Breakthrough technology produces cheap blue hydrogen, capturing 99% of CO2
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 06. 2023
- Breakthrough technology produces cheap blue hydrogen, capturing 99% of CO2
-
👇👇 The Electric Viking store/merchandise 👇👇
shop.theelectricviking.com/
Size guide and other help for the store 👇
theelectricviking.com/the-ele...
🔔 Subscribe and hit the notification bell! ► www.youtube.com/@electricviki...
Join me on Patreon ► / theelectricviking
Join as a member in The Electric Viking CZcams►
/ @electricviking
Members-only videos (see videos before anyone else)►
• Members-only videos
👇👇 Please donate here for Shanna (Viking's wife) if you can 👇👇
gofund.me/ef6650d7
See what happened to Shanna:
• Stage 4 can go to hell...
The Electric Viking on other platforms:
Rumble ► rumble.com/c/TheElectricViking
Facebook page ► / theelectricvikingfb
Facebook group ► / theevfbgroup
Twitter ► / theevking
Instagram ► / theelectricvking
Pinterest ► / theelectricviking
Telegram ► t.me/theelectricviking
TikTok ► / theelectricviking
My Stake referral link ► tinyurl.com/hellostake
👇 See more about me 👇
• You've been asking; he...
👇 My Bali trip 👇
• I went to Indonesia an...
👇 Video about My Skateboard 👇
• EASIEST & cheapest way...
👇 Subscribe to my kids channel 👇
tinyurl.com/subscribetojackan...
See more videos:
Billionaire Forrest calls Musk a ‘muppet’ over hydrogen - then his company said this...
• Billionaire Forrest ca...
US experts shocked by Coals sudden death spiral in the United States
• US experts shocked by ...
The coal industry may be dying in the U.S., but its deadly impacts are not
• The coal industry may ...
Germany is turning open cut coal mines into MASSIVE wind farms
• Germany is turning ope...
Experts say UK's car industry and 800,000 jobs to go to China & the US
• Experts say UK's car i...
Electric cars win every Euro NCAP safety award - ICE cars get zero
• Electric cars win ever...
NIO says it will disrupt VW in Europe with cheap EV's & have 3 brands
• NIO says it will disru...
Ford losses from EV division will explode to over $4 Billion in 2023
• Ford losses from EV di...
California plans to make bidirectional charging mandatory on all EV's
• California plans to ma...
Wind & solar send electricity prices below zero for 1 week in Australia
• Wind & solar send elec...
China has enough wind & solar to power nearly 1 billion houses
• China has enough wind ...
VW increase ELECTRIC car sales worldwide by 44% in Q1 2023
• VW increase ELECTRIC c...
The 5 best electric cars unveiled at the Shanghai motor show
• The 5 best electric ca...
Model Y is best selling car in Europe and the United States in Q1
• Model Y is best sellin...
Toyota NEW manual transmission with pretend clutch for hybrids & EV's
• Toyota NEW manual tran...
White House says Toyota is 'ALL IN' on electrification
• White House says Toyot...
#bluehydrogen #co2 #renewableenergy
👇 👇Reference to the news/charts & videos used in this video:
www.cnbc.com/2022/01/06/what-...
www.hydrogeninsight.com/innov...
www.iea.org/reports/methane-t...
8rivers.com/
8rivers.com/8rh2-ultra-low-ca...
8rivers.com/portfolio/8-river...
www.innovationzero.com/speake...
www.commerce.nc.gov/
www.hydrogeninsight.com/produ...
www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...
www.csis.org/analysis/south-k... netpower.com/
This channel may use some copyrighted materials without specific authorization of the owner; but content used here falls under the “Fair Use” Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976.
Allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Contact us for any copyright issues. If you want a credit of any footage we are using, please let us know.
Website: theelectricviking.com/contact/
Email: contact@theelectricviking.com
Sounds like a Fossil fuel industry con job, like "clean coal"😅
During my working career, my specialty was working in an oil refinery, primarily running several hydrogen plants for nearly 30 years. Hydrogen production is needed and necessary for use in several processes within a refining process. Hydrogen is made with natural gas and steam (water) running it through an natural gas fired reformer at temperature exceeding 1400 degrees F. The byproduct when making hydrogen is CO2 and is most often vented to the atmosphere. Lots of combustion from the reformer with tons of CO2. No one can convince me that hydrogen is the answer to global warming. Let’s use the hydrogen we now produce to improve and clean fuel stocks of sulfur compounds and use green electricity to power our vehicles.
