There’s a litany of reasons why hydrogen isn’t a practical storage fuel. They start with the Hindenburg and end with the billions in subsidies that American hydrogen-power companies have collected to not build anything useful.
Dont most people know that? I thought the promise is that you could establish a hydrogen infrastructure and it would get greener over time - similar to EV’s which get greener over time as power generation includes more renewables.
Not that I’m that naive but I thought that was the claim. Realistically it looks like corporate welfare to let fossil fuel companies keep a stranglehold on energy. One of the most satisfying parts of owning an EV is thinking about all that industry that no longer needs to exist. It’s not just the drilling and refining and shipping and military support for oppressive regimes worldwide, but also huge amounts of polluting and profiteering infrastructure to store and distribute gasoline to every street corner. It can all go
thought the promise is that you could establish a hydrogen infrastructure and it would get greener over time - similar to EV’s which get greener over time as power generation includes more renewables.
why should we use renewables to produce hydrogen (not to mention develop an entirely new hydrogen infrastructure) when we could just use that renewable energy as it is? That’s just adding extra steps and inefficiency for very little benefit, if any.
One of the most satisfying parts of owning an EV is thinking about all that industry that no longer needs to exist.
why should we use renewables to produce hydrogen (not to mention develop an entirely new hydrogen infrastructure) when we could just use that renewable energy as it is? That’s just adding extra steps and inefficiency for very little benefit, if any.
Because hydrogen isn’t trying to replace the source of energy, it is trying to replace the storage of it, at present batteries are not nearly good enough for the EV only transportation boom, but hydrogen works and only really needs to deal with the volatility issue
only really needs to deal with the volatility issue
H2 is the smallest molecule there is, and among the worst to contain. It’s also quite reactive. And the production of H2 for storage is not wonderfully efficient, nor is the whole lifecycle from production to consumption.
The only real reason for hydrogen is to repurpose rather than scrapping the existing gasoline supply chain. That benefits nobody but the fossil-fuel companies. And that’s why it’s being endlessly hyped, despite being a profoundly suboptimal solution.
Because hydrogen isn’t trying to replace the source of energy, it is trying to replace the storage of it
yes, but the point is renewables>battery storage is a more direct and efficient storage system than renewables>hydrogen which then has to be contained, shipped, and distributed for every refill/charge. Batteries you make once and recharge thousands of times which you can do with distribution through the grid from your local power utility (or even right at home if you have solar).
at present batteries are not nearly good enough for the EV only transportation boom, but hydrogen works and only really needs to deal with the volatility issue
it’s not just volatility that’s an issue. Even setting that aside, Hydrogen is difficult to contain because it’s such a small molecule, and it weakens/corrodes metals. These are not trivial challenges at all.
the other thing you can’t do with hydrogen is energy recovery via braking, so you’d have to build cars with a battery or some other kind of hybrid system for fuel cost efficiency.
It’s true that batteries present their own challenges but we are making much more progress in battery tech than we are with hydrogen.
There’s a litany of reasons why hydrogen isn’t a practical storage fuel. They start with the Hindenburg and end with the billions in subsidies that American hydrogen-power companies have collected to not build anything useful.
also most hydrogen is a byproduct of fossil fuels. very little hydrogen is made with green energy.
edit: 95% of hydrogen is produced directly from fossil fuels. Truly "green"hydrogen is less than 1%.
https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/hydrogen
It’s typical to see the proposals devolve.
Fully green hydrogen!
Yeah, bit expensive to build now. What if we first do half green and the rest from fossil fuels.
So we ran the budget again. We were thinking just a quarter green.
Well, infrastructure doesn’t quite support this, so you know what? Gas with hydrogen added!
Is this a good time to tell we settled on natural gas with a homeopathic amount of green hydrogen?
Yeah it’s effectively just a fossil fuel.
Dont most people know that? I thought the promise is that you could establish a hydrogen infrastructure and it would get greener over time - similar to EV’s which get greener over time as power generation includes more renewables.
Not that I’m that naive but I thought that was the claim. Realistically it looks like corporate welfare to let fossil fuel companies keep a stranglehold on energy. One of the most satisfying parts of owning an EV is thinking about all that industry that no longer needs to exist. It’s not just the drilling and refining and shipping and military support for oppressive regimes worldwide, but also huge amounts of polluting and profiteering infrastructure to store and distribute gasoline to every street corner. It can all go
most people do not know that in my experience.
why should we use renewables to produce hydrogen (not to mention develop an entirely new hydrogen infrastructure) when we could just use that renewable energy as it is? That’s just adding extra steps and inefficiency for very little benefit, if any.
agreed.
Because hydrogen isn’t trying to replace the source of energy, it is trying to replace the storage of it, at present batteries are not nearly good enough for the EV only transportation boom, but hydrogen works and only really needs to deal with the volatility issue
H2 is the smallest molecule there is, and among the worst to contain. It’s also quite reactive. And the production of H2 for storage is not wonderfully efficient, nor is the whole lifecycle from production to consumption.
The only real reason for hydrogen is to repurpose rather than scrapping the existing gasoline supply chain. That benefits nobody but the fossil-fuel companies. And that’s why it’s being endlessly hyped, despite being a profoundly suboptimal solution.
yes, but the point is renewables>battery storage is a more direct and efficient storage system than renewables>hydrogen which then has to be contained, shipped, and distributed for every refill/charge. Batteries you make once and recharge thousands of times which you can do with distribution through the grid from your local power utility (or even right at home if you have solar).
it’s not just volatility that’s an issue. Even setting that aside, Hydrogen is difficult to contain because it’s such a small molecule, and it weakens/corrodes metals. These are not trivial challenges at all.
the other thing you can’t do with hydrogen is energy recovery via braking, so you’d have to build cars with a battery or some other kind of hybrid system for fuel cost efficiency.
It’s true that batteries present their own challenges but we are making much more progress in battery tech than we are with hydrogen.
Didn’t they just start shipping grid size salt batteries too?