Hear me out, so we make a ton of hydrogen for cars, heating, etc. But it takes lots of methane to make hydrogen. So we give oil companies subsidies so they can do more fracking which is how we get the methane in the first place. This will be great for climat cha—wait a minute…

permalink
report
reply
13 points
*

It’s ok because after we have already fully transitioned the grid to renewables, batteries, and pumped hydro in twenty or thirty years, we’ll then be so good at making renewable electricity that we won’t mind using a process that throws half of it away, all so that we can keep going to gas stations instead of just getting electricity delivered to our homes.

Being able to fill up your car in 5 minutes instead of 18 during your occasional road trip is definitely going to win out over being able to fill up at home for a tenth the cost, and people will want to burn hydrogen for heating even though it would be a lot cheaper and more energy efficient to use it in even a basic diesel generator to power a heat pump, because people just love throwing their money away so that the poor oil companies can still have a growing business and it’s not like their is an easy and 98% percent efficient way to deliver power to people’s homes, that would just be ridiculous.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Well, there’s the whole other conspiracy to this… Cars wouldn’t need 18 minutes to recharge, or even 5… even 1 really…

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Screw that, we already have plenty of methane from cows. Just shove tubes up their asses and harvest that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Actually, cows burp most of their methane emissions

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Tubes in both ends!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

in my ignorance i assumed that we got hydrogen from electrolysis or something

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

We don’t at the moment. Hydrogen is primarily part of the fossil fuel process.

But there’s nothing stopping us getting it from water, other than cost.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

That’s really expensive compared to fracking. It’s reasonable to assume that any hydrogen project is going to use fossil hydrogen

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Treating Hydrogen as a fuel is a problem, but it’s an OK storage medium. Putting it next to Bromine or whatever is fine. I think people using it for flight or trucking is a good outcome overall, but yeah unfortunately the oil companies basically ruin all the good things.

permalink
report
reply
5 points
*

Yeah, or maybe for moving container ships. It’s not quite as energy dense as the heavy fuels they’re currently burning, but its only emissions are water vapor, and if we keep building renewable power generation there will be times of negative power prices where producing hydrogen with the excess will make a lot more sense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Container Ships could be moved by sail if we really wanted to do that.

permalink
report
parent
reply

how to ghost someone on Lemmy?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Block the user, maybe even the instance. What if they’re the owner?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

block block block block block block block

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Unbridled enthusiasm can be cute to a point, but those hydrogen folks are way beyond that. Yikes.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Look at which corporations are all pro hydrogen. Those hydrogen folks are probably astroturfing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

85%+ of hydrogen production is currently from fossik fuels. While there is a forseeable future where solar and other green energy could be used, an immediate increase in hydrogen production would come 100% from fossil fuel producers.

So yeah, it is currently oil company propaganda from trying to find alternate revenue streams.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Well in theory, it could come from nuclear. That’d be cleaner than fossil fuels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I won’t discount that possibility, but I think they get sold on a miraculous idea and simply don’t understand the reasons why it’s not a good idea. The more zealous one simply don’t want to believe it’s not the perfect solution.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The niches where it’s useful tend to get pushed out by better batteries over time. We’re already at the point where we don’t need hydrogen for cars and busses. Long haul trucks, construction equipment, and even airplanes are on the horizon. There isn’t much left to bother with hydrogen after that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

“And where does that hydrogen come from, my sweet summer child?”

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Excess of generated power during the day.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Much more economical to store the electricity in batteries or pumped hydro than using an electrolyzer, even if you found the electrolyzer for free on the side of the road.

Using hydrogen for steel and fertilizer production are the only feasible use cases for it over the next 100 years at least, if your goal is maximum GHG reduction.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Using hydrogen for steel and fertilizer production are the only feasible use cases for it over the next 100 years at least, if your goal is maximum GHG reduction.

lolnope.

Nuclear. Every day, all day, conventional nuclear power is so much better than trying to invent a hydrogen infrastructure. An expensive infrastructure if it’s going to perform those incredibly important base load purposes like smelting, chemical feedstock production (fertilizers) and concrete production that could be handled by existing infrastructure and nuclear power. I’m not even advocating for small modular reactors (which I think are nifty but ultimately unnecessary).

Hydrogen as energy storage and transport requires cryogenic everything, people don’t realize how expensive and sensitive it is. Ben Rich talks about the Skunkworks program to produce Hydrogen in meaningful quantities for the Suntan program in Skunk Works, and the prospect of large scale hydrogen production (and use on active airfields) terrified people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-400_Suntan

Basically, it can be done, but the risks are large without a highly trained workforce and rigid compliance to safety regimes.

Now imagine that but even more widespread :|

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Sure, in the future state where we have all the energy we need from solar and wind, but then we have all the energy we need

Hydrogen maybe has a place in sea and air transport. Maybe has a place in trucks

Hydrogen right now comes from fossil fuels

permalink
report
parent
reply

It kinda depends. Hydrogen protons were formed in the first second after the Big Banger🤘, but full hydrogen atoms that included a proton and an electron didn’t form until 370k “years” later during a time range called the Recombination Epoch.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Erm, actually…

permalink
report
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

  • 6.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 271

    Posts

  • 3K

    Comments