3 ms·

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
    That study assumes PEM electrolyzers. If one uses alkaline electrolysis one doesn't need platinium group elements or proton exchange membranes. The efficiency is slightly lower (although I've seen a claim it's actually just as good in practice), but the cost could be very low.
  - coderenegade 5y ago
    China is already making green hydrogen today at USD $2.20-2.40/kg, in Ningxia, using alkaline electrolyzers. This is in line with the cost of blue hydrogen, and getting close to the cost of grey. Mostly what's missing at the moment is economies of scale, which is coming. For example, a facility ten times the size of the Ningxia one goes online in 2023, in Inner Mongolia. Combine this with standard cost reductions in PV and wind, and electrolysis of hydrogen will likely be cheaper than SMR by the end of the decade.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  We produce 700 cubic kilometers of hydrogen, but almost all of it is produced through steam reformation. No, we can't reuse the equipment that makes the hydrogen, we have to replace almost all of it with carbon neutral alternatives. And no, most of the infrastructure connecting these can't be reused either. Our existing hydrogen production facilities are set up to produce the hydrogen as it's needed for other industrial processes. Our existing hydrogen economy does not have a significant storage capacity. Rather, it's set up to minimize the need for hydrogen storage altogether. For your proposed renewable grid, we'd likely be transporting methane many miles away from its generation to under ground storage facilities. Sure, the existing pipes connecting to fertilizer plants can still be used. But we still need a lot more pipes connecting electrolysis plants, to storage sites, and to hydrogen to electricity production facilities. This isn't something our existing infrastructure is set up to support. Your proposal has us effectively rebuilding our hydrogen economy from the ground up: First, changing production from steam reformation to electrolysis. And second, building out a vast hydrogen storage and transportation network to deliver this hydrogen to where energy is needed. There's a lot more to your proposed hydrogen grid storage than just valves and pipes.
coderenegade 5y ago
"Mostly" is relative. The US still stores more than 330GWh of H2 on a constant basis, and distributes it through hundreds of miles of pipe running throughout Texas. The material problems are a known quantity with proven solutions.

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
  That study assumes PEM electrolyzers. If one uses alkaline electrolysis one doesn't need platinium group elements or proton exchange membranes. The efficiency is slightly lower (although I've seen a claim it's actually just as good in practice), but the cost could be very low.
- coderenegade 5y ago
  China is already making green hydrogen today at USD $2.20-2.40/kg, in Ningxia, using alkaline electrolyzers. This is in line with the cost of blue hydrogen, and getting close to the cost of grey. Mostly what's missing at the moment is economies of scale, which is coming. For example, a facility ten times the size of the Ningxia one goes online in 2023, in Inner Mongolia. Combine this with standard cost reductions in PV and wind, and electrolysis of hydrogen will likely be cheaper than SMR by the end of the decade.
Manuel_D 5y ago
We produce 700 cubic kilometers of hydrogen, but almost all of it is produced through steam reformation. No, we can't reuse the equipment that makes the hydrogen, we have to replace almost all of it with carbon neutral alternatives. And no, most of the infrastructure connecting these can't be reused either. Our existing hydrogen production facilities are set up to produce the hydrogen as it's needed for other industrial processes. Our existing hydrogen economy does not have a significant storage capacity. Rather, it's set up to minimize the need for hydrogen storage altogether. For your proposed renewable grid, we'd likely be transporting methane many miles away from its generation to under ground storage facilities. Sure, the existing pipes connecting to fertilizer plants can still be used. But we still need a lot more pipes connecting electrolysis plants, to storage sites, and to hydrogen to electricity production facilities. This isn't something our existing infrastructure is set up to support. Your proposal has us effectively rebuilding our hydrogen economy from the ground up: First, changing production from steam reformation to electrolysis. And second, building out a vast hydrogen storage and transportation network to deliver this hydrogen to where energy is needed. There's a lot more to your proposed hydrogen grid storage than just valves and pipes.

coderenegade 5y ago

"Mostly" is relative. The US still stores more than 330GWh of H2 on a constant basis, and distributes it through hundreds of miles of pipe running throughout Texas. The material problems are a known quantity with proven solutions.