3 ms·

> Conventional alkaline electrolysis has an efficiency of about 70%. Accounting for the accepted use of the higher heat value (because inefficiency via heat can

> Conventional alkaline electrolysis has an efficiency of about 70%. Accounting for the accepted use of the higher heat value (because inefficiency via heat can be redirected back into the system to create the steam required by the catalyst), average working efficiencies for PEM electrolysis are around 80%. This is expected to increase to between 82–86% before 2030 [1]. It is to store peak renewable energy (negative price), and to achieve Zero Carbon by 2050 (no natural gas). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water#Industrial_output https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water#Industri...

wazoox 6y ago
Another of my unpopular opinions is that wind power is an abysmally bad capital investment with a terrible ROI (when not heavily subsidized) and even worse EROEI, and all that circus about H2 is a new way to meddle with the financial numbers to paint a rosy (greeny?) future where H2 comes to the rescue before the veil falls. It can only work as long as we have no supply crunch on hydrocarbons. I understand peak renewable at negative prices as an artefact of the market structure. If comes a time when there's actual supply problems on hydrocarbons, we'll need some other sensible way to provide a baseline, and so far only nuclear does. Furthermore, even for H2 production nuclear probably makes more sense than wind power.
- sergeykish 6y ago
  You said false fact and said nothing about when corrected. Maybe that's the reason your opinion is unpopular.
  - wazoox 6y ago
    I misremembered the actual value, but that doesn't change the overall point that the whole process from power generation to the wheel (in the case of vehicles) have a very poor efficiency, not significantly better than traditional diesel cars and much worse than battery powered vehicles. Plus my opinion appears unpopular in marketing and financial circles, but relatively popular among engineers. Conclude whatever you want. I sincerely believe we'll reach 0% carbon by civilisational collapse, so that's not exactly that I'm against green power, either.
    - sergeykish 6y ago
      It is not about wheel. Engineers operate with facts. World should be Zero Carbon yesterday to keep global temperature rise below 1.5°C [1]. > The Russian Federation supplies a significant volume of fossil fuels and is the largest exporter of oil, natural gas and hard coal to the European Union. > Part of the aim of the Energy Union is to diversify the EU’s gas supplies away from Russia, which has already proved to be an unreliable partner, first in 2006 and then in 2009, and which threatened to become one again at the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine in 2013–2014 [2]. Natural gas is both climate and political issue. How much is 40 GW in bcm (Billion cubic metres of natural gas [3])? 40 GW year / 40 petajoules 31.54 [4] bcm That and wind may help with 50 bcm / month winter time [5]. I am all for nuclear energy but it costs way more [6]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-mitigation-15c https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-mitigation-15c [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_in_the_European_energy_sector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_in_the_European_energy_... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_cubic_metres_of_natural_gas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_cubic_metres_of_natura... [4] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=40+GW+year+%2F+40+petajoules https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=40+GW+year+%2F+40+peta... [5] https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Natural-gas-demand-in-Europe-the-impacts-of-COVID-19-and-other-influences-in-2020.pdf https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2020/0... [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source
      - wazoox 6y ago
        I don't think that Russia is an unreliable partner, on the contrary in fact. Anyway I'm not arguing for natural gas at all, but for syngas, which should be carbon neutral. I never said "we shouldn't diversify", however I think we should diversify towards things that work. H2 is hyped at the moment but can only be at best a very small part of the solution. Synthetic zero-carbon methane is almost certainly more interesting because the infrastructure is already there, most things working on oil can be converted to methane, etc.
        sergeykish 6y ago

wazoox 6y ago

Another of my unpopular opinions is that wind power is an abysmally bad capital investment with a terrible ROI (when not heavily subsidized) and even worse EROEI, and all that circus about H2 is a new way to meddle with the financial numbers to paint a rosy (greeny?) future where H2 comes to the rescue before the veil falls. It can only work as long as we have no supply crunch on hydrocarbons. I understand peak renewable at negative prices as an artefact of the market structure. If comes a time when there's actual supply problems on hydrocarbons, we'll need some other sensible way to provide a baseline, and so far only nuclear does. Furthermore, even for H2 production nuclear probably makes more sense than wind power.

sergeykish 6y ago
You said false fact and said nothing about when corrected. Maybe that's the reason your opinion is unpopular.
- wazoox 6y ago
  I misremembered the actual value, but that doesn't change the overall point that the whole process from power generation to the wheel (in the case of vehicles) have a very poor efficiency, not significantly better than traditional diesel cars and much worse than battery powered vehicles. Plus my opinion appears unpopular in marketing and financial circles, but relatively popular among engineers. Conclude whatever you want. I sincerely believe we'll reach 0% carbon by civilisational collapse, so that's not exactly that I'm against green power, either.
  - sergeykish 6y ago
    It is not about wheel. Engineers operate with facts. World should be Zero Carbon yesterday to keep global temperature rise below 1.5°C [1]. > The Russian Federation supplies a significant volume of fossil fuels and is the largest exporter of oil, natural gas and hard coal to the European Union. > Part of the aim of the Energy Union is to diversify the EU’s gas supplies away from Russia, which has already proved to be an unreliable partner, first in 2006 and then in 2009, and which threatened to become one again at the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine in 2013–2014 [2]. Natural gas is both climate and political issue. How much is 40 GW in bcm (Billion cubic metres of natural gas [3])? 40 GW year / 40 petajoules 31.54 [4] bcm That and wind may help with 50 bcm / month winter time [5]. I am all for nuclear energy but it costs way more [6]. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-mitigation-15c https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-mitigation-15c [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_in_the_European_energy_sector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_in_the_European_energy_... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_cubic_metres_of_natural_gas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_cubic_metres_of_natura... [4] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=40+GW+year+%2F+40+petajoules https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=40+GW+year+%2F+40+peta... [5] https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Natural-gas-demand-in-Europe-the-impacts-of-COVID-19-and-other-influences-in-2020.pdf https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2020/0... [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source
    - wazoox 6y ago
      I don't think that Russia is an unreliable partner, on the contrary in fact. Anyway I'm not arguing for natural gas at all, but for syngas, which should be carbon neutral. I never said "we shouldn't diversify", however I think we should diversify towards things that work. H2 is hyped at the moment but can only be at best a very small part of the solution. Synthetic zero-carbon methane is almost certainly more interesting because the infrastructure is already there, most things working on oil can be converted to methane, etc.
      - sergeykish 6y ago