Calling Hydrogen An Energy Source Is Like Calling Stormy Daniels An Actress
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2024
- #hydrogen #renewables #alternativeenergy #greenenergy #climate #climatechange
For more energy and power content, subscribe to my Substack: robertbryce.substack.com/
Watch Juice The Series Free on UA-cam:
/ @juicetheseries .
The Power Hungry Podcast:
open.spotify.com/show/2EakVwK...
Tiktok:
www.tiktok.com/@pwrhungry?lan...
Twitter:
pwrhungry?ref_src...
Read my books (all six of them):
bit.ly/3Gv1Rc0
Watch my documentary: Juice: How Electricity Explains the World on Amazon Prime:
amzn.to/3gk9Ttx
Robert Bryce Website:
robertbryce.com - Наука та технологія
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
Profits ensure good ideas succeed. Subsidies ensure bad ideas are adopted.
Nice turn of phrase.
You just described EVs….
@@darbyheavey406 EV production is falling. EV production is driven by government subsidies and mandates. Without either they wouldn't survive the free market. These government subsidies are derived from taxing hard working people and they help finance the richest man in the world. Great plan.
Correct 💯
@@anthonymorris5084it’s not it’s doing very well especially compared to internal combustion engine vehicles, here in the UK and Europe it is anyway.
And there haven’t been subsidies on new ev purchases for 3 years in the UK and never on those over £40,000.
Very simply.....it takes more energy to produce less energy.......sounds like a government backed no brainer
This is true of all Energy Conversion. Always has been. Some forms just convert more efficiently. Most our modern ones are just as bad as the hydrogen example.
I believe the purpose of promoting hydrogen is to offer the convenience of gasoline in an environmentally friendly way. Batteries in cars are not convenient for long distances because of range limitations and the time wasted recharging. Solar panels on car roofs would not work. How about using solar to produce hydrogen then use hydrogen as fuel.
Ethanol in gas is a prime example. You get $1 worth of energy for the $1.25 it costs to produce it. I guess those cor growing states have the congressmen &senators to keep it going. The use of corn as fuel has a lot to do with higher beef, pork and chicken prices.
But somehow Dems will make money off of it.
Hydrogen is an energy source .
So is anything that burns.
Some things just burn better than others.
Hydrogen is an energy storage medium, not a source
H2 is an energy drain. It takes more energy to produce than it does when it is oxidized.
You are correct. Produce it cleaner and then cleaner to use in HFCEV and other applications than the disastrous environmental foot print of lithium ion batteries. It also can be stored and transported to end users easier than traditional electricity for BEVs. And useful for commercial transportation such as railways which operate in remote areas where electricity for batteries doesn’t exist or too hard to provide enough for the engines.
But despite all my pumping it up, synthetic, or e-fuels, have the greatest potential. The global distribution (logistical) system for stable liquid fuel already exists and doesn’t require any new infrastructure to put e-fuel into the system. And logistics wins all conflicts, it builds massive corporations, and keeps the global markets running.
100% correct! Our group have been saying that hydrogen is not the answer. And neither are electric cars! We are being led down the garden path by politicians and others who know nothing of what they are talking about.
Keep up the good work!
From South Island, New Zealand.
Can i ask what is your Back ground in hydrogen (what group and study with hydrogen ) I am think about purchasing Toyota Mirai hydrogen vehicle, Just doing some back ground , Thanks
@@user-lk7zr5hm9ydon’t do it - there is a few mirai owners on UA-cam in America they pay $180 to fill up for a 360mile range.
A hydrogen fuel cell car is just a more complicated and less efficient EV - it has all the components a EV has plus the hydrogen fuel system, tank and fuel cell to convert the hydrogen back into electricity.
It’s a terribly expensive and complicated machine - you be better off buying a decent battery EV.
@@badchefi What is your Back ground ?
Toyota Motor has a market cap or net worth of $273.25 billion as of May 17, 2024. Its market cap has increased by 41.19% in one year. Who would you Listen to ?
