5 ms·

> impractically expensive to produce Unless the energy input for production is from solar or wind. Hydrogen is a great battery and can form a good storage sol

> impractically expensive to produce Unless the energy input for production is from solar or wind. Hydrogen is a great battery and can form a good storage solution for wind and solar.

BobbyJo 5y ago
The cost doesn't come from energy requirements. It comes from materials. Hydrogen corrodes or escapes most things.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  And embrittles a lot of others. And if you want to use fuel cell tech membrane fouling is yet another problem to deal with.
- kumarvvr 5y ago
  My understanding is expensive material for hydrogen production was to increase the efficiency of the system (because energy is costly and not from renewable sources). With the proliferation of installed solar capacity, and availability of low cost renewable energy, the economics of H2 production allow for use of lower efficient systems, with focus on reducing exotic materials in the system.
  - glogla 5y ago
    Solar makes up 2 % or world electricity. Wind 5 %. Coal and natural gas together make up 61 %. Where is this solar capacity? Where is this available low cost renewable energy? We are decades away from making the renewables our main electricity source if there were massive investment into it, meanwhile we are building new coal and gas plants instead. And the electricity demand is still going up. Even if things go way better than anyone can predict, we will never have enough energy to throw it away on inefficient hydrogen, not in a lifetime of anyone currently on Hacker News. The whole H2 hype is just shilling for oil and gas, whether the people perpetuating it know it or not.
    - pfdietz 5y ago
      Someone doesn't really understand exponential growth. Of course we can have the capacity, after just a few more doublings.
    - jhgb 5y ago
      > Solar makes up 2 % or world electricity. ...in 2018. It's 2021 already. In 2020 solar made up something like 3.2% (https://www.worldenergydata.org/world-electricity-generation/ https://www.worldenergydata.org/world-electricity-generation...). That alone is an increase of 0.6% per year. Even if nothing changed about PV buildup, it would still be headed for 15% in 2040. This rate is likely to increase, though.
- pfdietz 5y ago
  The materials problems of hydrogen are overstated. The world produces and consumes 700 cubic kilometers (at STP) of hydrogen each year; this stuff is contained in something.
  - Manuel_D 5y ago
    No, the hydrogen is mostly consumed for industrial processes immediately after it is produced.
    - pfdietz 5y ago
      The equipment that makes the hydrogen, the equipment where the hydrogen is used, the pipes connecting these, the valves and sensors and pumps touching the hydrogen -- all these work in many places around the world, constantly. If hydrogen were the universal solvent ruining anything it touches, as the pearl clutchers on the internet seem to say, this wouldn't be possible. SOME materials have trouble with hydrogen. But this is a problem that can be, and is, worked around as needed. It's a nuisance, not a showstopper.
      - BobbyJo 5y ago
        The reason it's cost effective in those circumstances is because it's produced from hydrogen rich fossil fuels. If you want to use renewable energy to produce it, you'd likely have to fall back onto electrolysis, which is cost prohibitive because of material cost. If you check out DOE research, they point out capital necessary for materials as the factor that needs to come down, as efficiency is already > 50%: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/20004-cost-electrolytic-hydrogen-production.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi0sar9iL7zAhV-GVkFHSNLAVkQFnoECBUQBg&usg=AOvVaw0NMnlH5q3POh53QY6G-yWs https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/... If you just want 'hydrogen from any source' and aren't trying to get off fossil fuels, then yes, the materials costs are that horrible. But I don't believe that's where anyone is going with this conversation.
        pfdietz 5y ago
jacquesm 5y ago