Probably the best approach, 2 percent of all CO2 emissions in the world come from the steam reforming of natural gas to make hydrogen for ammonia production. It makes more sense to go after this market first and the use of hydrogen in the petroleum industry and then gradually expand the use of hydrogen in other industrial process rather than fantasize about producing competitively priced hydrogen from green energy and then burning it in our cars, airplanes and homes to replace fossil fuels.
The best place for green hydrogen is in making fertiliser and anhydrous ammonia. These users pay more for hydrogen plus it goes in to things like farming which needs to keep happening
Yep, so many unaware people keep saying "let's use green hydrogen to power vehicles".
But they ignore the massive amount of brown/black/blue/grey hydrogen that is already being made for other industrial/chemical/medical purposes which is massively damaging to the environment.
Any green/pink (or Allam cycle as per this video) hydrogen production we start needs to first replace the existing application black/brown/blue/grey supply BEFORE we consider any new applications of hydrogen.
If we just increase demand and some of that new demand is answered by low emissions hydrogen - it is all still high emissions hydrogen.
You do realise that when transportation is electrified we will need have no need for 65% of oil. And maybe 5% of methane gas?
The most important metric for an energy source is to look at how much energy it takes to produce the amount of energy used. This is termed "energy returned on energy invested," and the acronym EROEI, or most commonly EROI. As an example, oil and gas in the 1920s had an EROI of 100 to 1. That is for every 100 barrels of oil produced (energy returned), it only took one barrel of oil to find the oil, drill the wells, and extract the oil from the ground (energy invested). Now the EROI for oil and gas is considered to be somewhere between 20 to 1, and 14 to 1 depending on the analyst. If one then factors in the inefficiencies of using fossil fuels for transportation where only 15% of those barrels of oil actually turns the wheels after all of the refining, storage, transportation, delivery, and engine losses are factored in, then the EROI falls off a cliff.
Hydrogen has what is called a negative EROI of 1 to 5. That is for every unit of energy produced (energy returned), it takes 5 units of energy to make those 5 units (energy invested), regardless whether it is "green hydrogen," "blue hydrogen," or "grey hydrogen." Except that producing grey hydrogen produces more CO2 than if the natural gas was just burned as fuel, and blue hydrogen is just a wet dream for oil companies hoping to milk as much money as possible by continuing to sell fossil fuels.
The upshot of this is that hydrogen will always be 5 times or more expensive (at a minimum) than electricity, since it will always take far more energy to produce than it gives back. Wind and solar have an EROI of 14 to 1 for older systems, and new systems are between 16 to 1 and 20 to 1. And for every unit of power produced by renewables and used to drive an EV, 85 to 90% of that energy will end up turning the wheels of cars, while only 30% of hydrogen produced drives the wheels once all the efficiencies of storage, transportation, delivery, and fuel cell losses are factored.
As an aside, math teachers really need to do a better job at explaining how important math can be to ones life, and that it can mean the difference between being conned or mislead, and having informational savvy. Having math skills helps in figuring out if someone is just not taking into account certain factors (either accidentally or on purpose), or has made a mistake that could effect your life or the lives of others.
Best wishes to Sam for his family: hope your spouse is well & recovers soon.
Blue H2: well, that'd be great - except of course no one's solved the problems of H2 storage, pipeline & truck distribution. And of course none of the fossil fuels companies is willing to build a distribution network for the stuff.
H2 is a tiny molecule, worms it's way through metal lattices of all metals that have been tried to build tanks, pipelines or valves. Embrittles them, leading to metal fatigue & failure. Also worms its way through polymers, plastics. Destroys them all. So you can't commercially scale storage & distribution the way we do with methane, natural gas, gasoline & oil products.
Currently I've found one (1) hydrogen fueling station for H2-powered cars. Which no firm will ever produce & sell because you won't be able to refuel anywhere.
Wall Street thinks range anxiety means EVs are a problem? Tesla solved that. First, most Tesla owners fuel up overnight at home, many for 'free' with their own solar. On long trips they rely on the massive & near-ubiquitous Supercharger network Tesla has built out.