@@user-lk7zr5hm9y Studebaker, Abbott-Downing and John Shutter where amongst the biggest horse cart manufacturers in America in the late 1800’s.
None of them are making any cars today - the past of a company doesn’t tell you about their future.
It’s down to economics - the Mirai has more components than a Tesla model 3 and costs more.
Look at the Mirai - you fill up at a Hydrogen filling station. It holds 5.6kg of hydrogen at $36 per kilo. Hydrogen is held at 3500bar in a tank, the fuel cell turns the hydrogen into electricity, this electricity gets stored in a lithium battery pack that powers the electric motor.
Us$200 will get you about 400 miles of range.
It weighs 1950kg empty and has 185hp and 300NM of torque - it does 0-100km/h in 9.2 seconds.
It cost around 60’000 US dollars.
Tesla model 3 performance is a simple Battery powered EV that you can charge at home for $18 - this will give you about 315 miles of range.
It weighs 1836kg and has 534hp and 660NM of torque. It does 0-100km/h in 3.1 seconds.
It costs around 52’000 US dollars.
Even my seven year old grandson gets this in three seconds - which is the better and cheaper option?
@@user-lk7zr5hm9ythat’s down to Japanese tax payers money!
You don’t make hydrogen, you separate it and store it
We need to prepare for the use of hydrogen with Preparation H! 😂
😂😂😂😂😂🎉
Can I use a substitute like rectinol?
@@alpinealpine2793 Ass far ass Iam concerned, yes! 😂
Tell our Australian govt. as they’re giving $1 billion to one of our billionaires to go ahead with this venture.
Our government is Corrupted. Vote them out.
It’s good to know there is a dumber populace on earth than Americans.
That’s WHY it will continue to be called the Land Down UNDER !
That would be rather pointless
dont you think. R
Amazing amount of energy spent refining it
Problem is most of the voters don't understand any of this so believe the hype.
Scientific ignorance of the average American citizen is not an accident. If more of us had sufficient scientific knowledge, the Great Green Energy Grift would have withered on the vine decades ago.
……Is like calling a piece of printed paper a “ store of value “
Like…a dollar bill 🤷♂️
We used to classify hydrogen as an energy carrier, no different from an electricity cable, just a way to get energy from one place to another!
Exactly, it stores energy.
Hydrocarbons contribute a tiny amount to overall global temperature changes and in insignificant next to the natural cycles, terrestrial and extraterrestrial, that govern our climate AND hydrocarbons are an unlimited source of energy. What is the definition of renewables again?
We should be talking about how to improve air quality, which harms our lungs, especially for children, and not about increased CO2, which produces only positive benefits for the planet in the form of greenification. In fact we should be worried about the long term CO2 down trend because 150ppm is when plants start to die…
It's incredible with all the nonsense about reducing CO2 that most people don't know that plants "breathe CO2 in and "exhale " O after photosynthesis. I enjoy explaining this process. It helps to open the TV watchers minds.
So much common sense in a couple minutes. Thank much DD
More coal and gas fired power stations .
And what do you know, China’s doing it while everyone else kowtows to the few elite contingencies that magically have all our hard earned money 😂
Yeah, let’s commit suicide! Great idea.
NO. CNG fired. (Clean Natural Gas)
And Nuclear .
If net zero carbon is the goal, then hydrogen is definitely not the answer.
either are evs
Most hydrogen is made from natural gas...
@@TBonerton Most natural gas is produced after eating chili :)
The zero, is mankind.
Energy is Economy.
It's the green new Holocaust; whose author is satan.
@@666dualsport Yep! Batter Charging is 70% to 93% efficient. ( 30% to 8% loss) 5% losses in the power grid. 40% generation losses. We are already over the 50% loss for hydrogen and its going to save us!
So, what you are saying is that hydrogen is much like ethanol, 1.65 gal of petroleum to make 1 gal of ethanol. “Just the green energy plan I’ve been looking for” says AOC, in the “Green New Deal.
Hydrogen is more like a battery. You create hydrogen then use it to generate power. But, it is not without problems.
