4 ms·
> Take electricity, lose nearly 50% of all your electric capacity spend converting to hydrogen, Nothing needs to be converted (except transportation and mining
by anonymouskimmer 3y ago
> Take electricity, lose nearly 50% of all your electric capacity spend converting to hydrogen,
Nothing needs to be converted (except transportation and mining costs, and costs of running the fueling stations) for geologic hydrogen. I made this clear with the first links. And there are economic synergies with also using geologic hydrogen as a replacement for natural gas in electricity generation and home heating.
> All with a vehicle that has a mini bomb on it, where if it does explode, even if it's extremely unlikely, you are burning with an invisible flame.
Hydrogen needs oxygen to "explode" in flames. There's a limit to how fast the oxygen in the air can mix with compressed hydrogen to fuel burning. The majority of the hydrogen is going to escape the area before interacting with oxygen. The autoignition temperature of hydrogen is 500C, so it would need a spark to burn. And that burning spark would need to both spread over the entire escaping hydrogen and also not be extinguished as the thousands of PSI of hydrogen rapidly equilibriate to 15 PSI (additionally, as anyone who has used an aerosol can knows, rapid decrease in pressure results in a rapid temperature drop, reducing the chance of autoignition).
And electricity has it's own issues as the cause of major fires (both from battery fires on the local scale and from downed power lines on the larger scale). Burying power lines is an expensive process. And for battery fires, unlike hydrogen, the fuel doesn't fly off into the upper atmosphere, but stays in place until it is all burned up. Yet people still buy battery powered transportation in large numbers.
> There is no infrastructure, no desire by consumers, no feasible way to implement, no one to realistically invest in the infrastructure.
Initial infrastructure already exists for alternate fuel fleets of waste trucks and the like. It can grow from there. It's feasible to implement as people already are implementing it, and to an extent can share lines already used by natural gas, the investments have already started (from the government and from automotive and energy companies, such as the energy company in my earlier link).
- DoesntMatter22 3y ago> Nothing needs to be converted (except transportation and mining costs, and costs of running the fueling stations) for geologic hydrogen. Nothing needs to be done except everything! This is never going to happen. People have electric already piped into their house. You are talking investments in the hundreds of billions of dollars vs virtually no investment at all. This will never work.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoAs I added: Economic synergies with natural gas (both for homes and for baseload and peak power plants). (Geologic) Hydrogen saves you money duh duh duh duh The heat is on!
- DoesntMatter22 3y agoThere is no chance of this happening. I'm sorry
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoApology accepted.