H2? You wouldn't even be able to recharge at home. H2 is a wet dream for fossil fuel companies, a way for them to green-wash their ongoing hydrocarbons extraction. It's a complete non-starter. And no one's likely to solve the engineering problems inherent in storage & distribution because those problems are non-trivial (though possible - bet on engineers to find solutions to almost any problem) & extremely expensive to resolve.
We've already solved the problem of incredibly cheap & ubiquitous energy: solar & wind, backed by batteries so all of it can be considered base load. Solar can be produced in a distributed fashion: many homeowners will add their own, in aggregate vastly increasing national capacity at no generating cost to utilities. And cost for both residential & utility grade solar continues to plummet at over 14% per year, compounded. Levelized cost of generation for both solar & wind are now at $0.04 - four CENTS - per kilowatt hour. That's one quarter the cost of current nuclear. Proponents of Small Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) - untried, unproven salvation proposed by the nuclear industry - promises no lower levelized cost of power than $0.14 (14 cents) per kWh. So renewables are ALREADY one quarter the cost of nuclear, one-third the PROMISED cost of SMRs (assuming anyone is dumb enough to build them). Renewables construction costs are a fraction of equivalent nuclear builds, including SMRs (assuming SMR costs come in at what proponents claim they will - which would be a first for any nuclear development). And battery costs, to ensure renewables can function as base load, are already economical, and continue to drop in cost too, even faster than solar: battery costs are dropping at 20% per year.
It's way, way to much & far too late for nuclear of any kind. And that's before we even consider the problems of waste management (no one knows yet where & how we'll safely store waste for tens of thousands of years) and decommissioning, which promises to cost billions of dollars annually per reactor. Decommissioning promises to be a boondoggle that'll bankrupt nuclear operators - in fact, has already bankrupt the first utilities to attempt it.
Blue Hydrogen is a fraud. It may technically be possible - kudos to the engineers that found a way - but it is useless without storage & distribution solved. And they'd have to be resolved then built & scaled nationwide within a year or two to matter. Move on.
I worked for a supplier to petrochem, including hydrogen. You are spot on.
So if renewables are so cheap, why are energy prices continuing to increase? And what really is your problem with hydrogen? Germany have recently announced that it will be a critical part of their energy requirements, and are investing accordingly.
@@robertfonovic3551is problem is it's rubbish he has given a good description of one of about 6 reasons it doesn't work as to why it gets announced by government a mix of ignorance of the subject and big money from the oil giants that will make a fortune from it.
Not only is 'Blue' Hydrogen a fraud, its manufacture is based on another fraud, that of CCS.
CCS relies on the CO2 being stored as a supercritical liquid, underground, for EVER.
And people are nervous about nuclear waste being stored for only 10.000 years.
If a nuclear waste facility is breached, maybe some radiation escapes - big deal!
If CO2 sequestration is breached (by a large earthquake) all the CO2 escapes; all that effort for nothing.
Thanks for your post about storage issues. I've been unaware that this is such a problem and puts a totally different perspective on what investors are actually risking. Ya gotta pay ta play.
Hydrogen "production" was never the problem, this is misdirection. The problem with using Hydrogen for energy is the energy required to compress it, distribute it and convert it back to electricity. It may be useful for on-site Hydrogen production for chemical plants, but for energy it doesn't matter if someone hands you free Hydrogen, its still too expensive to handle.
The one big problem with Hydrogen is its storage and transportation, it's light and it's prone to just leak! Any very very slight hole and it'll just disappear, plus it's very explosive. It is quite difficult to transport because it has to be stored at very hige pressure, meaning a very large and heavy container
Before getting too excited about blue hydrogen, we must realize that carbon capture is easy by principle but very hard to keep captured permanently. If it's being made into some permanent compound, lots of energy and material will be needed. If it's put under ground in gas form, it'll come out .
Yup, also, blue hydrogen still emits 1kg of CO2 per kg of H2 - way better than the 9 to 12 kg from grey, but definitely not zero - people sometimes think 'carbon capture' means 100%, it is not.
Not mentioned are the inconcnvenient facts that Hydrogen is never dense (there is far more hydrogen in a bucket of gas than in a bucket of liquid Hydrogen), takes more energy to compress than it contains, and embrittles many materials onto which it comes into contact. Meanwhile, solar, wind and batteries all continue to fall in price, making hydrogen far less economically attractive.