Yeah, huge problems.
You “create hydrogen”? How? It is an essential element. You can isolate it (from water for example) by supplying MORE energy than you get back from it. Would you lend me $1000 if I pay you back only $500?
@@artemis6628 Greens think wind and solar are free, so they assume hydrogen made with free energy is also free or very cheap.
@@artemis6628 - Sorry, poor choice of words. The point is that hydrogen is not found in large quantities that can be easily collected. To get large reserves you have to expend energy to “isolate” this element. Then you can use it as an energy source. In theory, you could use excess power from solar arrays to isolate hydrogen. Then use hydrogen as a fuel source when the solar arrays are outputting current. But, even that has issues. Like you get less energy from the hydrogen than it takes to isolate hydrogen.
@@AntisocialRedNeckNerd You are right there. Another issue I remember is so called “Hydrogen embrittlement” of steel in contact with hydrogen. Problem for holding tanks.
I've heard a lot of hype around hydrogen, I've never heard this. Thank you!
interesting, thanks. I have invested in H2 FuelCells as replacement for diesel generators. The H2 is transported as ammonia and ‘cracked’ on site. Running the FuelCell emits water as by-product. It can’t be denied that reaching that process is problematical in the emissions of production of ammonia …more or less than diesel.?
H is great. Not only was it the first letter in Hindenburg, it was also the source of its destruction. It was a great newsletter Mr Bryce.
Not so. It was the paint on the covering which burnt. If you look closely at the film you can see the hydrogen flames going vertically upwards. Remember H is the lightest element.
Hindenburg went down because of coating on outside that is same powder as rocket fuel
Although I do not trust everything on wikipedia, it is an interesting read on the Hindenburg and the conflicting theories of what may have contibuted to its demise. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster
@@doughaug you can't get facts from wickapedia. Garbage in garbage out.
Ty for sharing this info. As a former underwater welder/burner, the process creates hydrogen off the tip of the welding and burning rods. This killed a coworker back in 91' when started to burn and tapped into a pocket of hydrogen. I had one small explosion that felt like a punch to my chest. High pressure hydrogen tanks in auto have caused EMT's to run from auto accidents as they hear leaking gas. I've always thought we need a hydrogen on demand system with no storage. A man invented a car like this. He was murdered and the car was taken never to be seen again.
Please tell us more about this magical car you speak of.
@@csmall7842 his name was Stan myer. Search water car inverter killed.. lots of results
@@csmall7842 There was actually three different ones shill and they were all assassinated, brush up on some history and zip it until then. Ah you're probably just an AI disinformation bot anyway.
@@csmall7842The guy with the 100 MPG carburetor killed that guy just before the CIA killed him.
Damn, what a lie.. did you go to school or did you just use the drugs. it would help if you had oxygen to burn and hydrogen.. it makes water.....LMAO
Under the way you're saying hydrogen is used it is very inefficient but there are efficient ways of using it I did it when I was in college in the early eighties and the technology disappeared
The green/liberal slogan at this point is essentially "ANYTHING BUT NUCLEAR!!". While at the same time they refuse to acknowledge the downsides of any of the alternatives that they choose to promote. Those downsides include significant environmental impacts and substantial ongoing carbon footprints.
It’s about profits in the short run
"Will the hydrogen lobby contribute to my election campaign?"
Asking for a politician.
It is a better way to store energy than a battery as it does not lose power ( energy) or have a recycling problem. It is certainly more expensive because it takes energy to produce it.
Unfortunately, the losses with hydrogen are high, compared to other gasses. Being such a small molecule it is difficult to contain. Hydrogen will percolate through most materials.
1:46 hydrogen does occur naturally, you just need to travel to a nebula to get it.
Actually there are some sources of hydrogen that are trapped underground and probably occurs due to a mineral deposit stripping the oxygen from water. But these sources are rare and quickly leach out.
