3 ms·

The funny thing is that theoretically hydrogen would be easy to deploy in the UK. We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20%

by ajb 2y ago

The funny thing is that theoretically hydrogen would be easy to deploy in the UK. We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Which would give us the ability to deliver hydrogen relatively cheaply to any location. But it looks like EVs have too much momentum, and are likely to have a cheaper running cost anyway.

danans 2y ago
> We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Even ignoring the dangers of embrittlement of metal pipes that carry the hydrogen enriched gas, what is the cost of this methane/hydrogen filter, and what is it's safety for home use given that it's dealing with 2 highly flammable gases mixed together. I can't find anything online about household methane/hydrogen separators. Whereas an EVSE is basically just a big electrical switch.
- ajb 2y ago
  The UK gas network was used for many decades to transport a 50-50 mix of hydrogen and CO, called "town gas". Nevertheless the risk to the modern network should be diligently evaluated . I believe the intention is to do that anyway to the extent it is found to be safe, as blending in hydrogen reduces the carbon consumption of the gas network For papers on hydrogen/methane separation, see: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blended+natural+gas+hydrogen+separation&oq=hydrogen+extraction+from+blended+gas https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blen...
  - AnotherGoodName 2y ago
    Qq where did this hydrogen come from for the 50-50 mix? From a quick reading above it looks like it came from cracking fossil fuels rather than electrolysis which is understandable but I think that should be made clear to everyone. It’s really just another way to ship fossil fuels in that sense. Burns slightly cleaner on your stove is the only real advantage here.
    - ajb 2y ago
      In town gas, yes. But that was until the 70s. The first climate change treaty was only signed in 1994. No-one wants to go back to town gas. I don't think it burned cleaner, it was made from coal. And it contained CO, which is lethal. I mention it merely as an existence proof that it's possible to ship hydrogen. I don't personally think it will be economic to do so without compromising climate goals, except as a tool to mitigate the carbon consumption of existing appliances.
      - danans 2y ago
        > except as a tool to mitigate the carbon consumption of existing appliances. Does it matter if you reduce CO2 it at the household point of combustion if the fuel is ultimately C02 emissions heavy? Accounting for the inefficiencies of cracking natural gas into H2, it may actually increase the GHG emissions, not to mention being more expensive (due to energy loss during the gas cracking process). Furthermore, the primary local issue with combustion appliances is air quality, and mixing in a little H2 not going to do much to improve that. So piping fossil derived hydrogen into gas pipes doesn't solve either GHG emissions or local air quality issues. You're better off continuing with piped methane gas and phasing in electric heat pumps over time.
        ajb 2y ago
        If you are putting hydrogen in the mix to reduce CO2 emissions, obviously you should not do it by cracking methane and letting out the resulting carbon. Assuming you don't let out the carbon (or use electrolysis) then maybe there is a case for it.
bobm_kite9 2y ago
I think this is set to happen: https://www.agcc.co.uk/news-article/hydrogen-will-be-pumped-into-uks-main-gas-pipelines-by-2025 https://www.agcc.co.uk/news-article/hydrogen-will-be-pumped-...
AnotherGoodName 2y ago
Just ship methane. If you have hydrogen it’s not hard to convert it to methane (or vice versa). It actually tends to happen with a simple catalyst near atmospheric co2 and one of the biggest pains when dealing with it is avoiding it reacting. Which should just add to how stupid hydrogen is. It’s a synthetic fuel that has huge storage and transport costs, is no more green or easier to produce than synthetic methane which we already have. We could just make synthetic methane today if that was the path we were likely to take but honestly it’s cheaper to pump methane out of the ground so that’s what we do (barring any incentives to mix in synthetic methane). A real hilarity is that hydrogen fuel right now is often made the opposite way. Take methane, heat in absence of oxygen and the carbon and hydrogen seperate. All this talk of hydrogen as an alternative to fossil fuels is nonsense. It’s a synthetic fuel, one of many possible synthetic fuels that’s extremely inconvenient for storage (absolutely can’t be stored in liquid form without cryogenics or ‘bleed off’ to keep it cool), it corrodes fucking everything and best of all it’s no easier to produce synthetically than the fuels we already use day to day, eg methane. Absolute stupidity and scientific illiteracy that hydrogen was even on the cards.