Almost every day there seems to be another game-changing new technology being announced. It gives us options to develop a future, although for the Japanese, Korea and others, they must have knowledge of, and extreme faith in, another process of hydrogen production that actually will be a gamechanger. Just a thought from watching weapon systems develop over the years.
Good job staying on the job Man. Our best to the Viking family! Hang in there guys, respect👊
I see a few comments from time to time about how possibly iffy tech is covered here. I agree, it’s a wild time right now for technology. Ya never know what’s gonna be kosher…
Like that crazy “Put 250+ humans including blue hairs and babies in a tube and squirt them through the sky 6 miles up at roughly 600mph.”
Seriously! What were those kooks smoking???
My car runs on LPG which is propane or butane obtained from natural gas. It's almost half the price of gasoline. It's less poluting because it doesn't emite the added particals. Many buses use it. Question, what's cheaper to produce, LPG or hydrogen, both coming from natural gas? What's less polluting? Another thing, why use green electricity to produce hydrogen when it can go straight into a vehicle's battery. Just my 2 cents worth.
This new technology, if it works as promoted, doesn't eliminate the fugitive emissions from the natural gas production. We've produced natural gas for a century or more and we still haven't solved the fugitive emission problem. I'm skeptical about this being a long-term solution.
You should do a thorough research of atmospheric CO2 and its relationship to our planet and do that in a way to avoid dsnfmtn. The latter is difficult but you can usually identify dsnfmtn by how high it is on an oogl search. The higher it is the more it is likely to be dsnfmtn. Do it!
There is another problem. Hydrogen is also a greenhouse gas several times more potent than CO². Furthermore, hydrogen leaks through virtually everything, including steel tanks.
Working as a formulation chemist by profession, I have watched hydrogen power proponents laud the praises of hydrogen powered vehicles over gas vehicles.
Here are fun facts.
Gasoline has 33.6 kilowatts of energy per gallon.
A 15 gallon tank holds 504 kilowatts of energy.
Compressed hydrogen has 30 grams [lower heat value] to 70 grams per liter, [ high heat value] with 56.8 liters of compressed hydrogen contained in a 15 gallon tank,for direct comparison, and would contain 1.7 kilograms [ LHV] to 4 kilograms [HHV] of hydrogen and would range from 240 mj to 567.8 mj energy content.
On average, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles can travel between 60 to 70 miles per kilogram of compressed hydrogen which equates to 102 to 280 miles from 15 gallon tanks.
This by comparison means:
15 gallons of gasoline = 375 miles
15 gallon tank of compressed hydrogen = 102 to 280 miles
Cost comparison = Hydrogen costs more and has considerably less energy.
The comparison of diesel fuel to hydrogen is even worse.
kilowatt-hours of energy, not kilowatts. You should know that...
@ledsalesoz A stich in time saves nine.
Big "f!@#$%^&ing deal"
Is that what you gleaned from the treatise?
So I'll take a grade of a B plus.
I would like you to write the next paper comparing Hydrogen to EV's.
A Rube Goldberg type contraption to solve a problem.
The problem with Hydrogen is it will always be an energy loss conversion better suited by dumping that energy directly into a battery.
Some really well-informed responses to this article.
Thai Airways. Flight TG 465 (359) to Melbourne.
Scheduled departure 19:40. Arrival 07:30 @ Melbourne Int. airport.
...this 'EV' goes every 24 hours.
Have a safe journey!
There only just starting on Hydrogen problems and efficiency. Good to see some ignoring, all the naysayers, and getting on with it. May not be the best for private transport, but could help a lot with other things
Hydrogen is just another con sold to you by big oil to try and keep their relevance into the future. It will never be as efficient, cheap or clean as battery storage systems in all transportation industries
Whenever I hear the term "hydrogen" I roll my eyes and move on.
I don't know whether or not it would work efficiently but it still uses natural gas that is a finite material on earth. At best, this could be a short-medium term solution for hydrogen production. We would still be left with the problems, costs and inefficiencies of compressing, transporting and storing that hydrogen. Its subsequent use in modified ICE engines or fuel cells linked to electric traction is yet another area where inefficiency is often cited among its shortcomings.
Fascinating report. Go 8 Rivers-I love what I’m hearing.
Color me skeptical. Great if it works and it's price competitive with dirty hydrogen. Assuming this is real there is a huge existing market for hydrogen, fertilizer for example. There is no reason to waste it on transportation, just use it to displace dirty hydrogen.
