You forgot about the part where the possibility of generating hydrogen cleanly from electricity later is used as an excuse to build infrastructure and fuel-cell cars for it now, even though hydrogen now is dirty hydrogen produced by cracking fossil fuels.
I have no confidence that the second phase of switching to electrolysis would actually happen, and that “the hydrogen economy” isn’t just a greenwashing scam perpetrated by natural gas producers.
I always love the stupidity of this idea: You were able to generate pure hydrogen at high costs… Now what should we do with it? Well lets just do what we did since the middle ages and burn it!
If you’re launching a rocket, sure. If cost or difficulty matters in any way compared to raw mass, not really.
It was talked about for cars where density kinda matters, but you could put them in a fuel cell that way instead of just burning it, and I’m not sure if it was ever anywhere close to economical.
The cost probably will go down, and with any luck the cost of polluting will go up, but electricity is going to be more practical for most things.
Electricity has gotten dramatically more expensive too. It is no panacea. In all likelihood, most of transportation will shift over to either green fuels (e-fuels) or hydrogen. Those are one-to-one replacements for fossil fuels.
I mean, to make e-fuel you still need the e (which stands for electricity). It’s ~guaranteed to have lower round-trip efficiency and higher cost in a car than just a battery. Ditto for green hydrogen. Theoretically blue hydrogen or white hydrogen could be used instead, but it’s not certain how much white hydrogen there is, and blue hydrogen needs carbon capture and storage which will add a lot to the cost.
Gas generators are pretty much the same as ever, while renewables have gotten much cheaper than them. If your power bill went up, it’s some local issue doing it.
(Air-breathing aviation is the other application I didn’t mention. Battery planes work but not well, so it’s closer to rockets. I don’t know if anyone has tried hydrogen, but that’s where e-fuel comes up a lot)
Round-trip efficiency is not that important. If it really was as important as claimed, we wouldn’t be talking about cars at all. It would all be about bikes, buses, trains, walkable neighborhoods, etc., instead. But in the real world, we will need to accept less-than-perfect solutions. So as long as the idea is green, it should be tolerated.
We also have far more renewable energy available to us than we could ever hope to use. It is orders of magnitude more plentiful than fossil fuel energy. As a result, there will be an overabundance of green energy in the long run. It is fine to use that excess of energy to make stuff e-fuels or hydrogen.
Okay, but then why not just go with battery cars? You’re the only person I’ve heard say hydrogen cars will make a comeback, if that is what you’re saying.
These prices are literally controlled by price-fixing cartels.
But Europe is investing hundreds of billions in North Sea wind farms to generate hydrogen for heating, it was initiated by Putin’s actions.
https://www.cip.com/projects/our-projects/hydrogen-island/
Now we just have to hope that people dont dig up this bullshit idea of using hydrogen to heat your own house.
There’s really nothing wrong with generating hydrogen when power costs are negative.
Except that only happens like 500 hours a year.
And hydrogen will leak from any tank.
And it turns metal brittle.
And I wouldn’t trust my neighbor with a propane tank, let alone hydrogen.
And its nearly impossible to transport through existing infrastructure.
But other than that, its great!
Most of your claims are just climate change denial arguments. Many of them were directly made up by the fossil fuel industry.
You forgot about the part where the possibility of generating hydrogen cleanly from electricity later is used as an excuse to build infrastructure and fuel-cell cars for it now, even though hydrogen now is dirty hydrogen produced by cracking fossil fuels.
I have no confidence that the second phase of switching to electrolysis would actually happen, and that “the hydrogen economy” isn’t just a greenwashing scam perpetrated by natural gas producers.
What’s that? I couldn’t hear you over the nonstop greenwashing of gas cracking plants.
Wow! so glad we have clean coal now!
🎵🎵🎵🎵🎵
The Gang Heat Their House With Hydrogen
I always love the stupidity of this idea: You were able to generate pure hydrogen at high costs… Now what should we do with it? Well lets just do what we did since the middle ages and burn it!
Craziest implementation? Burn the hydrogen in your home. But not in a furnace. Burn it in a mechanical combustion-powered heat pump!😁
Hydrogen has one of the highest energy densities by mass. It’s a very reasonable energy storage
If you’re launching a rocket, sure. If cost or difficulty matters in any way compared to raw mass, not really.
It was talked about for cars where density kinda matters, but you could put them in a fuel cell that way instead of just burning it, and I’m not sure if it was ever anywhere close to economical.
The cost probably will go down, and with any luck the cost of polluting will go up, but electricity is going to be more practical for most things.
Electricity has gotten dramatically more expensive too. It is no panacea. In all likelihood, most of transportation will shift over to either green fuels (e-fuels) or hydrogen. Those are one-to-one replacements for fossil fuels.
I mean, to make e-fuel you still need the e (which stands for electricity). It’s ~guaranteed to have lower round-trip efficiency and higher cost in a car than just a battery. Ditto for green hydrogen. Theoretically blue hydrogen or white hydrogen could be used instead, but it’s not certain how much white hydrogen there is, and blue hydrogen needs carbon capture and storage which will add a lot to the cost.
Gas generators are pretty much the same as ever, while renewables have gotten much cheaper than them. If your power bill went up, it’s some local issue doing it.
(Air-breathing aviation is the other application I didn’t mention. Battery planes work but not well, so it’s closer to rockets. I don’t know if anyone has tried hydrogen, but that’s where e-fuel comes up a lot)
Round-trip efficiency is not that important. If it really was as important as claimed, we wouldn’t be talking about cars at all. It would all be about bikes, buses, trains, walkable neighborhoods, etc., instead. But in the real world, we will need to accept less-than-perfect solutions. So as long as the idea is green, it should be tolerated.
We also have far more renewable energy available to us than we could ever hope to use. It is orders of magnitude more plentiful than fossil fuel energy. As a result, there will be an overabundance of green energy in the long run. It is fine to use that excess of energy to make stuff e-fuels or hydrogen.
Okay, but then why not just go with battery cars? You’re the only person I’ve heard say hydrogen cars will make a comeback, if that is what you’re saying.
Well, there are useful appliances for hydrogen, where you just burn it. Burning it to heat your own home isnt one if them.
Like, in place of natural gas?
Yeah
But think of the fireworks! /s