7 ms·

Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. but more power to toyota. can't wait to get an electric hilux. h

Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. but more power to toyota. can't wait to get an electric hilux. hopefully it's cheap.

nordsieck 4y ago
> Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. Is it though? Can't be a hedge if it doesn't really work well fundamentally. Although I'll admit to being largely ignorant of the Japanese car market. IMO, it'd be much more practical to invest in automotive LNG tech and combine that with synthesizing LNG from the atmosphere (or at least developing the tech to do so). Practically, both H2 and LNG are both "dirty", since H2 is made though natural gas reforming these days.
- greggsy 4y ago
  H2 has the benefit of being much easier to store, transport and transfer than batteries. It’s able to be stored in small containers and large vessels of any shape. Batteries manufacturing is much more complex. Electricity needs to be transferred from a power station over wires, while hydrogen can be pumped into a vehicle from a bulk source. Sure H2 is dangerous, but so is LNG, and petrol for that matter. 100+ years of accidents and safety controls means that even a drunk person smoking at the pump can (probably) fill their car up safely. Japan has very poor carbon security, so LNG reforming might come with its own challenges, but they could generate it via electrolysis using nuclear or wind power, or import ammonia from future mega producers like Australia. It’s very likely that global demand in the transport sector will tend towards H2, so they need to gear their industry towards that market.
  - pjc50 4y ago
    The bait-and-switch is that while green hydrogen can be made, it very rarely is, and when it is, it's less cost-effective than a battery electric solution. It's almost always a Trojan horse for shifting carbon emissions away from the tailpipe to a refinery where you can't see them quite as obviously.
    - greggsy 4y ago
      I think it’s important to frame it within the sociotechnical frameworks that nations are able to operate under. Introducing this technology will require incremental changes across industry, infrastructure and communities. Today, green hydrogen is out of reach for many economies. Building H2 ecosystems, will almost certainly require initial investment in brown/black hydrogen by burning fossils fuels, which is currently under development in Australia and Japan. The transition to blue (renewable>LNG>H2) and eventually towards green (renewables>H2O>H2) hydrogen will be slow and will take decades to achieve. Purple (nuclear) hydrogen may be a next logical step for Japan. It’s simply not possible to replace everything everywhere all at once. We should have gotten onto this two decades ago, so we unfortunately have to make compromises that seem cynical and small on the outset, but are still very difficult to implement and gain consensus.
    - pbhjpbhj 4y ago
      If battery material costs go high (it they're otherwise hard to come by) then it seems like hydrogen could find its niche?
    - _hypx 4y ago
      That is no different than a battery car. You are just shifting pollution to whatever is making your electricity. And if anyone comes in and says "I spent tens of thousands of dollars getting green electricity!" then it should be obvious that the same level of spending could make upstream hydrogen production vastly greener. And no, it is not "less cost effective" because batteries involve dramatically higher upfront production costs. The argument is really just a troll argument and virtually identical to the same arguments used against battery cars.
  - somewhat_drunk 4y ago