Exactly. If we increase demand for hydrogen with new applications, and only some of the demand is answered with low emissions hydrogen - then it is all high emissions hydrogen.
Hydrogen is currently used in industrial/chemical/medical applications and as most of it is made dirty it is on the list as one of the top sources of greenhouse emissions.
We must replace the current supply of dirty hydrogen with clean hydrogen BEFORE we consider any new applications of hydrogen.
@@5353Jumper From a business point of view it makes absolutely no sense to target markets that don't exist yet when you can target a massive market that already exists. The fertilizer market alone is $90B, if you have a drop in replacement for an existing feedstock all you have to do is be price equivalent. Aside from your manufacturing process nothing else has to be invented, it's all in place.
@@joshuarosen465 so sad that all the alternatives for methane-hydrogen are all so expensive. So there is little business case for change to existing supply without massive government interference.
How do you plan to cool the planet using hydrogen engines since water vapor is also a greenhouse gas, the main one?
Are you joking? Clouds reflect sunlight and cool the planet.
Ammonia is highly toxic and any spillage anywhere in the globe could be devastating. How could we consider increasing higher logistic moves of ammonia?
setup a solar powered thermal de-polymerization plant (changing world technologies)that uses solar heat to preheat the feedstock . they had one in carthage ,Missouri , and one Philadelphia plants in operation but were not solar powered.
Informatic video ... Appreciated
My pleasure
Leakage from carbon capture is as likely as methane leakage
H2 is REALLY hard to store & thus transport without large losses, even if you could generate it efficiently. Now if we get technology to bind H2 into something to enable transportation and deployment to end vehicles ... then we might be in the fringes of H2 cars/planes/home use.
Hi Guy, there is, you combine the hydrogen with nitrogen to make ammonia. Much easier to store and transport.
Carbon seems to fit the bill…
@@StevenHaskett except the part about atmospheric carbon killing us...that is kinda a big down side.
Any fuel gas an immediate disadvantage over electrified solutions due to the cost of physically transporting and storing the product. Electricity is just so much more efficient with very small losses in transmission and storage.
Nearly 30% of fuel is used just transporting fuel around the world.
When are you starting your new channel the The Blue Viking? - No one wants to fall into relying on one technology to power a Car/Truck/Ship/Airplanes - this is what got us were we are now, an alternative to electric and Fossil Fuels is a positive not a negative, don't let your Electric cynicism cloud the end goal.
Any traditional energy company will struggle to maintain high entrance ticket into the energy market and therefore any technology based on their existing resources with high technology requirements, will have their favor to save themselves and prevent renewable energy tech and companies to capture the market. Nature usually inclines towards the easiest path, the more natural path, let’s hope that prevails for the energy transition.
Best wishes to you Man
Doing good work
How the hell do they manage to account for the leaks and losses in the extraction and transport of methane? Will they produce it on site? The fact that they omit this problematic is very suspicious to me.
Excellent and highly informative video.
Glad you enjoyed it!
It is not capture, if you are the one emitting the CO2.
The question what they do with the CO2 was unanswered.
The only thing we can do with (actually captured)CO2 on large scale is make methane out of it. Therefore Blue Hydrogen can not really be a way forward.
Hydrogen atoms slowly destroy any tubing system or tanks you fill with it.
It will be interesting if hydrogen finds a place in transportation. It’s certainly needed for industrial processes. But it’s in a race with battery storage for clean transition. Seems to have lost the race on electric cars. Next up is trucking. Then shipping and rail. It’s an expensive wager. I’d bet on ever improving battery chemistry. Lithium Sulphur at 4x the best we have now would do it. Time will tell
amazing news! Innovation competition and discussion is good for us
Green hydrogen seems so much simpler.
Anywhere tropical by the sea can make hydrogen using solar.
Same problem as the tech in this video, it is a lot more expensive than methane-hydrogen so hard to make it compete for the buyers of hydrogen.
And also terribly inefficient. If we just take the electricity from the solar panels and plug that into the grid it may do a lot more good for overall emissions.
But we do need to replace existing dirty hydrogen production with clean hydrogen production so if the math works out then go for it.
Just need to do the math for each particular region and each particular application to see what the best use of those solar panels would be.
Yeah, but it's three times more efficient to cut out the middle man and just use that Solar energy in BEVs.
