The hydrogen economy

[Auditor #9]

It's time to start looking beyond the 'age of oil' now and towards the next big energy source which the likes of Honda and BMW see as hydrogen. Colourless odourless tasteless, make it in your kitchen with some water and solar panels or a windmill. Run your home heating and car on it.



Oil? Pfa! How could the hit be fitting the shan with such sexy things as that imaged above just around the corner? Though this website reckons 25 years before mass production, given that the American dollar is under such pressure, could the yanks make a wartime-like effort and reverse their plight in a shorter space of time? Say, 10-15 years?

[Ehhh]

Hydrogen is a storage medium. It will have to be created before it is used (despite it being the most abundant element in the universe, you can't just pluck it out of the air) and that will use the same amount of energy that the hydrogen will release.
Don't get me wrong, it's a very clean and efficient storage medium (using fuel cells as a buffer for wind turbines would be a big step forward) but it's not a substitute for oil.

[michael1965]

Hydrogen is a storage medium. It will have to be creeated before it is used (despite it being the most abundant element in the universe, ou can't just pluck it out of the air) and that will use the same amount of energy that the hydrogen will release.
Don't get me wrong, it's a very clean and efficient storage medium (using fuel cells as a buffer for wind turbines would be a big step forward) but it's not a substitute for oil.

True, though every dollar increase in the price of oil makes nuclear generated electricity more attractive and hydrogen (produced by electricity) is potentially an effective substitute for oil in the transportation industry.

I just wonder at what price of oil, will the penny finally drop, with policy makers in this country: $120 ... $150 .. $200 ??

[Ehhh]

True. I wonder if anybody has done the maths to calculate whether or not it will be possible to generate enough electricity to meet current demand and the demand of producing enough hydrogen to keep the world's transport moving. Could nuclear do that alone or would we have to fall back on coal fired stations?

[SPN]

As already mentioned, hydrogen is NOT an energy source.

It is very important to remember this!

Hydrogen is a storage medium. It will have to be creeated before it is used (despite it being the most abundant element in the universe, ou can't just pluck it out of the air) and that will use the same amount of energy that the hydrogen will release.
Don't get me wrong, it's a very clean and efficient storage medium (using fuel cells as a buffer for wind turbines would be a big step forward) but it's not a substitute for oil.

True, though every dollar increase in the price of oil makes nuclear generated electricity more attractive and hydrogen (produced by electricity) is potentially an effective substitute for oil in the transportation industry.

I just wonder at what price of oil, will the penny finally drop, with policy makers in this country: $120 ... $150 .. $200 ??

Nuclear generated electricity will never be feasible in IReland because we have so many other alternatives that are much much cheaper.

[Auditor #9]

As already mentioned, hydrogen is NOT an energy source.

It is very important to remember this!

I think Ehh said it was a storage medium and not that it wasn't a source. Source, not a source... semantics. It can be used as a source of energy, you'd agree with that? How it's produced is irrelevant as long as it's sustainable. Where it's produced on the other hand ...

[michael1965]

As already mentioned, hydrogen is NOT an energy source.

It is very important to remember this!

Hydrogen is a storage medium. It will have to be creeated before it is used (despite it being the most abundant element in the universe, ou can't just pluck it out of the air) and that will use the same amount of energy that the hydrogen will release.
Don't get me wrong, it's a very clean and efficient storage medium (using fuel cells as a buffer for wind turbines would be a big step forward) but it's not a substitute for oil.

True, though every dollar increase in the price of oil makes nuclear generated electricity more attractive and hydrogen (produced by electricity) is potentially an effective substitute for oil in the transportation industry.

I just wonder at what price of oil, will the penny finally drop, with policy makers in this country: $120 ... $150 .. $200 ??

Nuclear generated electricity will never be feasible in IReland because we have so many other alternatives that are much much cheaper.

How many alternatives? There is certainly much potential with wind, but wind has to be backed up, with alternative guaranteed supplies.

I'm a bit sceptical about storage of wind energy for the general supply of power, as opposed to for specific fields of use like transportation. In a recent thread that mentioned pumped storage (eg. Turlough Hill) I did a quick back of the envelope calculation and worked out that Turlough hill can't possibly supply power for more than a few hours, at its full power output.

As for other possibilities. There seems to be a lot in theory, but not a whole lot in actual existence. On one hand, it is probably wise to encourage and monitor the development of alternatives like wave and tidal, but when you look at the contribution of hydro to the total electricity usage here, it may well be the case, that these sources can never provide sufficient power, and someone needs to look at them from a theoretical and maybe slightly sceptical/realistic point of view, to see if they can ever provide an alternative to nuclear/fossil fuels.

[riven]

Nuclear could supply world demand esaily if the technology progresses.

Hydrogen economy is going to require alot of logistics. It is funny but fusion could be possible in 25 years

[david]

It is funny but fusion could be possible in 25 years

Fusion is forty years away, just like it was forty years ago, funnily enough.

[Eddiepops]

Hydrogen is a storage medium. It will have to be created before it is used (despite it being the most abundant element in the universe, you can't just pluck it out of the air) and that will use the same amount of energy that the hydrogen will release.
Don't get me wrong, it's a very clean and efficient storage medium (using fuel cells as a buffer for wind turbines would be a big step forward) but it's not a substitute for oil.

Actually, "creating" the hydrogen (through electrolysis, etc) is very energy intensive and does not get nearly an equavalence of hydrogen as a product. Factor in compression, storage, distribution etc and apparently you come out with an energy efficiency of about 22%:

The "power-plant-to-wheel" efficiency of a fuel cell vehicle operated on compressed gaseous hydrogen will be in the vicinity of 22%.

So 78% of the energy is lost, and this is why hydrogen won't be saving us anytime soon