    Nah. I worked as a project engineer in a hydrogen fuel cell test lab for a few years. H2 is EXTREMELY hazardous. It can be ignited by a miniscule amount of energy (i.e. a tiny static spark will do it), and it has a very fast flame front, which creates an extremely energetic explosion. It's also the smallest molecule, so it's very difficult to prevent leakage, and it embrittles and degrades most steels over time. Additionally, proton exchange membrane fuel cells (the most common kind) are poisoned by anything NOT H2, so you can't add odorous agents to H2 to easily detect leaks, like we do with natural gas. H2's only non-dangerous characteristic is its high buoyancy, which means it dissipates quickly in outdoor environments, but in my opinion that is not sufficient to offset all of its other dangerous characteristics. I would NEVER live in a building that had H2 stored inside (as in, inside a vehicle tank) or pumped in it, and I would definitely not trust the general public to use it safely. It also has to be stored at either incredibly high pressures (as a gas) or incredibly cold temperatures (as a liquid), neither of which are conducive to large-scale, long-range transport. But the worst part of H2 isn't how dangerous it is or how impractical it is; the worst part of H2 is how incredibly inefficient a hydrogen economy would be. See Paul Martin's excellent summary of H2 for a thorough debunking of the main H2 talking points. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/distilled-thoughts-hydrogen-paul-martin/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/distilled-thoughts-hydrogen-p...
    - entropicgravity 4y ago
      All true. The real reason Toyota is interested in hydrogen is that it would maintain its current balance sheet. Hydrogen would allow Toyota to swap one messy, expensive, heavy power plant requiring lots of maintenance (ie fuel cell) for ICE technology. Whereas EV technology has almost no maintenance, a motor with one moving part and regenerative braking that means even the brakes last forever. The accountants at Toyota would definitely frown at that. All the other car companies did the same calculations and said 'NO'. Lets just say we'll do that and keep kicking the can down the road for as long as possible. Now, thanks to Tesla, the cat is out of the bag and the entire industry knows they'll need a new financial platform to survive in the future and no, hydrogen will not save their sorry butts.
      - 4y ago
- pbhjpbhj 4y ago
  Strikes me that H2 made from excess solar panel output, at source, might become a thing. If you have enough solar for your needs then you're over-producing when the sun is at its peak. With feed in tariffs being low it makes sense to use this -- and hydrogen vehicles are an option.
  - nordsieck 4y ago
    > Strikes me that H2 made from excess solar panel output, at source, might become a thing. Why is that better than putting it back into the grid and/or putting it into a battery?
    - pjc50 4y ago
      There's occasionally overproduction of renewables, which is normally just curtailed (discarded) because it exceeds grid demand. The H2 for medium-term tank storage idea is not bad .. except for the very high capital cost of electrolysis. Without some means of making H2 that doesn't involve tying up a chunk of platinum as a capital asset this is a non starter economically.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      Batteries are as yet inappropriate for long duration swings over weeks or months that cycle only a few times a year. Better to compare it to thermal storage, PHES, simply curtailing it or even virtual storage via hydro or w2e (or hydrogen generation with no step where it is converted back to electricity or motion). All of which are more sensible than hydrogen for personal transport.
    - Rury 4y ago
      Capital cost of capacity mainly.

Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. but more power to toyota. can't wait to get an electric hilux. hopefully it's cheap.

nordsieck 4y ago

> Well H2 is a hedge. It's a green-ish fuel and has potential as a replacement to lng for japan. Is it though? Can't be a hedge if it doesn't really work well fundamentally. Although I'll admit to being largely ignorant of the Japanese car market. IMO, it'd be much more practical to invest in automotive LNG tech and combine that with synthesizing LNG from the atmosphere (or at least developing the tech to do so). Practically, both H2 and LNG are both "dirty", since H2 is made though natural gas reforming these days.

greggsy 4y ago
H2 has the benefit of being much easier to store, transport and transfer than batteries. It’s able to be stored in small containers and large vessels of any shape. Batteries manufacturing is much more complex. Electricity needs to be transferred from a power station over wires, while hydrogen can be pumped into a vehicle from a bulk source. Sure H2 is dangerous, but so is LNG, and petrol for that matter. 100+ years of accidents and safety controls means that even a drunk person smoking at the pump can (probably) fill their car up safely. Japan has very poor carbon security, so LNG reforming might come with its own challenges, but they could generate it via electrolysis using nuclear or wind power, or import ammonia from future mega producers like Australia. It’s very likely that global demand in the transport sector will tend towards H2, so they need to gear their industry towards that market.
- pjc50 4y ago
  The bait-and-switch is that while green hydrogen can be made, it very rarely is, and when it is, it's less cost-effective than a battery electric solution. It's almost always a Trojan horse for shifting carbon emissions away from the tailpipe to a refinery where you can't see them quite as obviously.
  - greggsy 4y ago
    I think it’s important to frame it within the sociotechnical frameworks that nations are able to operate under. Introducing this technology will require incremental changes across industry, infrastructure and communities. Today, green hydrogen is out of reach for many economies. Building H2 ecosystems, will almost certainly require initial investment in brown/black hydrogen by burning fossils fuels, which is currently under development in Australia and Japan. The transition to blue (renewable>LNG>H2) and eventually towards green (renewables>H2O>H2) hydrogen will be slow and will take decades to achieve. Purple (nuclear) hydrogen may be a next logical step for Japan. It’s simply not possible to replace everything everywhere all at once. We should have gotten onto this two decades ago, so we unfortunately have to make compromises that seem cynical and small on the outset, but are still very difficult to implement and gain consensus.
  - pbhjpbhj 4y ago
    If battery material costs go high (it they're otherwise hard to come by) then it seems like hydrogen could find its niche?
  - _hypx 4y ago
    That is no different than a battery car. You are just shifting pollution to whatever is making your electricity. And if anyone comes in and says "I spent tens of thousands of dollars getting green electricity!" then it should be obvious that the same level of spending could make upstream hydrogen production vastly greener. And no, it is not "less cost effective" because batteries involve dramatically higher upfront production costs. The argument is really just a troll argument and virtually identical to the same arguments used against battery cars.
- somewhat_drunk 4y ago
  Nah. I worked as a project engineer in a hydrogen fuel cell test lab for a few years. H2 is EXTREMELY hazardous. It can be ignited by a miniscule amount of energy (i.e. a tiny static spark will do it), and it has a very fast flame front, which creates an extremely energetic explosion. It's also the smallest molecule, so it's very difficult to prevent leakage, and it embrittles and degrades most steels over time. Additionally, proton exchange membrane fuel cells (the most common kind) are poisoned by anything NOT H2, so you can't add odorous agents to H2 to easily detect leaks, like we do with natural gas. H2's only non-dangerous characteristic is its high buoyancy, which means it dissipates quickly in outdoor environments, but in my opinion that is not sufficient to offset all of its other dangerous characteristics. I would NEVER live in a building that had H2 stored inside (as in, inside a vehicle tank) or pumped in it, and I would definitely not trust the general public to use it safely. It also has to be stored at either incredibly high pressures (as a gas) or incredibly cold temperatures (as a liquid), neither of which are conducive to large-scale, long-range transport. But the worst part of H2 isn't how dangerous it is or how impractical it is; the worst part of H2 is how incredibly inefficient a hydrogen economy would be. See Paul Martin's excellent summary of H2 for a thorough debunking of the main H2 talking points. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/distilled-thoughts-hydrogen-paul-martin/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/distilled-thoughts-hydrogen-p...
  - entropicgravity 4y ago
    All true. The real reason Toyota is interested in hydrogen is that it would maintain its current balance sheet. Hydrogen would allow Toyota to swap one messy, expensive, heavy power plant requiring lots of maintenance (ie fuel cell) for ICE technology. Whereas EV technology has almost no maintenance, a motor with one moving part and regenerative braking that means even the brakes last forever. The accountants at Toyota would definitely frown at that. All the other car companies did the same calculations and said 'NO'. Lets just say we'll do that and keep kicking the can down the road for as long as possible. Now, thanks to Tesla, the cat is out of the bag and the entire industry knows they'll need a new financial platform to survive in the future and no, hydrogen will not save their sorry butts.
    - 4y ago
pbhjpbhj 4y ago
Strikes me that H2 made from excess solar panel output, at source, might become a thing. If you have enough solar for your needs then you're over-producing when the sun is at its peak. With feed in tariffs being low it makes sense to use this -- and hydrogen vehicles are an option.
- nordsieck 4y ago
  > Strikes me that H2 made from excess solar panel output, at source, might become a thing. Why is that better than putting it back into the grid and/or putting it into a battery?
  - pjc50 4y ago
    There's occasionally overproduction of renewables, which is normally just curtailed (discarded) because it exceeds grid demand. The H2 for medium-term tank storage idea is not bad .. except for the very high capital cost of electrolysis. Without some means of making H2 that doesn't involve tying up a chunk of platinum as a capital asset this is a non starter economically.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    Batteries are as yet inappropriate for long duration swings over weeks or months that cycle only a few times a year. Better to compare it to thermal storage, PHES, simply curtailing it or even virtual storage via hydro or w2e (or hydrogen generation with no step where it is converted back to electricity or motion). All of which are more sensible than hydrogen for personal transport.
  - Rury 4y ago
    Capital cost of capacity mainly.