4 ms·
> One thing they didn’t mention is energy used for round trip per unit of H2 and cost of the material itself. I also did not see anything about recycling the c
by usrusr 6y ago
> One thing they didn’t mention is energy used for round trip per unit of H2 and cost of the material itself.
I also did not see anything about recycling the carrier materials which seems suspiciously odd in a context so closely related to environmentalism.
But the big picture news is that this is another datapoint that shows how, like you said, the solution space for what I like to call "bound hydrogen" is apparently not exhausted at all yet. In recent months I have seen (all on hn) power-to-ammonia, that Dutch group that proposes iron powder as a heat fuel of roughly coal performance that is recycled by reducing the returned iron oxide powder with hydrogen (and started to fuel a brewery as a pilot) and now this "powerpaste" which sound like straight out of the back to the future future. The claimed energy density is absolutely amazing! If the required infrastructure hardware is small enough it could be a gamechanger for BEV: size the battery to be sufficient for 80% of driving days and install the "1000 miles extra" block where it can be accessed for replacing, e.g. where an ICE car would have it's engine. Chances are the extra miles fuel won't be cheap, but you'll surely be able to buy a lot of RX refills for the battery cost saved if a strong majority majority of your driving can be done on battery only.
I always considered the term "hydrogen economy" silly because of how annoying H2 is to deal with at scale, but "bound hydrogen" can change that in so many ways. It's almost as if hindsight was trying to win a bet or something wrt how we look back at George W. Bush, first him appearing so unexpectedly presidential compared to a certain successor, then suddenly hydrogen economy ceases to be a joke. What's next, discovery of actual WMD so they could have well stayed honest had they just looked a little harder? Harris becoming president after "pretzel incident 2"? Bound hydrogen is the most exciting technology field since many years.
- adrian_b 6y agoBound hydrogen is what is in gasoline and any other hydrocarbons. So it is nothing new, but a method for storing energy already used for a few billions of years, since free dioxygen appeared on Earth. The only chemical substances that can approach hydrocarbons in energy density must be composed of light elements, preferably able to lose many electrons by oxidation. So aluminum hydride would be better from this point of view than the magnesium hydride and ammonia is a very good solution if it is desired to avoid making hydrocarbons from carbon dioxide. Nevertheless, nothing practically usable beats hydrocarbons in energy density. However it is unknown yet whether another form of storage, e.g. ammonia or another hydride a.k.a. "bound hydrogen", would not be better for the efficiency of a complete cycle of storing the energy by chemical synthesis, then recovering it using a fuel cell or a thermal engine.
- Reason077 6y ago> "The claimed energy density is absolutely amazing!" Specific energy of magnesium hydride is 7.7% of H2. Energy density by volume is 13.3 MJ/L, about 40% that of gasoline. The fuel cell should be more efficient than an internal combustion engine, however, so you probably make back the difference.