8 ms·
It's part of the puzzle. It's true that high efficiency catalytic electrolysis requires expensive materials. But at significantly lower efficiencies you can j
by newacct583 6y ago
It's part of the puzzle.
It's true that high efficiency catalytic electrolysis requires expensive materials. But at significantly lower efficiencies you can just do the same thing we all did with a battery in grade school. That's not quite free to build out, but it's close. And relying on low-efficiency energy storage to fill the gaps in production is still better than firing up a gas plant to supply the power.
It seems not unlikely to me that a lot of wind and solar plants might see building out a local hydrogen electrolyzer and generator (or just sell the hydrogen) as a useful choice.
But yes: there's no silver bullet, and there are a lot of very reasonable competitors in the energy storage market.
- baybal2 6y ago> It's true that high efficiency catalytic electrolysis requires expensive materials. And "high" here is only 70%. And this way, you only get around 15 grams per kwh.
- jschwartzi 6y agohow many mols is that? Gas is not very dense.
- slfnflctd 6y agoI'd expect that as in most other cases, it would come down to payback time, wouldn't it? With the floor being "pays for itself before it reaches end of life". If it doesn't pay for its own existence, it's likely a waste of effort. But if it does, you're adding capabilities & flexibility for zero cost. I don't really see a downside, other than tying up the capital.
- kakkan 6y agoHi slfnflctd! You replied to my comment on a thread on LSD trips some 42 odd days ago, and I kind of missed it when you posted it but I just stumbled upon it today and found your comment to be really insightful and I could relate to it really well. I think I could learn more from you if you were open to a discussion. I was wondering if we could connect through email or any other platform of your choice?
- baybal2 6y agoWhat I am saying that hydrogen from natural gas has an incomparable economic advantage over electrolyzed hydrogen, and denying it is as silly as denying thermodynamics. Electricity has to get tens of times cheaper for it to beat steam reforming, and you absolutely can't produce hydrogen cheaper than the energy you put into its production, most of which comes from, surprise, hydrocarbons. And obviously, you can't produce more hydrogen than the energy equivalent in hydrogen you consume. This completely crushes whatever ignoramuses thinking that you can "use hydrogen to produce more hydrogen"