All the wind power in Europe is going to have to do something when the wind is blowing at night when the demand is low and there is thus an excess of local electricity. Use that electricity to produce hydrogen. Otherwise it basically gets wasted. Keep those windmills producing.
ya i drove to carthage Mo. an saw the plant myself
Sam
Depressing news for me, a BYD stock owner. Did you see the Serpentza video on BYD cars? He showed film of hundreds of BYD cars rotting in a field, actually several fields. Apparently the company is involved in some sort of flim flam where they qualify for subsidies but never deliver the cars to actual buyers. I’d heard of a similar scam with regard to shared bicycles but now it seems the car manufacturers are doing the same thing. I probably won’t sell my stock hoping there is still true sales happening, but I’m deeply worried.
It was not byd cars . It was ride sharing cars .
Serpentza is very negative about China, I saw that particular video, and many of those cars did not look new, as someone else mentioned they seem to be from a bankrupt carshare company.
That being said, there are definitely some things about BYD's sales and production numbers that are suspect.
The issue is not caused by the cars but by the "bubble culture" of Chinese investors & conmen.
He seems to think it's the fault of the cars, in the video .
I’m all for cleaning up our existing Hydrogen production. I’m not sure anything other than green is going to do it though. Blue sounds great, but look at the oil refinery business. That business found or created a market to buy every drop of oil from the barrel. Propane grills, asphalt roads, plastics, etc… same will happen with Blue hydrogen. Why pay to safely put all that CO2 back into the ground when you can sell it as dry ice which is commonly used to clean mold off surfaces, or maybe as a way to euthanize live stock. That CO2 is going to find a way into our atmosphere.
Amazing
Oddly enough, CO2 is a useful product (refrigeration, for carbonbated drinks and for improving yields in greehouses, for example). Pulling it out of the atmosphere is difficult because there is such a miniscule amount. If they can capture it to onsell, it will be useful.
It’s expensive to capture and has low reactivity. We need to repurpose millions of tonnes per year not make more people burp. CO2 in soda doesn’t react it just goes back in to the air
Informative video
Thanks
Please Google search this phrase.
" For hydrogen to be a climate solution, leaks must be tackled"
This was a truly informative segment. Even with using low cost renewable enery the process cost is still high because you have find some way to store the CO2. Now I understand why Elon disproves of Hydrogen as a fuel source.
It would seem that the road to an affordable H2 fuel is still long.
Elon dislikes hydrogen because his company sells EV'S. Simple.
For me life is not about recovoring, its about learning. when i have learned abaout a problem the problem is gone.
what about hydroxyl and metane reduction
Combining solar with water electrolysis makes SOOO much more sense. They way things operate blows my mind.
Once EVs go to scale, you have all the storage you need, network controlled charging, say I need 70% for tomorrow, but I'm happy to go to 90% if there is cheap wind tonight I can use, that's 15kWh of on demand storage available to a grid operator with nothing more than a software upgrade to my existing internet connected car. Now multiply that by 10 million plugged in cars at any given moment, and you have 150 GWh of storage on tap, at 80% efficiency for zero additional cost - no salt caverns needed.
Good video
What a lovely Welsh name Sam Evans is.👍😊
Water resonance (like video truck runs on water)?
Rainbow hydrogen. Who would have guessed so many colours. What next! Doesn’t sound expensive, just complicated. Any system that captures CO2 below ground is worrying though.
Nice
Renewables+storage are already cheaper than NG electricity since 2021, and still getting cheaper. Every blue or grey hydrogen technology will be more expensive than simple NG electricity. Therefore, blue or grey hydrogen will be viable only if governments are willing to subside them. Unfortunately, this is exactly what they are doing for decades with fossil fuels...😮
I couldn't really follow: what happens to the carbon dioxide? Is any produced? Is it captured? I'm skeptical. It seems much wiser to leave carbon sources in the ground. If hydrogen is needed in some sectors, green hydrogen seems to be the way to go. We have lots of desert and lots of sunlight so we can just build solar arrays to generate hydrogen from seawater.
Not only is 'Blue' Hydrogen a fraud, its manufacture is based on another fraud, that of CCS.
CCS relies on the CO2 being stored as a supercritical liquid, underground, for EVER.
And people are nervous about nuclear waste being stored for only 10.000 years.
