3 ms·
I think we need an energy revolution. We still try to do this a way where there is a turbine in the process. Motionless energy storage is much more promising.
by StreamBright 5y ago
I think we need an energy revolution. We still try to do this a way where there is a turbine in the process. Motionless energy storage is much more promising.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell
- AndrewDucker 5y agoThat article says that fuel cells are 40-60% efficient. This process is claimed to be 80% efficient.
- StreamBright 5y agoYeah the first part of that article says so. However when you continue reading: In addition to electricity, fuel cells produce water, heat and, depending on the fuel source, very small amounts of nitrogen dioxide and other emissions. The energy efficiency of a fuel cell is generally between 40 and 60%; however, if waste heat is captured in a cogeneration scheme, efficiencies of up to 85% can be obtained.[1] Based on the other details like energy density for example, I think this tech has a bright future. In electrical terms, the energy density of hydrogen is equal to 33.6 kWh of usable energy per kg, versus diesel which only holds about 12–14 kWh per kg. What this really means is that 1 kg of hydrogen, used in a fuel cell to power an electric motor, contains approximately the same energy as a gallon of diesel.[2] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell#cite_note-Types1-5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell#cite_note-Types1-5 2. https://rmi.org/run-on-less-with-hydrogen-fuel-cells/ https://rmi.org/run-on-less-with-hydrogen-fuel-cells/
- jhgb 5y agoSo it's around 50%. If you consider the losses in creating hydrogen, the roundtrip is around 40% or so.
- legulere 5y agoAlso for this system that’s the efficiency for the whole cycle electricity to electricity. For the fuel cell you have to multiply by the efficiency for creating your fuel.