with a lesson in humility waiting at every stop. Many passengers would rather have stayed home.” – Carl Sagan