re: #404 Rightwingconspirator

Okay that is about what I thought. As I understand they still take more power to start and run than they get out, falling short of break even. Maybe that can be described to me as a %?

Where I work we use a lot of hydrogen. Maybe 36 of the large size tanks from the supplier a week. I have done a ton of reading on hydrogen combustion etc. I know it takes more energy to split water than you get out when you reburn the gases. Short of break even, right?

My point is which “break even” is closer to practical, given the benefit of zero carbon heat.

Well if you had a fusion reactor or even fission reactors electrolyzing water to get hydrogen becomes much more reasonable.

IIRC fusion actually has reached break even back at Princeton in the early 90’s.

However, it is still a long way from primetime. IN principle though since the reaction os 2000 times more energetic than fission it would be the ultimate bonanza for world energy needs.