In theory. In practice there are a ton of really hard to overcome problems (Hydrogen embrittlement, very low activation energy so it can go 'foom' without provocation, leakage from containment vessels. There has been progress on all of these fronts, one of the most interesting developments that I'm aware of is this fleet of 1500 trucks that is being built: https://www.electrive.com/2021/02/18/hiringa-energy-orders-1500-hydrogen-fuel-cell-trucks-from-hyzon-motors-for-new-zealand/ https://www.electrive.com/2021/02/18/hiringa-energy-orders-1... But there are a large number of questions (for me) around this project that make me wonder how much it is vaporware and how much of it is reality. If they pull this off, and that includes delivery of the vehicles, infrastructure and do it within budget and with a substantial fraction of the life-span of an ordinary truck without major issues it will be a game changer. If not some investors - and their customers - are going to be extremely pissed off. Even the first 50 deliveries would already be a huge milestone, I'm aware of exactly one truck like this that is supposed to be driving for Campina ( https://www.nieuweoogst.nl/nieuws/2021/07/13/frieslandcampina-heeft-eerste-truck-op-waterstof https://www.nieuweoogst.nl/nieuws/2021/07/13/frieslandcampin... ) but I have not been able to get any data on the actual use of this truck by the customer (ie: service history, operational readiness history). What is suspicious is that if I enter that truck's license number (19-BLD-5) into https://ovi.rdw.nl/ https://ovi.rdw.nl/ that it comes up as a more or less regular Volvo truck with a 12.7 liter LNG installation, not a hydrogen installation, which it would surely mention if that were the case. It's very well possible that that was just a promotional picture from before the conversion to Hydrogen, but you'd expect the company to put out one press release after another to prove their tech is real if it was actually road worthy. But all of the pictures where they 'Hyzon' logo is present on the front of the trucks show no license plate. (for instance: https://www.truckpartsandservice.com/alternative-power/hydrogen-fuel-cell/article/15066650/hyzon-hydrogen-storage-system-expected-to-cut-development-costs https://www.truckpartsandservice.com/alternative-power/hydro... and many other promotional articles like it).
- kumarvvr 5y ago
  > What is suspicious is that if I enter that truck's license number (19-BLD-5) into https://ovi.rdw.nl/ https://ovi.rdw.nl/ that it comes up as a more or less regular Volvo truck with a 12.7 liter LNG installation, not a hydrogen installation, which it would surely mention if that were the case. I guess it is easier to modify an LNG truck to handle H2 rather than a diesel one.
tigershark 5y ago
No, it’s not when you count the cost of compressing it. Even if it was possible to have completely free hydrogen (and it’s not possible) the compression cost would lower the efficiency to something around 60% if I remember correctly. Adding to that the storage tank cost and the far bigger explosion potential compared to batteries its supposed advantage is dwindling fast given the continuous improvement in batteries.
- kumarvvr 5y ago
  I agree. However, for remote solar power plants, having an explosive H2 tank is much lesser of a problem than in residential areas. IMV batteries are not sustainable. Currently there is a huge hype on batteries, but once the first set of batteries start dying out and the disposal process begins, we will have to deal with a lot of toxic waste. This is going to start happening in about 10 years or so. Suppliers like Tesla and Panasonic might be making recyclable ones, but Chinese vendors scarcely give a thought to recyclability.
- nuerow 5y ago
  > Even if it was possible to have completely free hydrogen (and it’s not possible) the compression cost would lower the efficiency to something around 60% That's pretty much irrelevant. Hydrogen is used as an energy store. Thus the whole point is to generate it where it's cheap to generate, and afterwards transport it to customers willing to pay for it. Therefore conversion effixiency is irrelecant and the key factor is market price, whose lower bound is dictated by the combination of production cost and how much it costs to transport it. To illustrate how irrelevant conversion efficiency is, keep in mind that right now both Morocco and Australia are investing in Hydrogen export. If I recall > if I remember correctly. Adding to that the storage tank cost and the far bigger explosion potential compared to batteries its supposed advantage is dwindling fast given the continuous improvement in batteries. You're already describing how natural gas is used. Not only are there large natural gas storage tanks in residential neighborhoods but also there are plenty of major cities throughout the world where natural gas is piped straight into apartment buildings.
pipodeclown 5y ago
Yeah but than we would still face the fact that the total cost per amount of energy is higher than fossil as well as other forms of renewable energy storage and transmission.
julosflb 5y ago
> Hydrogen is a great battery Indeed, but the round trip efficiency is hardly exceeding 30 to 40%.

