Toyota announcement on its hydrogen SUV and pick-up

[Number_35]

Even if true, low carbon isn’t zero carbon.

Which is why it’s confusing that we prefer wind over nuke. Wind requires a fast acting plant (peaker?) that seems to (typically?) be gas fired, so as to, well, make power when the wind doesn’t blow.

Agreed, but something (a reduction by moving to natural gas) is better than nothing (staying with coal), especially when the reduction is that significant.

I agree that nuclear is the way to go in the long-term, but am discouraged by all the roadblocks, mostly regulatory.

It's relatively cheap and fast to convert a coal-fired GS to natural gas.

I was thinking about our "almost carbon-free" hydro-electric power generation here. Hydro-electric accounts for at least 98% of the power generated, with natural gas turbines (converted from coal c. 20 years ago) available for peaking and restoration.

Never factored in is the carbon contribution of the gasoline- and diesel-powered fleet of thousands of corporate vehicles, nor the commuting of thousands of employees, most by ICE car.

As far as wind power, it's a good complement to hydro-electric. The water ponded on the upside of the dam, as a result of not being required due to wind's contribution, is effectively the battery.

Unfortunately, at one time, and I hope this has changed, the wind turbines were only good down to -26°C. So they weren't contributing during peak load. Furthermore, they had to draw power from the grid for heat, so they added to the peak load.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Apache uses CNG in company vehicles - well, they tout green - but more likely greenbacks - and that’s all good too …

Sunbridge launches CNG station to help reduce Permian emissions

Operators in Texas's Midland region of the Permian can access CNG for their support vehicles from August 31. [Image: Clean Energy]

gaspathways.com

Most drilling rig engines up here are dual fuel: Diesel and LNG Revapourized.
There are several LNG terminals throughout Alberta. After the turmoil in Europe I’m hoping more folks will relax and consider NG to be green. We have a new LNG export terminal opening the west coast of Canada in 2023 or 2024 and displacement of coal is the ticket.

 

[97prizm]

I find it interesting that a lot of major manufacturers are working on hydrogen technologies.

I still think EV's will be a short term solution, or development will slow down in favour of hydrogen. But I'm well aware there is significant hurdles to be dealt with when it comes to the creation of hydrogen.

Yes first of the vast amount of free hydrogen on planet Earth is almost zilch. It's
0.00005%

Hydrogen is found in great quantities on Earth combined with other elements, such as in water and hydrocarbons, but it is barely present in our atmosphere, which contains just 0.00005%. Two it takes 50 kilowatts to separate a kilo (2.2 lbs) of hydrogen.

 

[nthach]

Think building an EV charging network is hard and expensive? Holy cow, can you imagine the idea of building a national network of hydrogen production, transportation, storage, filling, etc.

Never gonna happen.

While Toyota’s hard-on for H2 is understandable, the oil companies aren’t sold. I read somewhere Shell shut down the H2 network in the UK. Here in the Bay Area, only a handful of places has H2 for the general public. One of them is at a bus yard for a major transit agency here. They spent somewhere around $15 million just for the infrastructure to fuel a small fleet of buses. That also includes a on-site electrolyzer that can make 65kg of H2 a day.

The gas suppliers(Messer/Linde, Air Liquide, Air Products, Matheson) have virtually no interest in getting into consumer retail fueling either. Like with petroleum, the downstream side is a money-losing venture compared to the upstream side.

 

[SammyChevelleTypeS3]

That won’t happen it would be nice but no way politically

There is simply too much money flowing into certain members of Congress bank accounts to totally stop EVs at this time.

 

[HondOtaChOrd]

Toyota started the whole hybrid thing. I think their engineers are the best in the automotive industry and they see something in hydrogen.

I personally think hydrogen is the future.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Yes first of the vast amount of free hydrogen on planet Earth is almost zilch. It's
0.00005%

Hydrogen is found in great quantities on Earth combined with other elements, such as in water and hydrocarbons, but it is barely present in our atmosphere, which contains just 0.00005%. Two it takes 50 kilowatts to separate a kilo (2.2 lbs) of hydrogen.

I believe you mean kWhrs not kW.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Here are two screenshots from Car and Driver regarding the current pricing of N2 and the number of cars on the road, nearly all in California. The pressure N2 has to get compressed to in order to have a useable amount in a car is 10,000 psi. Yes, the stations are out there but not many people are interested. Enjoy.

 

[Bailes1992]

Yes first of the vast amount of free hydrogen on planet Earth is almost zilch. It's
0.00005%

Hydrogen is found in great quantities on Earth combined with other elements, such as in water and hydrocarbons, but it is barely present in our atmosphere, which contains just 0.00005%. Two it takes 50 kilowatts to separate a kilo (2.2 lbs) of hydrogen.

I'm far from a scientist.

My basic understanding is that hydrogen can be produced by passing a current through water. I understand that there is an energy deficit doing this and it's highly inefficient.

Saying 50kwh of electricity produces a kilo of hydrogen is utterly pointless. You're not comparing apples to apples. It's a statistic thrown about to make the situation look worse than what it is. What exactly is a kilo of hydrogen? A quick google reveals that a kilo of hydrogen has an energy content of 36.6kwh.

Saying it takes 50kwh of electricity to produce nearly 40kwh of hydrogen doesn't seem anywhere near as bad saying it takes 50kwh of electricity to produce a kilo of hydrogen, does it?

Thing is... it's reasonably efficient now. If that fuel was produced by only using green electricity, what's the issue if there's some waste? And I imagine with technological improvements, it will only get better.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Even if true, low carbon isn’t zero carbon.

Which is why it’s confusing that we prefer wind over nuke. Wind requires a fast acting plant (peaker?) that seems to (typically?) be gas fired, so as to, well, make power when the wind doesn’t blow.

Nuclear is no less than twice the cost of natural gas per MWh, takes decades to build, and can't modulate as quickly as NatGas. It's all about a mix of generation sources rather than using only one source anyways. People are conditioned to view power generation through the lens of one generation source for one area when it doesn't work that way.

This doesn't include the political issues revolving around waste processing, storage, etc.

The carbon intensity of wind is lower than nuclear but the numbers thrown around nuclear range from 10 gmCO2/KWh to 117 gmCO2/KWh. Wind is 11gmCO2/KWh.

 

[supton]

Nuclear is no less than twice the cost of natural gas per MWh, takes decades to build, and can't modulate as quickly as NatGas. It's all about a mix of generation sources rather than using only one source anyways. People are conditioned to view power generation through the lens of one generation source for one area when it doesn't work that way.

This doesn't include the political issues revolving around waste processing, storage, etc.

The carbon intensity of wind is lower than nuclear but the numbers thrown around nuclear range from 10 gmCO2/KWh to 117 gmCO2/KWh. Wind is 11gmCO2/KWh.

Interesting on the CO2 numbers at the end--that would be the important part, if the powers that be are interested in CO2 and climate change. Cost per kWhr being only important in an election year.

Still, I'm not sure if we have more hydro to add (snagglefoots point) in order to have more wind.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Interesting on the CO2 numbers at the end--that would be the important part, if the powers that be are interested in CO2 and climate change. Cost per kWhr being only important in an election year.

Still, I'm not sure if we have more hydro to add (snagglefoots point) in order to have more wind.

From what I've read, hydro is maxed out in the US but who knows. Decades down the road the people in the Western US may decide that having more hydro along the Columbia River is more important than salmon.