3 ms·

Governments put also a lot of money in green energy too so it makes sense to for them to put money in more "green" storage. >Not only is in inefficient, its al

Governments put also a lot of money in green energy too so it makes sense to for them to put money in more "green" storage. >Not only is in inefficient, its also inherently expensive and inherently dangerous. Use best tool for the job. The natural gas I use to heat my home is dangerous too so I had to use approved professionals to install it, and I have to have approved professional come and check my installation every 2 years. When electricity would be better for my job I will use it. Isn't a failure in logic to believe that batteries will get better and greener over time but for some reason hydrogen related stuff won't get better as well? Maybe chemists will find some efficient way to make a denser liquid fuel if we would invest enough in research.

nickik 6y ago
Yes, just the best tool for the job and its not hydrogen. Yes, hydrogen production can potentially improve. Of course, it can, if we invest infinity money into it everything can improve. The question is with limited resources make choices about what the best couple of things are that we can invest in. In terms of basic research, some study on hydrogen is appropriate. But it is nowhere close to be the right system for grid storage, in the next 1-2 decade. The problem is this, hydrogen is the older technology compared to these battery systems it has shown a far, far slower improvement curve. And an top of that, the cost improvement curve is even worse. Where should investment go, in places where we are making massive leaps on both the fundamentals and the cost, or to the system that is mostly stagnant. We literally have totally new battery systems go from research to mass deployment while hydrogen with more overall investment has only improved a tiny amount.