Since I was a little lad, I have been hearing that hydrogen was the fuel of the future ! That was 50 years ago !
what has happened ?
15 Years ago I was involved, with the commissioning of a Solar-Vasserstoffe fabrik, in Neunburg am Wald.The plant split water into Hydrogen and Oxygen .
The Hydrogen was then recombusted with the oxygen in a fuel cell., and DC electricity was generated. this was then rectified using an Umrighter and resulted in 147 kw of electrical power . what ever happened to this promising technology ?
Hydrogen does have some peculiarities . Characteristic for normal combustion Lowest heat value per cubic meter of gas.. Highest heat release per Kilogram of gas. Products of combustion H20 water. High combustion velocity tends to cause back burning in conventional aspirated burners.
I suppose that the image for Hydrogen is distorted by the Hindenburg disaster, I also suspect that the good Burgers of the Cotswolds would get abit worried if Hydrogen tankers were suddenly passing through their villages.
Somebody help me out here to understand where we are currently with Hydrogen
I am pushing a Hydrogen, you can see it on the competition list. Well it has not changed much for the average person. First BMW hast the BMW7 a world record car with Hydrogen powered. Under Magna Austria the problem with the tank got solved.
Atomic Power is back as big key player, because they see the chance to provide all the electricity for the needed Hydrogen. The other option is renewables, and this is what my design is all about. Although I am fighting big boys I am optimistic because my Design can be used for drink water production a other needed commodity.
What not has changed is how the Industry deals with the problem and therefore nothing happened from the point of used resources and its related infrastructure problem. I see it very different and go not with the Industry and I can proof my point with studies done by the US Government and others.
The biggest problem, the Industry does not like to see this, therefore they are not providing any support.
I o not think that in a short time 3000 Atomic power plant will be built, so much are needed - and the cap after peak oil has to be filled. My concept has big chances to be build.
Well... what about the energy used in splitting water in the first place? This is I think the biggest problem - splitting water to then have it re-created doesn't create a surplus of energy. Plus, you have to compress the H2 gas to be able to store and transport it - which uses more energy.
Of course you could create this energy with renewables - but then why not use them straight away in the first place?
The electricity for providing the cracking of H20 was provided by Solar energy ( effciencies have lately improved for solar panel, also prices have fallen )
The re-combinat process gave a net heat gain and electric power I know it sounds a long round the houses . but it did work.
and as we know product of oxidising H2 is H2O
Weak point is the seal on the fuel cell maybe this has improved , most things Do.
Yes you are absolutely right, this is the way the average knowledge goes, I disagree and refer to a US Department/NREL Study. You will agree that the world population will increase drastically and with this fact the Fossil fuel resources will end faster. Your point of view is the point of the Elite who has energy. Today we are not able to feed the world population estimated 6.7bi in 2040 estimated 9.0 bi. Most of the energy goes into food production ( 1 p food = 9 p energy ) and goods transportation. Do not speculate with energy management and savings, the depletion phase is a not having energy phase because fossil fuel will go there, where most of the money is made and this will not be food production ( I assume Chemical Industry ). I understand that you need not to go and cut your wood when you need to make your dinner. I can tell you, many not having any energy do not need Hydrogen liquid, they would be happy to have it non liquid and so it was used by you grandparent and they had no problem either. 50 million tons of hydrogen is produced mostly for the gasoline production, there it is affordable, appropriate and legitimate. Don't you think there is something wrong in the argumentation? I do.
Yes we can discuss this as a weak point, I do not think it relevant. Oil tankers sink, nearly every week goes one container ship lost. Are we stopping now shipping?
I am asking you something. There was a big fear about the gas imports from Russia when it stopped. Let's say I secure the Hydrogen Gas Supply and compensate such events, do you think the sealing will be worth the discussion? I can ask you in a other way. All the death people caused by gasoline pollution do you think they would like to have a leaking Hydrogen or a perfect Gasoline System not to mention the health costs which are paid by the Oil Industry ( social costs ). On the docks in the Port of Los Angeles and Long Beach, longshoreman have with 50 asthma or cancer unable to continue working, the cancer risk in the area is 1500 higher as allowed I do not think they would discuss Hydrogen leaking. Along Highways, lead and heavy metal contamination in a distance of about 300m about 70 times higher as allowed. By the way, your car tire are also leaking, and you are not thinking to refuse to use your car? Yes leaking may be a problem, but compared to all the problems fossil fuel is causing, I guess it is a very minor problem.
Sorry Alfred, I did not mean to infer that because hydrogen is the smallest molecule that it will allways make problems with leaks on equipments .
