3 ms·

The first claim is not true. The second claim is a dishonest distortion of facts. It is an "indirect" greenhouse gas whereby it extends the life of methane in t

by _hypx 3y ago

The first claim is not true. The second claim is a dishonest distortion of facts. It is an "indirect" greenhouse gas whereby it extends the life of methane in the atmosphere. This is a pretty meaningless thing to say because it is directly replacing methane. So the more hydrogen we use, the less global warming there will be.

wkat4242 3y ago
Euh yes it's true. There is no tank which can contain hydrogen at the pressue we store it. The atoms are so small they migrate directly through the material and cause chemical changes as a result that weaken the tank over time (hydrogen embrittlement). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement It happens quite fast, a tank will lose most of its capacity over a month. As most tanks will be full most of the time (after all where else are you going to store the hydrogen for your car?) they will lose significant amounts to the atmosphere. Regardign the methane it's already there and is also expelled by natural resources (e.g. meat industry and marshes for example). So even if we would stop burning fossil, there is no end of it. I don't think Hydrogen is a bad option for some usecases by the way. I just wish people wouldn't view it as a magic bullet.
- _hypx 3y ago
  > It happens quite fast, a tank will lose most of its capacity over a month. A claim backed up by nothing. In fact, no hydrogen tank is allowed to leak that fast by regulation. Something you can easily verify: https://newsletters.inficon.com/AUTOTEST/April2020/LeakTestingOfHydrogenTanks.html https://newsletters.inficon.com/AUTOTEST/April2020/LeakTesti... You can do the math and realize that at 8 * 10⁻³ mbar * L/s, the maximum leakage rate, it will take a tank of 30L and 700 bar about 80 years to leak away: 700 bar * 30 L / (0.008 millibar * L/s) = 83.1830072 years That's the danger of swallowing random BEV propaganda from some propagandist. Those people are liars and are know for making shit up. In reality, this is not an issue.

by _hypx 3y ago

wkat4242 3y ago

Euh yes it's true. There is no tank which can contain hydrogen at the pressue we store it. The atoms are so small they migrate directly through the material and cause chemical changes as a result that weaken the tank over time (hydrogen embrittlement). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement It happens quite fast, a tank will lose most of its capacity over a month. As most tanks will be full most of the time (after all where else are you going to store the hydrogen for your car?) they will lose significant amounts to the atmosphere. Regardign the methane it's already there and is also expelled by natural resources (e.g. meat industry and marshes for example). So even if we would stop burning fossil, there is no end of it. I don't think Hydrogen is a bad option for some usecases by the way. I just wish people wouldn't view it as a magic bullet.

_hypx 3y ago
> It happens quite fast, a tank will lose most of its capacity over a month. A claim backed up by nothing. In fact, no hydrogen tank is allowed to leak that fast by regulation. Something you can easily verify: https://newsletters.inficon.com/AUTOTEST/April2020/LeakTestingOfHydrogenTanks.html https://newsletters.inficon.com/AUTOTEST/April2020/LeakTesti... You can do the math and realize that at 8 * 10⁻³ mbar * L/s, the maximum leakage rate, it will take a tank of 30L and 700 bar about 80 years to leak away: 700 bar * 30 L / (0.008 millibar * L/s) = 83.1830072 years That's the danger of swallowing random BEV propaganda from some propagandist. Those people are liars and are know for making shit up. In reality, this is not an issue.