3 ms·
I believe you meant to say 120 tons per second. Your [1] link shows 3.8x10^15 grams, which is 3.8x10^9 (metric) tons, not 120. That is in mass of hydrogen. Mult
by darksaints 7y ago
I believe you meant to say 120 tons per second. Your [1] link shows 3.8x10^15 grams, which is 3.8x10^9 (metric) tons, not 120. That is in mass of hydrogen. Multiply by ~9 to get the total mass of water used to electrolyze that quantity of hydrogen.
However, the water cycle is pretty fast on average, and has incredibly high throughput, and the cycle quickens as water vapor concentrations increase. If hydrogen generation is sufficiently distributed, you could likely just wait for the next rainfall to release the brine.
- contravariant 7y agoYou're right I seem to have misread. Good point about the factor ~9, but even then it doesn't look like we'll be draining the oceans dry any time soon. Although it would be a problem of unimaginable scale to use it as the sole source of energy, which is bound to create some of its own problems, I just don't see any obvious ones.