> impractically expensive to produce Unless the energy input for production is from solar or wind. Hydrogen is a great battery and can form a good storage solution for wind and solar.

BobbyJo 5y ago

The cost doesn't come from energy requirements. It comes from materials. Hydrogen corrodes or escapes most things.

jacquesm 5y ago
And embrittles a lot of others. And if you want to use fuel cell tech membrane fouling is yet another problem to deal with.
kumarvvr 5y ago
My understanding is expensive material for hydrogen production was to increase the efficiency of the system (because energy is costly and not from renewable sources). With the proliferation of installed solar capacity, and availability of low cost renewable energy, the economics of H2 production allow for use of lower efficient systems, with focus on reducing exotic materials in the system.
- glogla 5y ago
  Solar makes up 2 % or world electricity. Wind 5 %. Coal and natural gas together make up 61 %. Where is this solar capacity? Where is this available low cost renewable energy? We are decades away from making the renewables our main electricity source if there were massive investment into it, meanwhile we are building new coal and gas plants instead. And the electricity demand is still going up. Even if things go way better than anyone can predict, we will never have enough energy to throw it away on inefficient hydrogen, not in a lifetime of anyone currently on Hacker News. The whole H2 hype is just shilling for oil and gas, whether the people perpetuating it know it or not.
  - pfdietz 5y ago
    Someone doesn't really understand exponential growth. Of course we can have the capacity, after just a few more doublings.
  - jhgb 5y ago
    > Solar makes up 2 % or world electricity. ...in 2018. It's 2021 already. In 2020 solar made up something like 3.2% (https://www.worldenergydata.org/world-electricity-generation/ https://www.worldenergydata.org/world-electricity-generation...). That alone is an increase of 0.6% per year. Even if nothing changed about PV buildup, it would still be headed for 15% in 2040. This rate is likely to increase, though.
pfdietz 5y ago
The materials problems of hydrogen are overstated. The world produces and consumes 700 cubic kilometers (at STP) of hydrogen each year; this stuff is contained in something.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  No, the hydrogen is mostly consumed for industrial processes immediately after it is produced.
  - pfdietz 5y ago
    The equipment that makes the hydrogen, the equipment where the hydrogen is used, the pipes connecting these, the valves and sensors and pumps touching the hydrogen -- all these work in many places around the world, constantly. If hydrogen were the universal solvent ruining anything it touches, as the pearl clutchers on the internet seem to say, this wouldn't be possible. SOME materials have trouble with hydrogen. But this is a problem that can be, and is, worked around as needed. It's a nuisance, not a showstopper.
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      The reason it's cost effective in those circumstances is because it's produced from hydrogen rich fossil fuels. If you want to use renewable energy to produce it, you'd likely have to fall back onto electrolysis, which is cost prohibitive because of material cost. If you check out DOE research, they point out capital necessary for materials as the factor that needs to come down, as efficiency is already > 50%: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.hydrogen.energy.gov/pdfs/20004-cost-electrolytic-hydrogen-production.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi0sar9iL7zAhV-GVkFHSNLAVkQFnoECBUQBg&usg=AOvVaw0NMnlH5q3POh53QY6G-yWs https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/... If you just want 'hydrogen from any source' and aren't trying to get off fossil fuels, then yes, the materials costs are that horrible. But I don't believe that's where anyone is going with this conversation.
      - pfdietz 5y ago