I have worked on and of with Hydrogen since 1968, first with Lugi/H&G water gas units, then Namptha methane reformers, and also the united technologies reformer . and solar Vasserstoff unit to date I have experienced no serious problems .
My point essentially was that all kit has weak points with compressors and turbines it is seals and bearings, With sfety valves it is the seat is never again perfect tight after having lifted, and with fuel cells it looks to be membrane/seal
I did not understand it as interfering. I responded because a layperson would think this is the problem. My response should show that we agree to so many negative aspects inherited to fossil fuel use and we take it for given even it kills us. I am not worrying about leaking, I can see the big political game, and the Oil Industry is a powerful operation as well the Atomic Industries Lobbyist and they interfere. Very good visible, the US Department of Energy has no funding for Hydrogen but it has a 10bi$ funding for Nuclear Power. In the US Studies the storage of waste is left out of the power calculation, as the storage relates to a other business. In the Hydrogen calculation they have even inflation rates recognized, and still in 2004 the kg Hydrogen was 2,90$ made by wind power. And you will find a lot of Hydrogen fairy tales making life difficult. So I don't worry about your point of discussion and thanks for responding.
The curve population growth goes up = drastic increase
The curve fossil fuel resources goes down = ending
The question is not how we manage ore how much we save energy, the question is where we compensate the depleting energy resources. It does not matter if it The peaking of crude oil happened in 2006 or optimistically in 2020, IT WILL HAPPEN. The difference of both curves is a missing energy quantity, which we need to compensate if the world wants to keep current living standards and food prices. You can turn it as you want there are only two ways to secure energy, Nuclear Power - a very unsafe and also ending resource ( current calculation is 3000 power plants for today's energy capacity ) and renewable resources, mainly Wind Power. To have a System in place, which is able to fill the gap and eliminate speculation with the left resources is the priority. When you have not heard about the problems already reality to food financing, then here is more.......... Ban Ki-moon to lead task force to tackle global food crisis
there are many routes to Hydrogen - some are cheaper than others.
the old fashioned route is still almost certainly the cheapest .
1) Convert coal to -> coke in a LURGI coking still.
2) Feed coke to a water gas generator ( humphries and Glasgow). maintain a constant firebed level , and react steam and air ( or Oxygen for better combustion)over the fire bed.
3) Result water gas 80% hydrogen , ballance of gases Co2, CO, hydrogen sulphide . CO2 and CO separated and adsorbed for commercial usage. ( last time I checked CO was bringing in $9000/ton
Hydrogen sulphide adsorbed into the solid phase in Iron oxide boxes .
We do still have rather alot of coal left in the UK, so that realistic at least.
I wonder, do we have good enough scrubber technology to take those nasty pollutents out of dealing with coal, or is that also tied to cost as well ?
I don't suppose you have any figures off the top of your head on rough costs for the coal route ?
Though I'd rather a more long term solution which doesn't involve using up all our coal..
(I certainly see a niche market for hydrogen powered devices, eg. perhaps vehicles that don't convert easily to other fuels, like its probably difficult to imagine a battery powered JCB, but then I suppose you could just plug in an extension cord )
this is very old technology route, and is normally also integrated with a heavy organics section . so there are uses for the scrubbed gasses .
some are quite nasty some are beneficial.
liquid CO + liquid H2 is the route to Mustard Gas.
Mustard gas ( Non sadam hussein use) is the building brick for di-isocyanites , instant adhesives and the polymerisation agents for plastics ,
I suspect the greenest use of CO2 would be to fix the gas in precipitated calcium carbonate, by the adsorbtion route into calcium hydroxide solution.
couldn't claim as carbon neutral but it would deal with a lot of the CO2 from the gasification proces. and it would be in solid phase and it would be added to cement/mortars and concretes, which would continue to adsorb CO2 from the atmosphere as it slowly cured over hundreds of years.
Hydrogen Mass-Production, inexpensive and safe can be produced only from Renewable Energy Resources.
A wake-up call on coal.
For the believers in coal driven economy there are bad news. In a good case scenario, coal peaking will happen 2030. I recommended the following web page
I want to come back to my curves, one the increasing demand on energy caused by the increasing world population and the curve down to the depletion of fossil fuel
resources. Turn it as you want, only a permanent available Hydrogen Mass-production as proposed, will secure future food and living standards.
Hydrogen Economy is coming, the future is closer than you think. All Big care makers have a Hydrogen Car, waiting for an economic Hydrogen Mass-Production. BMW Hydrogen 7 with, world records into the future.
)
