Lets talk hydrogen fuel cells.

[Puppies04]

So I saw that Toyota has announced it will be releasing a hydrogen fuel cell car in the US later this year and has handed over all rights to a ton of patents using the technology to try and get other companies refining the technology. On top of that they have gone public with the statement that they think hydrogen fuel cells will be used for the next 100 years.

This immediately got me thinking about the technology and how well it would scale up to something the size of a power station. Toyota already says you can use the car to power your house in the event of a blackout.

So are we going to be seeing hydrogen fuel cell power stations in the future? Is there a better option just around the corner?

P.S Yeah I know I could google it but I prefer ATOT to get my information from ATOT experts.

 

[TridenT]

Uhm, it's just a form of energy storage. Hydrogen production is very inefficient and one of the only clean ways to get hydrogen currently is through electrolysis. (running current through water to break the bonds) That method is extremely inefficient compared to other forms out there.

Right now the hydrogen economy can go fuck itself. We need to get on clean renewable energy first and THEN we can talk about the hydrogen economy. The hydrogen economy isn't very good if you're still fucking over the planet.

I rather use the clean energy we're producing to power houses and businesses first. It's more efficient use of energy than putting that into creating hydrogen fuel for cars.

 

[lxskllr]

Don't know much about it. How are they getting the hydrogen? An easy way is through petroleum, but that's only a partial/temporary solution to the problem.

 

[Dman8777]

The problem with the primary renewable energy sources is that energy production isn't predictable or easily controlled and excess energy can't be easily stored. One solution being proposed in Germany right now is to use excesx electrical energy produced by renewable sources to create hydrogen as a means of storage. Unfortunately, the process isn't that efficient but it's better than letting the energy go to waste.

 

[TridenT]

The problem with the primary renewable energy sources is that energy production isn't predictable or easily controlled and excess energy can't be easily stored. One solution being proposed in Germany right now is to use excesx electrical energy produced by renewable sources to create hydrogen as a means of storage. Unfortunately, the process isn't that efficient but it's better than letting the energy go to waste.

This is the only scenario where the hydrogen "economy" makes sense to me currently. Just using the excess energy that isn't being used to create hydrogen. I'm fine with that.

As long as it's being done in an environmentally way, that is.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Uhm, it's just a form of energy storage. Hydrogen production is very inefficient and one of the only clean ways to get hydrogen currently is through electrolysis. (running current through water to break the bonds) That method is extremely inefficient compared to other forms out there.

Right now the hydrogen economy can go fuck itself. We need to get on clean renewable energy first and THEN we can talk about the hydrogen economy. The hydrogen economy isn't very good if you're still fucking over the planet.

I rather use the clean energy we're producing to power houses and businesses first. It's more efficient use of energy than putting that into creating hydrogen fuel for cars.

EVERY energy tech is inefficient in its infancy. In the early days of fossil fuel more fuel was wasted moving it around than there was available on the other end of the delivery . Solar cells went from 1% first generation to 2% in the 50's to maybe 15% now with 40%+ in the lab. Nuclear reactors get more efficient with each new generation. Why do you think hydrogen would be any different? It's poor now, but if more people get onboard it will make huge leaps.

 

[mmntech]

I suppose it all breaks down on the cost benefit ratio. How much energy is used to produce and store hydrogen versus how much you're actually getting out. It also boils down to how well it compares to battery-electric vehicles as well, especially since infrastructure for them already exists.

For either one to work, we're going to need to beef up electricity generation. Rnewables can't generate on demand. They're only a supplement to the grid, not a replacement. That means increasing funding for atomic energy research. That will be the energy source for the 21st century if we want to stop using fossil fuels.

 

[TridenT]

EVERY energy tech is inefficient in its infancy. In the early days of fossil fuel more fuel was wasted moving it around than there was available on the other end of the delivery . Solar cells went from 1% first generation to 2% in the 50's to maybe 15% now with 40%+ in the lab. Nuclear reactors get more efficient with each new generation. Why do you think hydrogen would be any different? It's poor now, but if more people get onboard it will make huge leaps.

Just because history was a repeat offender with some technologies doesn't mean we'll make real attainable astronomical gains with hydrogen.

We need to fix the issues that WE CAN RIGHT NOW. Hydrogen comes later.

 

[Puppies04]

see, you don't get this on google. Thanks for the viewpoints. Anyone else going to chime in?

 

[iwajabitw]

I remember Paul Harvey talking about Mercedes having a hydrogen cell engine in '94. Must be some reason they didn't market it in 21yrs.

 

[Puppies04]

Just because history was a repeat offender with some technologies doesn't mean we'll make real attainable astronomical gains with hydrogen.

We need to fix the issues that WE CAN RIGHT NOW. Hydrogen comes later.

Who invests in maturing the technology if nobody markets in now though?