Those little bitty hydrogen atoms are like a hamster. Master escape artists.😂
I already miss the power hungry podcast
Agree with you on the energy equation. However, the source of the energy is the key difference. If you are using solar energy for an example, to produce hydrogen, after the year or so payback cost for the solar panel (energy wise), you are then getting that hydrogen for “free”, energy wise, in comparison to using resources that do not produce their own power, for the life of the solar panels.
I recently installed solar on my home. My 900lb of solar panels produces the same as amount as 950lb of coal, PER DAY.
So the hydrogen as fuel argument then becomes - do I create a slightly less thermally efficient energy source for free? Or do I burn an incredibly large amount of a different resource for a continuous cost?
Promblem even with solar is it still takes 50kwh of electricity to get 33kwh usable out of the hydrogen so much better to put that electricity directly into a battery and also avoid all the extra loss of having the processing equipment, storage and delivery devices for the hydrogen. Hydrogen has its usage just not as a fuel for vehicle propulsion.
@@alankemp1970 oh yeah agree completely, for cars electric is 100% the way to go vs hydrogen. Heavy vehicles there is a bit more of an argument for hydrogen, but still, EV wins the efficiency argument.
That said, if it’s the case that 50kw of electricity produces 33kw of hydrogen, that’s insane efficiency compared to even the most efficient coal and nuclear, which is around 38%.
It's easier to fool someone, than to convince them they have been fooled.
I've used H in R&D experiments. I've always felt uneasy with it's application in compressed conditions.
I am an attorney with the California PUC. The California PUC approved a memorandum account for SoCalGas that basically guarantees it will eventually be compensated for expenses incurred in researching a proposed hydrogen pipeline to supply hydrogen from out unknown outside the state sources to unknown consumers in the state. The application was so vague on details that it was clear that SoCalGas was simply seeking the functional equivalent of a rate payer funded handout for something it might never build. The PUC’s decision to approve the memorandum account made no objective sense and it was driven in large part by the institutional mentality that anything that anything “renewable” is good, a very simplistic way of thinking.
As an engineer working in the power industry for over 30 years and being around equipment to store and use hydrogen (for generator cooling) much of the concern about using and storing hydrogen is also over hyped. (Gasoline isn't exactly all that safe either.) Hydrogen could find a place in powering some transportation and would make more sense than full EVs in some instances, but there would be a long way to go to get any infrastructure in place for fueling up and especially for the hydrogen production. Hydrogen fuel cells would get rid of the idea that you're driving the Hindenburg. Just about all that is being talked about these days from Solar to Wind to Geothermal to Hydrogen to Flywheels to Tidal generators were are being studied 50 years ago when I was in college. There hasn't really been what was predicted to be quantum leaps in progress on any of them (regardless of how many Teslas might be driving around). Coal may be basically a dying or dead power source, but I'm not seeing any evidence that that has made any impact on Climate Change.
people are using more coal than ever.
The hardest part about separating hydrogen and using it for fuel is keeping the oil companies from unaliving you.
Toyota just developed a 445hp hydrogen V8 engine. You can look it up online
If you have enough money, you can make your own diamonds too.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The differences is Stormy Daniels is very good at certain things, as is Hydrogen if we develop the technology to use it affectively.
I agree IF you are trying to store hydrogen and use it like gasoline. I've made my own units that separate hydrogen and oxygen from water. It makes a fine combustible product for use in internal combustion engines.
Well if New York Times said it… you definitely know it’s not true. That’s one of the best litmus tests.
Currently we have vehicles that run on hydrogen. There are different grades like green or blue for various uses. It is an almost limitless resource, has long has you have water. But, if we use solar power to make the hydrogen, it would be like taking you solar mobile without all the hazards of toxic materials used by EVs.
If memory serves, it takes about 250KJ of energy to split water through electrolysis, and H2 has about 150MJ of energy. The research I did back in the early 80s demonstrated viability, but usable H2 is extremely dangerous: flammability range is huge. I though the decision to move away from H2 was simply for safety reasons
*"Our source was The New York Times."*
- Ambassador DeSadesky in Doctor Strangelove
The practical way to use Hydrogen is to store its energy as a sort of battery. Excess energy produced by electricity generating systems that is not used up by demand (and would be otherwise wasted) can be used to produce Hydrogen. It's not much, but if the process of using excess electricity to generate Hydrogen can be designed to work economically, then it would make sense.
