• awwwyissss@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    We could use solar (or other renewables/nuclear) to power hydrogen fuel cells, then take the energy where it’s needed.

    • Forester@yiffit.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

        This statement you’ve made here is mostly accurate and informative. Hydrogen isn’t a noble gas, its brother Helium is. Hydrogen is highly reactive. However, your points about Hydrogen storage and transport are spot on. You’re not insulting nor condescending in this post. Nearly every other response you’ve made in this whole post is the opposite.

        You are clearly capable of civil and informative responses, but because you have so few you’ve lost the audience you want to inform/persuade a long time ago. Are you aware of that?

        • Forester@yiffit.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          This is /c/shitpost im not debating civilly as the arguments I get aren’t in good faith 9 times out of 10. I’m not here to be a school teacher. More of a doomsday preacher

          • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Seems like a big assumption. It could be generated in a remote area by a nuclear reactor or a renewable source.

            • daltotron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              It won’t be. You’d be expecting to eat like 30% losses if you were to generate hydrogen from electrolysis, then that’s combined with 40 to 60% efficiency in fuel cells, then that’s combined with a pretty low energy density, even if it has a relatively high specific energy. You’re also dealing with hydrogen tending to make everything it touches pretty brittle, since it’s reactive, and liking to leak out because it has such a small particle size, in combination with your tanks all having to be like multiple times the size of a propane tank to offset the losses. Either way, the sheer tank size tends to offset the gains in practice, and piping that shit would fucking blow, maybe literally.

              • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Right, but that’s all current conditions, and the field is changing quickly. Legislation, technology, and increased market efficiency will resolve some of those problems.

                I doubt many experts in the late 19th century would have predicted our current energy infrastructure, and they werent dealing with an urgent global need to reverse environmental damage.

                The cost of inaction is very high, and humanity will be forced off of fossil fuels eventually anyway. Maybe we’ll use batteries for most portable electricity, but hydrogen will have a role.

                • daltotron@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I mean I kind of doubt that most of those problems are really surmountable in the longer term, unless maybe cryo cooling and storage becomes way cheaper in terms of price, they’re not really things that you can just like, really market innovate your way out of. Not in the same way as batteries, which we might see gain a lot in the next decade or so from solid state. Everyone banks on future technology to solve current problems to court venture capital, but we can already solve most of the problems that we’d need hydrogen for right now. We have trains, we know how to build way more, we don’t really need it for cars, and if you’re not getting your hydrogen from a “free” source like natural gas, there’s not really a reason to produce it in large quantities.

                  • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Fair enough, I appreciate the informed perspective. Regardless of how, I hope we can revolutionize our energy systems soon.