Usok ng LPG TAXI mabaho?

[acesanbuena]

I talked to Taxi driver that their using LPG. Has to complain it usage. And many people complain on the smoke emission of LPG. Masakit sa ilong.

Delicado ito sa mga old people na may heart problem. At nahihirapan tayo huminga pag nadaan natin ang LPG taxi.

A safety reminder:

Kapag andyan siguro ang LPG taxi kailan tayo magtakip ng ilong na gamit ay panyo. Para hindi tayo nakalanghap ng lpg smoke. I usually do that when there LPG taxi.

[EssB]

Mabaho lang po ang amoy ng LPG exhaust dahil sa additives...

...but compared to regular gasoline smoke, less harmful ang contents nung sa LPG.

...another thing kaya amoy na amoy yung baho sa karamihan ng taxis, usually dahil kulang sa alaga (tune up)...

[dencio1976]

Mabaho lang po ang amoy ng LPG exhaust dahil sa additives...

...but compared to regular gasoline smoke, less harmful ang contents nung sa LPG.

...another thing kaya amoy na amoy yung baho sa karamihan ng taxis, usually dahil kulang sa alaga (tune up)...

wah idol! andito ka din pala sharing your infinite wisdom.

[sboogie]

sa mga nabasa ko sa net di nga sa safe sa health ng tao kahit environmentally friendly sya. water powered vehicles dapat ang idevelop nila eh

[ghosthunter]

sa mga nabasa ko sa net di nga sa safe sa health ng tao kahit environmentally friendly sya. water powered vehicles dapat ang idevelop nila eh

Even hydrogen burning vehicles will emit NOx emissions which will result in acid rain and other bad stuff.

OT: Question is how to do split water to hydrogen/oxygen economically. Typical methods use electrolysis in one form or another.

[webmiester]

One of the issues I have with using water as fuel is this:

The amount of water in the world has been a constant through time. Yung inihi ni Juan in 1512, is your drinking water today. The amount of water has remained constant and water has been continually recycled: It is just evaporated, moved, filtered, drank, excreted, etc. all these years.

My issue is that when we start using water as fuel, like splitting them and "burning" its components, we might change this constant amount of water, and God knows what kind of environmental problem this will bring!

Similar to today's problem where we have accumulated larger than normal amounts of CO2 in the environment causing global warming, an environmental dilemma might also ensue if the constant amount water becomes less than normal. I dont know what will happen yet, but like in the case of global warming, the long term effects of "burning" water will be felt after much of the water has been used up and the effects will be hard to reverse.

[ghosthunter]

One of the issues I have with using water as fuel is this:

The amount of water in the world has been a constant through time. Yung inihi ni Juan in 1512, is your drinking water today. The amount of water has remained constant and water has been continually recycled: It is just evaporated, moved, filtered, drank, excreted, etc. all these years.

My issue is that when we start using water as fuel, like splitting them and "burning" its components, we might change this constant amount of water, and God knows what kind of environmental problem this will bring!

Similar to today's problem where we have accumulated larger than normal amounts of CO2 in the environment causing global warming, an environmental dilemma might also ensue if the constant amount water becomes less than normal. I dont know what will happen yet, but like in the case of global warming, the long term effects of "burning" water will be felt after much of the water has been used up and the effects will be hard to reverse.

Nice thought but I think you made a wrong assumption.

Disregarding the power required to produce hydrogen as fuel, converting water to hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen to power our cars will NOT result in a water crisis since the output of the combustion will be water. In an engine burning hydrogen, only hydrogen is added as fuel. Oxygen is taken from the air and added to the combustion "charge". So the only output of such will be what is in the air. Results in mostly water vapor and some trace NOx gases.

[webmiester]

Nice thought but I think you made a wrong assumption.

Disregarding the power required to produce hydrogen as fuel, converting water to hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen to power our cars will NOT result in a water crisis since the output of the combustion will be water. In an engine burning hydrogen, only hydrogen is added as fuel. Oxygen is taken from the air and added to the combustion "charge". So the only output of such will be what is in the air. Results in mostly water vapor and some trace NOx gases.

Well, is the amount of water vapors equal to the amount of water used? If yes, then what material was used to make the NOx?

This story of water as byproduct is what proponents of water powered cars tell us. But if there is a by-product such as NOx then there was a material consumed to make it. If the material made came from water, then the amount of waste water produced would be less than that consumed.

If the amount of waste water is equal to the amount of water which went in the machine, then NOx was probably magically made without any raw materials. Im not sure if even Harry Potter can conjure that considering that he uses a transfiguration spell to convert something into something else or an Accio spell to call the substance from a far place, but maybe not to create matter from nothing.

Believing that the amount of water remains the same after the process I think might also be a misleading assumption on its own.