Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!clewis
From: clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: net.misc,net.physics
Subject: Re: Hydrogen (isn't flammible?!?)
Message-ID: <359@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Mar-85 09:26:21 EST
Article-I.D.: mnetor.359
Posted: Wed Mar 27 09:26:21 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Mar-85 11:12:44 EST
References: <708@mhuxt.UUCP> <643@houxa.UUCP>
Reply-To: clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis)
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 59
Xref: utcs net.misc:7365 net.physics:2263
Summary: 

In article <643@houxa.UUCP> jhs@houxa.UUCP (J.SCHERER) writes:
>> > I saw a film somewhere (whose name I forget) about using hydrogen as
>> > a fuel. It seems that John Q. Public isn't ready for it -- street
>> > interviews showed that everybody thought of the Hindenburg.
>> > Laura Creighton
>> > utzoo!laura
>> The Hindenburg used helium instead of hydrogen. Helium is 
>> considerable more flammable. Germany had used it because
>> there was an embargo of hydrogen against it.
>> 					Bob Crowley
>> 					ihlpm!crowley
>WRONG! (By exactly 180 degrees!)
>....
>with the proper amount of oxygen - or air - is extremely explosive).
>Helium, which is inert, was not available to Germany because the
>US (I think) had only recently discovered how to produce it in
>quantity, was the sole source, and was somewhat reluctant to give
>it to (prewar) Germany to power what could be used as a weapon.
>
>On the subject of cars and peoples "irrational" fear of hydrogen:
>gasoline leaks are not uncommon in today's cars - what would
>happen with a hydrogen leak?  Could indeed be another Hindenburg.
>
>  John Scherer  Bell Labs - Holmdel NJ

John is correct, it was the US.  However, the US was stockpiling 
Helium for their own (probably military) purposes and there was 
very little of it available - not because of reluctance to give
war material to a possibly hostile Germany.  After all, it didn't
stop the US from selling scrap steel to Japan, or other strategic
material to Germany during the first part of WW II.

Germany was (understandably) very annoyed at the US for forcing 
them to use hydrogen for their civilian dirigibles (sp?).  
I think one source for this info is from the Nevil Shute book 
mentioned previously.  I believe that it was also mentioned as one 
of the reasons for Germany's attack on the US ship that caused
the US to enter WW I.

By the way, a company has started building dirigibles in Toronto
in the Wardair hanger at Toronto International Airport (whoops,
"Pearson International").  They have sold at least one (to the
US Navy).  Sure stops traffic on the 401 when they test one!
It's real neat to watch the thing just hang there, puttering
around.  Of course they are using helium.

Regarding "irrational fear of hydrogen" - there may be some truth
to it in automobiles.  It would be interesting to see some sort
of risk analysis of gasoline vs propane vs hydrogen.  There have
been a couple of propane car fires in Toronto recently.  Nobody 
killed, but several injured.  Hydrogen in a car would probably
be stored as a gas (isn't the pressure required to keep hydrogen
liquid too high to be practical in a car?  In contrast, propane is
very easy to keep liquid.)  The consequences of a leak are probably
somewhat more spectacular.
-- 
Chris Lewis, Motorola New Enterprises
UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!utcs!mnetor!clewis
BELL: (416)-475-1300 ext. 321