3 ms·

Is there a better/more balanced article that describes this company's technology more accurately? This device does not use "solid hydrogen", and that absurd mis

Is there a better/more balanced article that describes this company's technology more accurately? This device does not use "solid hydrogen", and that absurd misnomer made me discount most of this article. They did say elsewhere that it is instead a solid-oxide fuel cell [1], but I have no idea if this is in any way. significantly better/cheaper option than batteries. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_oxide_fuel_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_oxide_fuel_cell

mdip 3y ago
Thanks for this. The first thing I'm reading is some statement about how they don't actually want to locate these things on your property, but nearby, which makes me think (a) either "I wouldn't want this thing on my property" or (b) it's "not practical and/or safe to locate this thing on my property" (a being a subset of b). And then "solid hydrogen" is mentioned and I'm thinking ... huh? Glad I wasn't alone. So nobody on Earth would ever confuse me with a chemist, but (at least) I think I have some of the basics down. Hydrogen isn't solid until you drop the temperature a whole hell of a lot or increase the pressure a whole hell of a lot. Now, I guess the upside is that "solid hydrogen" requires temps/pressures that render oxygen similarly frozen which[0] I guess reduces the probability that said "hydrogen battery" doesn't become a "crater surrounded by the fiery wreckage of the neighborhood where said hydrogen battery once was." But, gee, it better be one hell of a power storage source to offset the cost of cooling/pressurizing its storage. I guess the more logical explanation is "an attempt to dress up what is likely a different use of/material-but-not-flashy-improvement upon an existing technology" which likely hasn't had the slightest bit of practical testing behind it. That sounds a little more cynical than I mean it to -- I mean I really do hope they have something that is as sexy as this thing is trying to sound but the best I could get out of reading that "skeptically" was: "Put some (top of the line) solar panels on a building (for reasons unmentioned, we aren't using your roof) and store the power in these things just outside your neighborhood (for reasons unmentioned, we aren't small enough/safe enough/it's otherwise impractical to store these on your property/in your home) and they'll go in this sleek-looking 3D rendered thing that we haven't yet worked all the details out of yet[1]." [0] ... according to the two second Google search that I did. [1] The cynic in imagines a meeting "Let's see, our technology is something that's solid ... and it's chemical make-up includes something with Hydrogen" ... somewhere along the lines someone was like "F!ck it, let's just call it 'Solid Hydrogen' and see if anyone bites".
- sjducb 3y ago
  You could be right about a and b, but there is an option c: The battery is large (2m^3) this means that it’s most practical to put it in the garden, rather than taking up a whole room in the house.
- RetroTechie 3y ago
  Article does explain some: "We're locking up the hydrogen molecules in a solid to basically fix them." And indeed there exist materials that can absorb hydrogen in a sponge-like fashion, so you don't (as much, anyway) need the pressure or low-temperature extremes normally required to squeeze H2 into an empty vessel. Iirc, you're probably talking some metal(s?), or material containing those like a salt or hydroxide. So it may be a case of sort-of-existing tech, put together in not previously used manner. Regardless: hope this pans out (esp. cost-wise). Our world badly needs solutions like this. Cheap, at scale, yesterday.

mdip 3y ago

Thanks for this. The first thing I'm reading is some statement about how they don't actually want to locate these things on your property, but nearby, which makes me think (a) either "I wouldn't want this thing on my property" or (b) it's "not practical and/or safe to locate this thing on my property" (a being a subset of b). And then "solid hydrogen" is mentioned and I'm thinking ... huh? Glad I wasn't alone. So nobody on Earth would ever confuse me with a chemist, but (at least) I think I have some of the basics down. Hydrogen isn't solid until you drop the temperature a whole hell of a lot or increase the pressure a whole hell of a lot. Now, I guess the upside is that "solid hydrogen" requires temps/pressures that render oxygen similarly frozen which[0] I guess reduces the probability that said "hydrogen battery" doesn't become a "crater surrounded by the fiery wreckage of the neighborhood where said hydrogen battery once was." But, gee, it better be one hell of a power storage source to offset the cost of cooling/pressurizing its storage. I guess the more logical explanation is "an attempt to dress up what is likely a different use of/material-but-not-flashy-improvement upon an existing technology" which likely hasn't had the slightest bit of practical testing behind it. That sounds a little more cynical than I mean it to -- I mean I really do hope they have something that is as sexy as this thing is trying to sound but the best I could get out of reading that "skeptically" was: "Put some (top of the line) solar panels on a building (for reasons unmentioned, we aren't using your roof) and store the power in these things just outside your neighborhood (for reasons unmentioned, we aren't small enough/safe enough/it's otherwise impractical to store these on your property/in your home) and they'll go in this sleek-looking 3D rendered thing that we haven't yet worked all the details out of yet[1]." [0] ... according to the two second Google search that I did. [1] The cynic in imagines a meeting "Let's see, our technology is something that's solid ... and it's chemical make-up includes something with Hydrogen" ... somewhere along the lines someone was like "F!ck it, let's just call it 'Solid Hydrogen' and see if anyone bites".

sjducb 3y ago
You could be right about a and b, but there is an option c: The battery is large (2m^3) this means that it’s most practical to put it in the garden, rather than taking up a whole room in the house.
RetroTechie 3y ago
Article does explain some: "We're locking up the hydrogen molecules in a solid to basically fix them." And indeed there exist materials that can absorb hydrogen in a sponge-like fashion, so you don't (as much, anyway) need the pressure or low-temperature extremes normally required to squeeze H2 into an empty vessel. Iirc, you're probably talking some metal(s?), or material containing those like a salt or hydroxide. So it may be a case of sort-of-existing tech, put together in not previously used manner. Regardless: hope this pans out (esp. cost-wise). Our world badly needs solutions like this. Cheap, at scale, yesterday.