Of course the uptake (usage) of stored Hydrogen energy would have to be adapted so that the whole thing remains energetically economical.
It is very, very unlikely to be economical from a CapEx/OpEx perspective. A lot of expensive equipment laying around doing nothing.
Well said. These same people are winding coils of wire to make free energy. Or putting magnets on their fuel lines to improve gas mileage.
One word..."Hindenburg".
using a wood gassifier could produce a running amount of H2 but alot of wood would be needed
You have to consider the energy required to produce, transport, and store any fuel in order to make a comparison. The hydrogen paste mixture recently discovered is a step in the right direction. New innovations will continue until the cost of fuel cell energy will become competitive with oil, natural gas, & solar..
About as pie in the sky as evs.😂
Foghorn leghorn: your problem son is that the lobbyists “ when your representative says no” just keep adding to the money pile in front of said representative until he says ok/yes, I’ll vote for your ……..
A worse energy in energy out ratio than alcohol gasoline.
The cost of production of the H is really not the main issue. Its low energy density and challenge to store safely are bigger issues. The very bumpy nature of solar and wind could be harnessed to cost effectively produce H. The other challenges are more significant.
So what about electrolysis in conjunction with a modern gasoline engine in an automobile ?
Just ask the survivors off the Hindenburg explosion how easy Hydrogen is to work with! Oh wait, that’s right, there are none😮
Exactly, we learned this in high school chemistry!!!
Well, we could just use coal or diesel or gas to power the machines to create clean hydrogen, right? Then from there we do what is necessary to use hydrogen for energy creation. So ultimately we end up with clean energy. What could possibly be simpler or cleaner or sound so good.
Hydrogen is not a fuel - it’s a means to store energy - say in summer you turn excess solar energy into hydrogen and in winter you turn it back into electricity.
It’s way cheaper and more efficient to put electricity straight into a battery to power a motor.
Hydrogen fuel cell cars are electric cars that have a fuel cell that turns the hydrogen into electricity - that electricity goes into a small battery pack that powers the motor - about half as efficient as a simple battery electric car😂
It is an energy source but only if one is able to use it in a fusion plant.
I think that Hydrogen could be a good replacement for fossil fuels, but only is it is produced via nuclear, or sun powered electrolyzers. Otherwise nuclear base load power generation is a no brainer.
Thats what I thought about hydrogen. At the end of the day, it's just an inefficient way to store energy.
Great article, thank you for saying it! As a 40 year veteran of refinery operations I am profoundly aware of the problems associated with Hydrogen!
Thank you for speaking truth on this Sir. My best to you and yours from Canada
Thanks Robert. Are you an informed layman or scientist, or engineer? I'll look you up. I was aware that there were problems with it in everyday use but you have given a good explanation of them.
Why not use solar and wind to make it. Use it as a battery to store energy for the renewables
Two words: energy density.
That is a perfect response.
Thanks for your explanation. One and a half times in to get one in return said it very succinctly.
Hydrogen , is I believe , manufactured from splitting H20 , the by-products being Hydrogen and Water vapour , and , water vapour being the most abundant Greenhouse Gas in the Atmosphere ?
Thank you!
You can actually use graphitic carbon nitride and the sun in a water panel to make hydrogen. Scale that up you have a giant source of hydrogen. Transport that hydrogen in one of the new hydrogen powered ships and you have a cheap hydrogen energy source.
Doesn't anybody remember chemistry from high school?
Hydrogen is essentially just another battery. You have to use energy to separate H from O2. This energy is still largely generated by burning gob coal. Pretty much the equivalent of an EV. The only advantage is that it moves the smokestack from the back of cars to a remote area away from densely populated cities, so places like LA can be less smoggy and people suffer fewer respiratory illnesses. The reason to create EVs or hydrogen cars is to prepare for a future of truly clean energy - like fusion. Sadly, no politicians have picked up on this so it isn't getting any press.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart!
