You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
32 points
*

“Hydrogen is the Future” - sponsored by Shell

After years of denialism and fucking up our planet these cunts want to sell us the solution to the problem they caused so that we stay dependent on their supply chain and pipelines.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

The one case I have seen for hydrogen, that might be useful, is that when things like solar energy generation, create and overload of power, it can be used to create hydrogen, then the hydrogen can be stored, and used for a variety of ways to power things, in a largely eco-friendly, way. Otherwise… yeah.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The main problem with Hydrogen is the efficiency. If we want to get off fossil fuels, we need to talk about primary energy, not only the electricity consumed today. That alone means that we need multiple of the electric production (the physicist in me shudders at that word) of what we have today.

So instead of the finite resource of oil or gas, there’s a bottleneck in energy production and its infrastructure, which means that we need to be efficient with the energy we have. With Hydrogen, you first need energy for Hydrolysis, then cool it down and pressurize it which uses a lot of energy. And then converting it back in the fuel cell to usable electric energy is again lossy. On a good day that’s an overall efficiency of about 30% (which is around the peak efficiency of the combustion itself in modern ICEs). A good LiPo Battery (which comes with its own problems, and for industrial applications energy density is less of a problem) has a roundtrip efficiency of 98%. So you’d need triple the production infrastructure (PV, wind mills, geothermal, etc.) for your storage, if you’d do everything with H2 compared to everything with batteries.

Which means, that if there aren’t major breakthroughs, like a totally different technology (e.g. photosensitive bacteria) to produce H2 at a multiple of the efficiency of today’s tech, then H2 and E-Fuels in general have to be reserved for the applications, where energy and power density are un-negotionable (like airplanes, some construction equipment, or for some agricultural applications).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

This is correct, however the idea, at least the one not being pushing by industry, is not that hydrogen will be the primary source of power, nor is it considered efficient. It is just one way that we can, right now, capture some of the excess power generation, as opposed to losing it, or other problems is can create. This is all being considered precisely because we can’t really create batteries at the scale needed to accomplish this, yet. Hydrogen is also something that can be broken down into units that can be transported via numerous different means, such as trucks, rather than needing it to just be grid attached. It is also not being proposed as THE solution here. Most, reasonable, sources discussing this, that I have found, see this as one of many methods needed to accomplish this. All working together, with different strengths, for different uses. This one lacks in efficiency, but is highly portable, and not grid dependent, which makes it attractive to a number of different use cases.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

That is one possibility. We could also use pumped hydro, thermal batteries, or just a big fucking rock on a pulley to store that extra energy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Hydrogen storage is very expensive and difficult, which makes personal storage difficult. Industrial storage is easier, but still… sketchy. Just look at how many times a year Texas City has an explosion at their gas plant network.

There are better ways to store energy. Hydrogen is just cheap to acquire, which makes it an attractive substance for the existing industry.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Most of what I have read are discussing this possibility is industrial storage, for industrial scale fuel use. Then they usually come in with asides if the car industry, or whom ever, ever creates a good fuel cell. Though I know there are a lot of BS articles about hydrogen fuel cells powering everything, especially cars. Largely pushed by the oil, and auto, industries.

I looked up Texas City explosions, there aren’t actually a whole lot. Though they do have one devastating one (1947), and one really bad one (2005). Most of them seem to have less to do with the stores of hydrogen, and more to do with mishandling of other aspects of the fuel refinement, and fertilizer, manufacture/storage. Large scale hydrogen storage is not as dangerous as it would seem. When punctures in LH tanks happen, even though they are now mixing with oxygen, it proves to be very difficult to actually get it to light. With most attempts to create a hydrogen leak explosion showing it lights briefly, before the pressure of the expanding gas puts it back out, because it actually displaces all the oxygen. The biggest dangers actually seem to be burns from the extreme temperature of it, and suffocation as leaks rapidly fill areas, displacing all the oxygen. Most of the storage explosions of hydrogen are due to how rapidly it expands, which, when improperly stored, can cause a run away pressure build up, and pressure explosion, rather than an ignition one. Though there are exceptions, such as the Muskingum River power plant explosion. Though we still don’t know what managed to ignite the hydrogen leaking from the truck. This means hydrogen isn’t any more dangerous than the storage of other fuels, and materials, that can explode. It is more dangerous to store large amounts of grain.

https://hydrogen.wsu.edu/2017/03/17/so-just-how-dangerous-is-hydrogen-fuel/

https://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/hydrogen-vehicle-danger1.htm

https://www.nrdc.org/bio/christian-tae/hydrogen-safety-lets-clear-air

https://courses.grainger.illinois.edu/npre470/sp2019/web/readings/Hydrogen safety issues.pdf

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Losses stack up for hydrogen. It’s kinda of a bad battery and storage is dangerous. Fuel cells are bulky and fragile.

Right now, it’s relatively viable because we get it as a petrolium byproduct. But that version doesn’t burn very clean.

Once we’re using solar at home, it’s green, but you’re chewing through freshwater which isn’t ideal.

Something like sodium ion batteries would be better is most ways. (Other than refilling cars in a gas station)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They aim for the same production -opoly (I forgot the real name and I am too tired to look it up) they have now. In the market where demand and supply are what set prices, the one who makes the supply AND sells it is king.

Hydrogen ‘is the future’ not because it is, but because it fits their current business model the best.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The dumb thing is they could have bought the whole market 20 years ago

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Not only this, H₂ is also a green gas, and we can’t afford the leaks of H₂ due to the used as an energy supply.

permalink
report
parent
reply

solarpunk memes

!memes@slrpnk.net

Create post

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a “meme” here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server’s ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators’ discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

Community stats

  • 5.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 303

    Posts

  • 4.1K

    Comments