Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site houxa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!houxa!jhs
From: jhs@houxa.UUCP (J.SCHERER)
Newsgroups: net.misc,net.physics
Subject: Re: Hydrogen (isn't flammible?!?)
Message-ID: <643@houxa.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Mar-85 09:04:48 EST
Article-I.D.: houxa.643
Posted: Tue Mar 26 09:04:48 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Mar-85 03:32:38 EST
References: <708@mhuxt.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 23
Xref: watmath net.misc:7660 net.physics:2317

> > 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!)
The Hindenburg did use hydrogen which is flammable (and which mixed
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