jacquesm 5y ago

In theory. In practice there are a ton of really hard to overcome problems (Hydrogen embrittlement, very low activation energy so it can go 'foom' without provocation, leakage from containment vessels. There has been progress on all of these fronts, one of the most interesting developments that I'm aware of is this fleet of 1500 trucks that is being built: https://www.electrive.com/2021/02/18/hiringa-energy-orders-1500-hydrogen-fuel-cell-trucks-from-hyzon-motors-for-new-zealand/ https://www.electrive.com/2021/02/18/hiringa-energy-orders-1... But there are a large number of questions (for me) around this project that make me wonder how much it is vaporware and how much of it is reality. If they pull this off, and that includes delivery of the vehicles, infrastructure and do it within budget and with a substantial fraction of the life-span of an ordinary truck without major issues it will be a game changer. If not some investors - and their customers - are going to be extremely pissed off. Even the first 50 deliveries would already be a huge milestone, I'm aware of exactly one truck like this that is supposed to be driving for Campina ( https://www.nieuweoogst.nl/nieuws/2021/07/13/frieslandcampina-heeft-eerste-truck-op-waterstof https://www.nieuweoogst.nl/nieuws/2021/07/13/frieslandcampin... ) but I have not been able to get any data on the actual use of this truck by the customer (ie: service history, operational readiness history). What is suspicious is that if I enter that truck's license number (19-BLD-5) into https://ovi.rdw.nl/ https://ovi.rdw.nl/ that it comes up as a more or less regular Volvo truck with a 12.7 liter LNG installation, not a hydrogen installation, which it would surely mention if that were the case. It's very well possible that that was just a promotional picture from before the conversion to Hydrogen, but you'd expect the company to put out one press release after another to prove their tech is real if it was actually road worthy. But all of the pictures where they 'Hyzon' logo is present on the front of the trucks show no license plate. (for instance: https://www.truckpartsandservice.com/alternative-power/hydrogen-fuel-cell/article/15066650/hyzon-hydrogen-storage-system-expected-to-cut-development-costs https://www.truckpartsandservice.com/alternative-power/hydro... and many other promotional articles like it).

kumarvvr 5y ago
> What is suspicious is that if I enter that truck's license number (19-BLD-5) into https://ovi.rdw.nl/ https://ovi.rdw.nl/ that it comes up as a more or less regular Volvo truck with a 12.7 liter LNG installation, not a hydrogen installation, which it would surely mention if that were the case. I guess it is easier to modify an LNG truck to handle H2 rather than a diesel one.

tigershark 5y ago

No, it’s not when you count the cost of compressing it. Even if it was possible to have completely free hydrogen (and it’s not possible) the compression cost would lower the efficiency to something around 60% if I remember correctly. Adding to that the storage tank cost and the far bigger explosion potential compared to batteries its supposed advantage is dwindling fast given the continuous improvement in batteries.

kumarvvr 5y ago
I agree. However, for remote solar power plants, having an explosive H2 tank is much lesser of a problem than in residential areas. IMV batteries are not sustainable. Currently there is a huge hype on batteries, but once the first set of batteries start dying out and the disposal process begins, we will have to deal with a lot of toxic waste. This is going to start happening in about 10 years or so. Suppliers like Tesla and Panasonic might be making recyclable ones, but Chinese vendors scarcely give a thought to recyclability.
nuerow 5y ago
> Even if it was possible to have completely free hydrogen (and it’s not possible) the compression cost would lower the efficiency to something around 60% That's pretty much irrelevant. Hydrogen is used as an energy store. Thus the whole point is to generate it where it's cheap to generate, and afterwards transport it to customers willing to pay for it. Therefore conversion effixiency is irrelecant and the key factor is market price, whose lower bound is dictated by the combination of production cost and how much it costs to transport it. To illustrate how irrelevant conversion efficiency is, keep in mind that right now both Morocco and Australia are investing in Hydrogen export. If I recall > if I remember correctly. Adding to that the storage tank cost and the far bigger explosion potential compared to batteries its supposed advantage is dwindling fast given the continuous improvement in batteries. You're already describing how natural gas is used. Not only are there large natural gas storage tanks in residential neighborhoods but also there are plenty of major cities throughout the world where natural gas is piped straight into apartment buildings.

pipodeclown 5y ago

Yeah but than we would still face the fact that the total cost per amount of energy is higher than fossil as well as other forms of renewable energy storage and transmission.

julosflb 5y ago

> Hydrogen is a great battery Indeed, but the round trip efficiency is hardly exceeding 30 to 40%.