4 ms·

> The reason is that electrolyseurs aren't free, the capital costs are high. While this is definitely the reason, there is also a bigger one - that the process

> The reason is that electrolyseurs aren't free, the capital costs are high. While this is definitely the reason, there is also a bigger one - that the process of turning electricity into Hydrogen is fundamentally wasteful(Energy losses), particularly when the route is electricity->hydrogen->back to electricity. Where it actually is the best option: and where most of the “Green Hydrogen” gas will likely end up being broadly used to me is looking like industrial applications like this article mentions (Steel production), along with ammonia for fertilizer production. Capital costs as you mention (combined with utilization rates) - electrolyzers to be most economical need to run 100% of the time, meaning you need “excess energy” 100% of the time. With the implication that the energy will be from variable, renewable sources - there is a fundamental disconnect between these. A main reason why batteries and other techs are likely to win out in many “utilizing excess energy” over the long run.

Hypx 6y ago
No one cares about efficiency intrinsically. As long as it's cost effective, this is not an issue. One of the major improvements in modern electrolyzers is that they don't need to run 100% of the time to function. As costs come down, it's likely we can tap excess energy whenever it is available.
- clomond 6y ago
  No one care about efficiency, sure. But efficiency in this case is the “tax” that must be paid in all cases. And you are missing my point: That as far as the options go for “tapping excess energy” hydrogen is overblown and overstated as a solution. Things like demand response and heating applications don’t have anywhere near the same kind of losses. Price and value is what actually matters.
  - Hypx 6y ago
    Then it's merely reducing the "tax" until it is no longer an issue. A combination of efficiency improvements and lower source energy cost can solve this. The alternatives have their own downsides. Usually in the form of weight or raw material usage. Since the raw material of hydrogen is water, this could easily be much cheaper than the competition.

Hypx 6y ago

No one cares about efficiency intrinsically. As long as it's cost effective, this is not an issue. One of the major improvements in modern electrolyzers is that they don't need to run 100% of the time to function. As costs come down, it's likely we can tap excess energy whenever it is available.

clomond 6y ago
No one care about efficiency, sure. But efficiency in this case is the “tax” that must be paid in all cases. And you are missing my point: That as far as the options go for “tapping excess energy” hydrogen is overblown and overstated as a solution. Things like demand response and heating applications don’t have anywhere near the same kind of losses. Price and value is what actually matters.
- Hypx 6y ago
  Then it's merely reducing the "tax" until it is no longer an issue. A combination of efficiency improvements and lower source energy cost can solve this. The alternatives have their own downsides. Usually in the form of weight or raw material usage. Since the raw material of hydrogen is water, this could easily be much cheaper than the competition.