3 ms·
Why the negativity here? What people mostly worry about (fossil fuel being used to produce electric then produce hydrogen in the background) is simply explaine
by ebfe1 4y ago
Why the negativity here? What people mostly worry about (fossil fuel being used to produce electric then produce hydrogen in the background) is simply explained in this line in the article
"The carbon-free rigs will pack 50 kilos of hydrogen zapped from water using electricity from the refinery’s dedicated solar power plant."
hence __green__ hydrogen.
On the contrary, I think storing energy in hydrogen has more potential in long term compare to lithium or any other type of batteries that rely on ores we need to dig up, refine and dump as waste after a couple of years, no?
- Schroedingersat 4y agoElectrolysers are (for now) slightly more mineral limited than batteries and don't last as long. Both are valuable enough to recycle, and both are having a lot of work being done in finding abundant chemistries. Batteries are further along on the latter. Western australia has good enough solar resources that they could in theory use a heat based hydrogen production method, but that is more logistically difficult. TL;DR Hydrogen isn't for electricity, it's for ammonia/steel/polymers/etc and the stores of various hydrogen compounds created for those purposes are your emergency backup for the month long dunkelflaute if it ever manifests
- jonnycomputer 4y agoQuite a lot of natural gas is used to make fertilizer, either as feedstock or for energy; replacing that use is well worth it all by itself.