Hydrogen combustion engines are extremely efficient. Generating Hydrogen through electrolysis is not. My truck runs on water via water fracking to separate H2O into HHO. Only requires a 12 volt battery and a modified air conditioning compressor.
However, hidroggen is easier to produce than fosil fuels.
Best regards.
I always appreciate an honest factual point of view
This video boiled down to 5 words, it’s harder than you think.
As much as appearing in a movie doesn’t make one an actress ,
Containing Carbon Hydrogen doesn’t make a combustible substance a “ fossil “ fuel ( Mendeleev / von Humboldt )
Stormy is a great actress. She fooled the greatest conman in modern history. He thought she was really into him. But good talking points about hydrogen as a fuel. And you’re correct in that it isn’t economically feasible as of yet.
With that being said, what about LP ? Is there an endless source of LP. Zero emissions
Hindenburg, I rest my case.
Thank you Sir, may your message spread far and wide. Another case of facts as opposed to "feelings."
Stanley Meyer... 2:46
Good info for those who cannot spell chemistry or physics.
Same thing as these huge wind turbines. They use mega amounts of chemicals to produce, and then become a major pollutant to dispose of. Like a major pollutant!!!!!!
Comparing hydrogen to Stormy? What did Hydrogen ever do to you?…
I suppose you could consider hydrogen to be a type of energy battery--albeit an expensive, inefficient one.
A perfect candidate for the Government Subsidy Racket.
Energy is easy to produce, storing it is a bitch. It doesn’t matter if it takes 1.5 units of energy to create 1 unit of hydrogen if that energy would be going to waste otherwise. All the so called free solar energy in the world isn’t worth a tinkers damn if you can’t store it for use when the sun doesn’t shine. The lithium battery is almost 50 years old and still isn’t suitable for large scale storage and the danger of these batteries is becoming more evident every day. When I started scuba diving in the seventies air pressure of 3000 psi was considered crazy and overly dangerous, now kids playing paintball and air rifle enthusiasts routinely run around with 4500 psi tanks. New technologies will tame hydrogens shortcomings so don’t be too fast too discount it!
Remember the Hindenburg!
More energy in then you get out same with growing corn to make alcohol fuels
This is what scares me personally about Hydrogen. They separate it. Yet. It can be made. My own knowledge of it. It's well beyond dangerous. They want and demand it to be in vehicles. Sure. Their nuts.
Hydrogen (H2) is the only element that can achieve escape velocity. That is the reason why it is not naturally occurring it all went into space. Producing it and spills could deplete the planet, however that would take a very long time!
Wow, finally SOMEBODY says the truth about Hydrogen.
He is spot on! I can’t believe that people have bought into this hype.
I agree, hydrogen is inefficient and overhyped. Just a side note: in my opinion hydrogen is an energy source, but it has to be made. Petrol and coal are energy sources that were made too - by nature. Energy sources that do not have to be made are things like solar energy.
Absolutely true. It's a shame our politicians, whose legislation distorts what would otherwise be logical decisions, have too little knowledge about subjects like this one.
Those little bitty hydrogen atoms are like a hamster. Master escape artists.😂
Let alone storing on transporting it … god sake
SNR's appear to suffer from the same problem. The amount of energy required to produce, and then contain energy, far exceeds the amount that would be available commercially. This does keep me entertained though.
But in space would it be different as it's quite everywhere!?
Agreed.
you mean it's sometimes blows. explosively!
Frankly, I hadn’t heard about this debate. But I certainly think that you stated your case well.
This has always been true of ALL Energy Conversion. Originally the thought 60 years ago with hydrogen was that limitless nuclear energy would provide the source. The same is now true of Batteries and Green EV cars. Batter Charging is 70% to 93% efficient. ( 30% to 8% loss) 5% losses in the power grid. 40% generation losses. We are already over the 50% loss for hydrogen and its going to save us!