6 ms·
A hydrogen-powered air taxi flew 523 miles emitting only water vapor
- akira2501 2y agoLiquid Hydrogen is not a lot of fun. Anything with an 700:1 expansion ratio is a stored energy hazard in and of itself, but because it's cryogenic it also means the cumulative daily loses in tanks where cooling is not actively maintained will be a constant annoyance. They seem intentionally coy about how the 523 miles where flown, seemingly just above Marina, CA. They have requested that flight tracking not be publicly shown on flight aware.
- aftbit 2y agoYou might be able to find them on ADS-B Exchange, either live or in the historical data sets. They are somewhat famous for only using citizen-sourced ADS-B data and refusing all requests to delist or hide data (allegedly anyway). It looks like their tail number is N542B but I'm not sure how to translate that to the ICAO hex codes that they use to archive their data nor exactly what date and location the flight took place. Some more sleuthing would be required. https://www.adsbexchange.com/products/historical-data/ https://www.adsbexchange.com/products/historical-data/
- kbaker 2y agoN542BJ is the tail number (not N542B,) flightradar24 has the Mode S code listed even though the flight data is locked there. https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n542bj# https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n542bj# Some test flights around 6/23 - 6/27. Looks like a pretty boring way to get 523 miles. They should fly the loops over the Indianapolis Speedway instead. https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a6df7c&lat=36.689&lon=-121.763&zoom=15.0&showTrace=2024-06-24 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a6df7c&lat=36.689&lon=-... https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a6df7c&lat=36.689&lon=-121.763&zoom=15.0&showTrace=2024-06-27 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a6df7c&lat=36.689&lon=-...
- antonvs 2y agoI wonder if the the high-pressure, non-cryogenic hydrogen tanks used in some cars and buses would work. That technology seems to have solved the major issues, although I suppose aircraft crashes could introduce some additional problems. Toyota has some detail about their system, which is similar to systems used by Honda and Hyundai, at: https://www.toyota-europe.com/news/2015/hydrogen-is-that-safe https://www.toyota-europe.com/news/2015/hydrogen-is-that-saf...
- more_corn 2y agoThe Hydrogen in our supply chain also comes from petroleum so it’s more dangerous, more expensive and less green than any other alternative. Its would literally be more green to burn coal.
- pdonis 2y ago"Emitting only water vapor"--which is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO2.
- XorNot 2y agoYou might want to consider that 70% of the planet is covered with water which emits a lot of water vapor per day, everyday. Water vapour condenses out of the atmosphere in a matter of minutes to hours. CO2 in the atmosphere has a half-life of 120 years.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- tzs 2y agoYes and no. Yes, water vapor is more effective at warming than CO2, and is responsible for over half of Earth's total greenhouse effect. But humans have very little effect on the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere [1]. Emit a ton of CO2 and that CO2 remains in the atmosphere for hundreds of years. Emit a ton of water vapor and it is gone from the atmosphere in weeks. The average emitted water vapor molecule only stays for two weeks. So no, as far as emissions go emitting CO2 is much worse than emitting water vapor. [1] https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-do-we-blame-climate-change-carbon-dioxide-when-water-vapor-much-more-common-greenhouse https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/why-do-we-blame-climate-chan...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Terr_ 2y agoDon't worry, any excess water vapor quickly falls out of the atmosphere. Literally. As rain.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- 2y ago
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- GenerocUsername 2y agoThat's great. How horrible was the process of generating the fuel to only emit water by the final link in the energy chain?
- akoboldfrying 2y agoYou don't seem to realise that that process happened far away from where we are. Maybe even in a different country. So when you think about it: Did it even really happen at all?
- pauljurczak 2y agoGreenwashed hydrogen?
- taylodl 2y agoThe production and use of hydrogen in transportation requires 4x more energy from the electric grid than EVs - and there are people claiming the grid can't handle EVs (they're wrong - but that's another point). What the grid can't handle is hydrogen. Between Microsoft and Google battling over AI, the claim that the grid can handle EVs is being cast into doubt. None of this is even getting into the consumer issues with hydrogen - of which there are plenty. Hydrogen may find a use in long distance haulers and heavy-duty construction equipment (think replacing big diesel engines), but it's never going to get a strong foothold on personal transportation.
- al_borland 2y agoFrom what I’ve read, liquid hydrogen isn’t a great option due to the energy required to create it. Where does that energy come from?
- analog31 2y agoCommercially viable hydrogen production starts with methane, goes through a combination of "steam reforming" followed by "shift reaction." So far as I know, liquefaction involves essentially mainstream cryogenic refrigeration.
- Loughla 2y agoAnd the energy for that comes from where?
- analog31 2y agoProbably more methane. As mentioned in the neighboring post, hydrogen is an energy storage mechanism, not an energy source. It's also a feedstock for some other chemical processes. Unless we can tap into some sort of "too cheap to meter but too hard to transport" energy source in the future.