by ajb 2y ago

danans 2y ago

> We already have a gas network for methane, it wouldn't be hard to mix in 20% hydrogen and then filter it back out at the other end (there's an energy cost, but it's not huge, and in any case most existing uses would not have a problem with 20% hydrogen). Even ignoring the dangers of embrittlement of metal pipes that carry the hydrogen enriched gas, what is the cost of this methane/hydrogen filter, and what is it's safety for home use given that it's dealing with 2 highly flammable gases mixed together. I can't find anything online about household methane/hydrogen separators. Whereas an EVSE is basically just a big electrical switch.

ajb 2y ago
The UK gas network was used for many decades to transport a 50-50 mix of hydrogen and CO, called "town gas". Nevertheless the risk to the modern network should be diligently evaluated . I believe the intention is to do that anyway to the extent it is found to be safe, as blending in hydrogen reduces the carbon consumption of the gas network For papers on hydrogen/methane separation, see: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blended+natural+gas+hydrogen+separation&oq=hydrogen+extraction+from+blended+gas https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=blen...
- AnotherGoodName 2y ago
  Qq where did this hydrogen come from for the 50-50 mix? From a quick reading above it looks like it came from cracking fossil fuels rather than electrolysis which is understandable but I think that should be made clear to everyone. It’s really just another way to ship fossil fuels in that sense. Burns slightly cleaner on your stove is the only real advantage here.
  - ajb 2y ago
    In town gas, yes. But that was until the 70s. The first climate change treaty was only signed in 1994. No-one wants to go back to town gas. I don't think it burned cleaner, it was made from coal. And it contained CO, which is lethal. I mention it merely as an existence proof that it's possible to ship hydrogen. I don't personally think it will be economic to do so without compromising climate goals, except as a tool to mitigate the carbon consumption of existing appliances.
    - danans 2y ago
      > except as a tool to mitigate the carbon consumption of existing appliances. Does it matter if you reduce CO2 it at the household point of combustion if the fuel is ultimately C02 emissions heavy? Accounting for the inefficiencies of cracking natural gas into H2, it may actually increase the GHG emissions, not to mention being more expensive (due to energy loss during the gas cracking process). Furthermore, the primary local issue with combustion appliances is air quality, and mixing in a little H2 not going to do much to improve that. So piping fossil derived hydrogen into gas pipes doesn't solve either GHG emissions or local air quality issues. You're better off continuing with piped methane gas and phasing in electric heat pumps over time.
      - ajb 2y ago
        If you are putting hydrogen in the mix to reduce CO2 emissions, obviously you should not do it by cracking methane and letting out the resulting carbon. Assuming you don't let out the carbon (or use electrolysis) then maybe there is a case for it.

bobm_kite9 2y ago

I think this is set to happen: https://www.agcc.co.uk/news-article/hydrogen-will-be-pumped-into-uks-main-gas-pipelines-by-2025 https://www.agcc.co.uk/news-article/hydrogen-will-be-pumped-...

AnotherGoodName 2y ago

Just ship methane. If you have hydrogen it’s not hard to convert it to methane (or vice versa). It actually tends to happen with a simple catalyst near atmospheric co2 and one of the biggest pains when dealing with it is avoiding it reacting. Which should just add to how stupid hydrogen is. It’s a synthetic fuel that has huge storage and transport costs, is no more green or easier to produce than synthetic methane which we already have. We could just make synthetic methane today if that was the path we were likely to take but honestly it’s cheaper to pump methane out of the ground so that’s what we do (barring any incentives to mix in synthetic methane). A real hilarity is that hydrogen fuel right now is often made the opposite way. Take methane, heat in absence of oxygen and the carbon and hydrogen seperate. All this talk of hydrogen as an alternative to fossil fuels is nonsense. It’s a synthetic fuel, one of many possible synthetic fuels that’s extremely inconvenient for storage (absolutely can’t be stored in liquid form without cryogenics or ‘bleed off’ to keep it cool), it corrodes fucking everything and best of all it’s no easier to produce synthetically than the fuels we already use day to day, eg methane. Absolute stupidity and scientific illiteracy that hydrogen was even on the cards.