Original text too short.
Hydrogen Is Not A Fuel, It’s A Cult
8 thoughts on “Hydrogen Is Not A Fuel, It’s A Cult”
Leave a Reply
RECENT POSTS
-
Electric bus charging on Los Angeles Metro (G) line
Electric bus charging on Los Angeles Metro (G) line from electricvehicles
-
The Audi Q4 demonstration models are finally being delivered to dealers! Test drove it earlier and it is excellent.
The Audi Q4 demonstration models are finally being delivered to dealers! Test drove it earlier and it is excellent. from electricvehicles
Copyright © 2021. All rights reserved
That’s such a terrible picture to use for this topic, whatever side you’re on. The Hindenburg didn’t use H2 as fuel, but for buoyancy, and only because the US refused to sell helium to Germany. Also, the fireball in the picture is from the aluminum paint; not that the hydrogen wasn’t a problem, but it’s not the reason the ship blew up.
Thank the oil companies.
Snippets from the article:
> In the UK, there are even advertisements for the fuel on the London Underground, which is quite an odd thing to see next to posters about the latest iPhone and vitamin supplements. […] **this is more of a sign that there is a PR-campaign to implant hydrogen in the public imagination as the savior of all our lifestyles in the face of climate change.**
> For a certain type of tabloid-reading consumer, it’s working, with many claiming they won’t buy battery-electric vehicles because they are “waiting for hydrogen”. The bigger problem is that governments are listening too and it’s not necessarily such a good thing.
> The UK has already switched a lot of its generation grid to renewables, particularly wind, which sometimes now supplies over half the country’s electricity. But that still doesn’t mean there will be loads of surplus to be used for producing hydrogen. The bullish employment and market value predictions appear to hide some major obstacles.
> **This threatens to derail our route to decarbonization more than ease it.** The arguments against hydrogen as our lord and savior are increasingly well known, and mostly revolve around the laws of physics. Hydrogen may be abundant in the universe but harnessing it for use is not so easy. Although there are some ways of harvesting hydrogen as a byproduct of other processes, it usually must be extracted from fossil fuels or electrolyzing water. The latter is the truly green option but takes plenty of energy and loses about a third of the power input compared to just sending the electricity over the grid [(see chart)](https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/61b48ae9d01c7f054b8aec02/Chart-Effizienz-Antriebe-2020-vs-2050/960×0.jpg). You lose even more using fuel cells to convert the hydrogen back to electricity, and even more with hydrogen-derived synthetic fuels. **Only mild improvements in efficiency are expected over the coming decades, too.**
…
> Michael Liebreich of BloombergNEF has created [a handy pyramid](https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/61b48a2ad01c7f054b8aec00/Clean-hydrogen-ladder/960×0.jpg) of the relative value of different hydrogen use scenarios, with applications like fertilizer being essential, but **any form of transport from trucks, coaches, and short-haul aviation downwards being better served by batteries, or other forms of electrification.**
…
> The problem is that the underlying battle is between two types of energy provider – electricity grid suppliers versus oil and gas companies. **The latter are generally in favor of hydrogen because currently most of it is made out of their methane or coal.** They also want to maintain their financial model of forcing consumers and industrial customers to go somewhere to pay for fuel, rather than having it supplied to their homes and businesses.
Hydrogen is better because <insert promise that is far from happening>.
It’s particularly funny to see here, as the opposite is equally as true. It’s like the only answer is binary, and can’t be both (or neither). It’s black vs white. Red vs Blue. My team is better than your team.
Said on the electric car ~~cult~~ subreddit….
5 years ago we said the same things about electric cars, things can change VERY quickly.
What a total marketing scheme this Forbes article is.
The hydrogen fuel being designed for todays semi trucks and and buses is very different than the blimps of yesteryear.
Sure if you ignite it it blows, but think of it this way:
If you puncture a Tesla battery pack or overheat it it explodes… Hmm.
If hydrogen fuel cells are being used to replace marine engines and offer a sustainable alternative to large scale ships to create a fuel as you float system of regenerative fuel technology, we are no longer relying on Saudis or oil pipelines to ensure giant shipping barges are pushing all year long and not require fuel ups or support from drilling.
Let’s go hydrogen and f u c k this journalist.
The points the article makes are well-known and significant. However, using the word “cult” in the headline seems a little amusing considering the behavior of the followers of the Book of Musk.