- coryrc 2y agoI recently learned there are natural hydrogen deposits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_hydrogen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_hydrogen
- condiment 2y agoThis is pretty cool. They built the taxi to do battery operated flights, with the longest flight so far was 150 miles at a top speed of around 200 mph. For reference, 500 miles is the distance between San Diego and San Francisco. That’s a 90 minute flight that would take closer to 2 1/2 hours with this air taxi. So I suspect that this demonstration is less about any sort of aspiration to replace batteries and fossil fuels with hydrogen, and more a demonstration of an operationally clean burning fuel. The criticisms that hydrogen is environmentally expensive are valid, but what’s interesting is that the operational use of the vehicle, whether it’s battery or fuel cell, is effectively emissions-free. When the operational fuel is clean, emissions improvements can be centralized. That’s a really big deal. https://www.jobyaviation.com/news/joby-progresses-next-phase-aircraft-flight-test-program/ https://www.jobyaviation.com/news/joby-progresses-next-phase...
- readthenotes1 2y agoIf it's a taxi service, is there a chance that +90 minutes for security and baggage could be avoided to make the door to door time more comparable?
- imtringued 2y agoYou still need to make sure that no one except the pilot can take over the controls and that nobody is secretly loading up the VTOL with bombs in their luggage with the intention to crash it into the side of a glass skyscraper. Then there is the safety of the passengers. If you and the pilot are the only ones in the aircraft, there is not much risk to yourself, but if the pilot dies, then the aircraft must land autonomously. If there is a group of passengers, then a terrorist could take the passengers hostage. So you still need to check for weapons and explosives. The only case where you could get rid of security is with a fully autonomous aircraft that carries no luggage and only a single person.
- vernon99 2y agoThis is a weird assumption, see my comment above - there already exist a bunch of airplanes operating in the US with no TSA. Also, what’s the point of bombing small airplanes? Why not to bomb a bus instead? The impact would be larger.
- briandw 2y agoCost to produce H2 from water, 50-55 kWh/kg Cost to liquefy H2 is 10-13 kWh/kg 1 Kg of H2 stores about 33 kWh of energy. More than 50% of the energy is wasted before transport, storage, boil off etc are concerned. H2 does not make any sense whatever.
- akoboldfrying 2y agoWell, the article actually admits that 95% of hydrogen produced in the US is from hydrocarbons, and thus produces lots of CO2. And if you think about it for a minute: Do CO2 emissions that occur miles away from where I'm standing right now really even exist?
- remram 2y agoJust give me an electric train for that distance...
- coryrc 2y agoIt makes better sense than curtailing solar or wind production. 50% is better than zero. That being said, hydrogen is usually the worst option, but I don't think that's true for every scenario.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jfengel 2y agoIf you had all of that H2, what is the additional cost to just fix some CO2 into hydrocarbons? It feels like that would be a much simpler way to get to net zero than having to reinvent all of the infrastructure. So much simpler that I wonder why anyone would keep trying on hydrogen. Which makes me darkly suspect that the goal is to take our attention off the solution that's already being deployed, i.e. wind and solar.
- skoocda 2y agoRegardless of net efficiency, that still entails collecting CO2 at a central facility (where it could have been dealt with in other ways, such as injection underground) and sprinkling it through the air as you fly over delicate ecosystems. I'm sure bankers see both as net zero, but condors might have more issues with your simpler workaround.
- dtgriscom 2y agoNote that they never say what the payload was. Was there just a pilot? Was it just remote-controlled? (I'm guessing just the pilot, but that's less than useful except as a personal transport, not a "taxi".)
- akoboldfrying 2y agoIt's reassuring to know that the CO2 that will be emitted in the end-to-end process of getting these planes airborne will be occurring somewhere far outside of my immediate vicinity.
- flembat 2y agoGeneration, transmission, storage and local consumption of energy, are separate problems. Hydrogen probably makes sense in the long term, it can be transported in pipes, can quickly refill a local users tank and is not going to create a monstrous waste recycling problem.
- rasz 2y ago>it can be transported in pipes how long do the pipes last before crumbing? and how long do the pumps last? Toyota cant even make a hydrogen car fuel pump last more than 7 hours.
- dzhiurgis 2y agoWe’re not even using hydrogen, the most dense fuel, in rockets. Why would you use anywhere else? Cars, trucks, EVTOLS and even planes are getting batteries which are superior in most aspects.
- ben_w 2y agoApart from the SLS, Ariane 6, Japan's H3 Launch Vehicle, the Russian Angara's KVTK stage, the Saturn V 2nd and 3rd stages, and several others which do/did all use hydrogen.
- dzhiurgis 2y agoHow many kg’s to orbit/year vs other fuels? It’s close to 0. If hydrogen is too complex for space, don’t even dream using one for cars and planes.
- ben_w 2y ago% of kg to orbit doesn't tell you much about the complexity, especially given that SpaceX is approximately half of the global total mass to orbit all by itself… by doing things that everyone else thought were too complicated. The fact that vehicles which were retired before I was born managed to use liquid hydrogen just fine, however, requires it to be relatively non-complex. This doesn't necessarily mean it will win, just that you can't rule it out on that basis.
- ramon156 2y agoElectric trains, people
- TedHartDavis 2y agoThis is seriously impressive to me, if indeed as claimed. I'm no longer skeptical about the successful application of hydrogen for power in vehicles. Buuut will we ever make it truly make sense for vehicles en masse?
- arnaudsm 2y agoImpressive range! What's the CO2/mile?
- black_13 2y ago[dead]
- nullc 2y agoBut would falling passengers count as carbon emissions?