 

[zerocool84]

If you want a 100 percent green FCV, you need to make your hydrogen in a non-polluting way. That's no easy task, but the best way right now is using hydrogen electrolysis, in which hydrogen and oxygen gases are produced by passing a current through water. The best systems can only produce hydrogen with about*80 percent*of the energy of the electricity used to create it, however -- not exactly an efficient solution.

Natural gas reforming*(above) is a more cost-effective way to make hydrogen, but it is polluting. Steam is heated to 700-1,000 degrees Celsius (about 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) and combined with methane to produce hydrogen and carbon monoxide, along with a small amount of CO2. In all, 95 percent of US hydrogen is produced that way thanks to large natural gas reserves from hydraulic fracturing ("fracking").

http://www.engadget.com/2014/12/23/hydrogen-fuel-cell-explainer/

This is a pretty good article explaining the state of hydrogen cars as they are right now. I suggest giving it a read.

 

[DesiPower]

With the current gasoline prices, lets not

 

[TridenT]

http://www.engadget.com/2014/12/23/hydrogen-fuel-cell-explainer/

This is a pretty good article explaining the state of hydrogen cars as they are right now. I suggest giving it a read.

Yep, this is why I don't like the hydrogen economy right now. :| If we use electrolysis then I'm cool with it but we need to use that energy for other shit first. Electrolysis for hydrogen production should only be done when the energy is going to be completely going to waste otherwise. We have other ways we can use that spare electricity right now. (powering a wider grid!)

 

[sdifox]

very explosive stuff. not sure I want the average road idiot near it. maybe if they find a stabaliser that turns it into gel or something.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Yep, this is why I don't like the hydrogen economy right now. :| If we use electrolysis then I'm cool with it but we need to use that energy for other shit first. Electrolysis for hydrogen production should only be done when the energy is going to be completely going to waste otherwise. We have other ways we can use that spare electricity right now. (powering a wider grid!)

I'd suggest using solar to reduce reliance on a national grid. The cost and complexity of expansion and control not to mention what a clever trouble maker could do makes the ancient grid topology less appealing. If solar made economic sense I'd rather sell the excess to a local cluster relatively immune to trouble backed up by connections to other local clusters to form a mini grid. A more robust system of local power generation appeals to me.

 

[DrPizza]

I think electric cars (rechargeable batteries) are going to beat out Hydrogen. Reason: infrastructure is already in place.

 

[K1052]

I think electric cars (rechargeable batteries) are going to beat out Hydrogen. Reason: infrastructure is already in place.

It's really just the battery cost holding things up at this point. If new production methods/designs can lower the cost (a la Musk's gigafactory) then the ICE could well be a thing of the past except for niche users.

 

[Ruptga]

I don't know why people think hydrogen is so inefficient. 80% conversion of electricity to hydrogen sounds pretty good - that's way better than the efficiency a gas turbine gets making electricity. Hydrogen fed by nuclear would be a really straightforward zero emissions strategy.

 

[Imp]

It's really just the battery cost holding things up at this point. If new production methods/designs can lower the cost (a la Musk's gigafactory) then the ICE could well be a thing of the past except for niche users.

Been a while since I read up on hydrogen, but I think hydrogen fuel cells needed platinum or something that made them really expensive.

Hydrogen could have a place as a fuel storage. Main problem with renewables and even regular power is storage. Convert unused juice to hydrogen? But then there's the fuel cell cost to convert it back.

 

[John Connor]

Uhm, it's just a form of energy storage. Hydrogen production is very inefficient and one of the only clean ways to get hydrogen currently is through electrolysis. (running current through water to break the bonds) That method is extremely inefficient compared to other forms out there.

Right now the hydrogen economy can go fuck itself. We need to get on clean renewable energy first and THEN we can talk about the hydrogen economy. The hydrogen economy isn't very good if you're still fucking over the planet.

I rather use the clean energy we're producing to power houses and businesses first. It's more efficient use of energy than putting that into creating hydrogen fuel for cars.

Felling inconvenienced?

 

[John Connor]

see, you don't get this on google. Thanks for the viewpoints. Anyone else going to chime in?

HTE nuke plants. And watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgGlE97rJl4

 

[John Connor]

The U.S is the number one producer of natural gas and thus why can't we burn that in cars? They do, but it's not widely used as it should be. Cleaner too!

 

[WelshBloke]

I don't know why people think hydrogen is so inefficient. 80% conversion of electricity to hydrogen sounds pretty good - that's way better than the efficiency a gas turbine gets making electricity. Hydrogen fed by nuclear would be a really straightforward zero emissions strategy.

Yeah,that.

If you are converting electricity to a stable long term storage medium with an 80% efficiency that sounds great.
What's the efficiency at the other end though,when you convert the hydrogen back to electricity?

 

[sandorski]

I think electric cars (rechargeable batteries) are going to beat out Hydrogen. Reason: infrastructure is already in place.

Could very well be. However, Hydrogen should still be developed as it's uses are potentially quite vast, especially if Cost is lowered significantly.