The Lunar ice would be used for "in-situ resource utilization" for long stays; drinking-water, breathing-oxygen, growing food, and perhaps rocket fuel for returning home. That way, astronauts can essentially 'live of the land' in an Antarctican-like research station. Without taking many tones of high-cost consumables with them. That's the plan.

Back to the subject: Mass H2 production doesn't really not effect the water supply. Almost all H2 comes from steam-reformation of hydrocarbons--the cheapest process.
That said, 'might as well purchase a Civic GX. Even better, an EV.

↓↑report

Yeah, and use hydrogen to get to the moon, right? =)

Sebastian, thanks for taking a look at the National Hydrogen Association's FAQs. I'm sure you wanted to spur a discussion, but in case folks are looking for the answer to your question, it's right on the page where you got the other info: http://www.hydrogenassociation.org/general/faqs.asp#waterrequired

YES, the 110 billion gallons does include all water used in production. This assumes that ALL hydrogen for vehicles was made from water using electrolysis. As we know, lots of resources can be used to make hydrogen, not just water, so this is a maximum case to figure out if the hydrogen economy would use too much water. It would not, as pointed out in the article and link above.

Also, when you make hydrogen from natural gas, you use steam and actually HALF of the hydrogen in this process comes from the WATER in the steam. This is part of why the emissions coming from this process are so low--low carbon.
CH4 + 2H2O > CO2 + 4H2 (2 H2s from the natural gas, CH4 and 2 H2s from the water) Obviously, if natural gas is used, some water would be needed, but overall even less than the 110 billion gal. above.

-Patrick Serfass, NHA

↓↑report

Patrick

Thanks for the link to your site. I hope that you will be a regular commenter here!

↓↑report

Well, the H2 oxidized in the fuel cell is expelled as water vapor and returns to the normal water cycle. However, as the smallest of all molecules, some of that H2 leaks out and rises up through the atmosphere. Most of that rising H2 reacts with ozone in the ozone layer to form water and oxygen, but a small fraction escapes into space.

So, given several millenia of H2 fuel use, we could loose a small percentage of our water. Somehow I don't see that as a concern right now...

↓↑report

That sounds great, but in my town in the midwest, we use fossil water from a deep aquifer. The water then goes to its normal uses and then it gets returned as surface water or goes back to the water table.

That sounds great, right? But it takes about 3000 years for water from the surface or from the shallow water-table to make it back to the aquifer, and so the water really is somewhat limited. Compared to the West, we're doing great -- but a few dozen ethanol plants would greatly accelerate the process of using up all of that water. Using the same water in the kind of H2 economy that everyone wishes for would accelerate the process, too.

But, as HAL10000 pointed out, H2 doesn't come from where everyone wishes -- it's really natural gas (CH4) with the carbon removed (which combines with oxygen to make H2 + CO2). So, you might as well leave out the extra step and just burn natural gas.

P.S. If the hydrogen economy were happening, why isn't my local gas and electric pushing me to tweak my natural gas furnace, hot water heater, and clothes-dryer so that it will burn hydrogen? That's a huge market right there, and all we'd have to do is adjust the mixture a bit on the consumer end -- and the provider end probably doesn't need to change too much, and the people who work with natural gas and propane already know how to handle explosive gaseous fuels. Just a thought!

↓↑report

I hate when my spark plugs foul! And darn that big auto company "monopolisation". They keep the little guy from being able to build and sell cars! because everyone would totally be building and selling cars out of their garages with 100k mile warranties and thousands of models used for crash tests and six airbags for less than $20,000. Life is so awful, all because of the auto companies.

↓↑report

I made the mistake of buying a 96 Caravan with 200,000 km on it once. The windows and locks didn't work right (electrics) But the IC engine with all those miles on it was perfect.

↓↑report

will you cease to eat what manufacturers say and start doing your shopping in advance throu internet, are you just old fashion customers just learning car-technology, your consumer habits fit the 1900-1929 era with adapted wood-stove mecanisms ( gasoline ice ). Today it's 2009 and i declared total crush of gasoline or diesel ice+ transmission+gear differentials+front radiator opening+catalytic converters, etc. At least for me personnaly , LOL. You are still free to order, buy, invest, trade, hope, enjoy what you like, LOL Im just shopping after all and car manufacturers managers and car technicians and engineer, read secretly this site and take their main inspiration here instead of universities or official learners like epa, presidents of contries or any thing else, they want to secretly learn if their official products are enjoyed for real by real consumer car-guys ( or women ) . And many folks are learning in internet more and more instead of the old method of colleges and universities, where they are officially 10-50 years in the past. Here we talk of the latest inventions, not actually known by many. Nothing is more fun then ordering de luxe products that nobody since well before 2009 years ago have for real, but dream to have for real. Even with lot of money the products actually sold don't worth s&?t , like ferraries, cadillac, hummer, aston-martin, porsches, etc. These products are not adapted to the roads and don't fly vertically nor horizontally and you get struck in traffic at the same speed as a focus or civic or a tata nano.

It's me that have provoked this world wide war against conservatism, now we order throu blogs the cars that fit our way of life or your fantasy-dream car or your scientific car or your hybrid car, call it what you want.

But one funny thing i observed that is funny is that many bloggers are doing like me ( ordering a futur car) but when a project car is proposed then they still bug it with new and more necessary add-on needed. Please be realistic and don't lauph of the alternative proposals from the new and microcopic business, they might crush gm, toyota, ferrari, ford, mercedes sooner then you taught. Gm is crusched by me mainly but exxon and friends give them tax money so they are not real car business, they are tax money folks since the beginning. Toyota and mercedes will go bankrupt too. They are not looking at selling cars for real, they are in the tax business mainly. That's why conservatives folks not educated throu internet are buying their products.

It take just one ( 1 ) green car to change the entire situation and demonstrate an alternative that is real. Our society is almost made on this only ' truth ', i mean that you have to sell a valuable product to ( one ) 1 or more customer for money. This is what made the industrial and business revolution for mankind in 1900 in u.s.a. Every body was doing that and never listened to the deads in europe, asia, africa, south america, siberia, etc. They never invented the middle class, only armed deals for stealing the natural ressources was a way of life with one percent richs and 99% slaves . You invented the assembly lines done by a privateer, so maintain this tradition, that's the best.

↓↑report

Wouldn't natural gas production also use water? It'll be interesting comparing water usage via electrolysis vs natural gas.

Doesn't seem like too big a problem since the water is returned to the system via the exhaust and should be fairly clean.

↓↑report

Yeah, but then you have to chip the salt and crap out of your electrolyzer every so often...

↓↑report