If a nuclear waste facility is breached, maybe some radiation escapes - big deal!
If CO2 sequestration is breached (by a large earthquake) all the CO2 escapes; all that effort for nothing.
silence on what happens to the CO2, always the pitfall if it has to be transported and pumped underground somewhere - all energy consuming.
@@peteglass3496 Your question gets to the crux of the problem: It requires storage. Carbon Capture and Storage or CCS has been touted for over 20 years, and this blue hydrogen process only addresses the capture. The storage proposed (underground in old oilfields) is very risky in the long-term (see an earlier reply by myself)
The real problem as you say is getting the CO2 to where it is to be stored; it would take additional pipelines and billions of dollars, and Big Oil and others keep talking about it hoping that we, or governments, will pick up the bill. They don't want to reduce their profits by paying for pipelines!
@@davidinkster1296 supposedly could be fixed in basaltic rock but would you have to frack it first?
@@peteglass3496 Basaltic rock would not be a good choice because it has neither the porosity or the permeability. Fracking would indeed improve effective permeability, but the basalt (normally) does not have the porosity needed to contain large volumes of the CO2 liquid.
That is why depleted oilfields are probably the best option. The wells already exist, the rock is porous (The porosity is where the oil/gas was stored) and the permeability is adequate. Furthermore the sedimentary basins, where most oil & gas is found, are relatively stable geologically. The problem I have is with the 'relatively stable'. We really need totally stable, and on a planet that still has tectonic activity that is not possible. The reason that volcanoes spew millions of tons of CO2 is the limestone rock that accumulates near or in subduction zones and is decomposed into CO2 and CaO by heat. Any sequestered CO2 will similarly be expelled when that part of the crust approaches a subduction zone.
You could argue that any hydrocarbons in the crust will also be expelled as the crust nears subduction, but the problem of sequestration of CO2 is that release could happen at any time a humongous earthquake hits. For instance, Los Angeles was the site of a productive oilfield in the 1950s; That's one old oilfield I would not like to use for storing CO2, because when (not if) the big earthquake hits, all bets are off.
On the other hand it would be a good idea to look at the Hazer process.
That not only captures all of the H 02 from methane when using a limited amount of renewables to provide process heat BUT produces high quality graphite for battery use.
Also can create carbon credits when using sewage gas.
Up to 7 times the efficiency of H2 from electrolysis
No brainer
Get on to it Sam . It is even Australian!
Exactly. It surprises me how little attention the Hazer process is getting, especially on channels like this.
They are testing that process up in Canada. The issue with hydrogen is it doesnt play nice with steel piping but is fine with plastic. With natural gas the big distribution is steel piping but then once it gets to the distribution closer to where its used they use plastic piping. Their plan is to do the Hazer process at the point where the natural gas pipelines go from metal to plastic.
As a side note there are also fuel cells that can run off natural gas. CO2 is produced in the process but its pure CO2 which means it can be used. Lots of industries need CO2 so using fuel cells with natural gas at those businesses would make sense. They get power, heat and CO2. ADIDAS is using a product made from the emissions captured at a natural gas power plant to make shoes now as well.
Nice❤
0:39 It's not called "green hydrogen" if it's not made with sustainable inputs
CO2 Storage is the elephant in the room. How effective is it to pump it underground? How much will it cost to do so? Will it cost more over time as the storage fills? Will the gas stay there? If not, who monitors the leaks. Out of sight, out of mind? Just rambling thoughts…
This is best news for fossil fuel executives!
Where does the oxygen come from? How is that produced?
We don’t create Hydrogen, we have to extract it . If we could make it then we wouldn’t have a problem. I know it’s very prevalent in compounds but I can’t see me or my family making it at home. On the other hand a few Solar cells and some Electrical Storage system and I can have free or cheap Electricity to use for many things around my home … nice of you to mention that Ch3 Methane is actually a bigger problem than plant food gas CO2 . Although H2O is actually the biggest driver of planetary climate changes. Messing around with our atmosphere causes more imbalance than any 1 percent of a gas in our atmosphere. That postulation was ridiculous and wasn’t called out when it should have been. CO2 acquisition by plants is the best way to deal with that gas. More Nuclear Power Plants would make Blue Hydrogen by basic water hydrolysis a viable method … stop the Nuclear scaring and build Molten Salt reactors …
the difference between gas versus coal was highlighted recently in TEXAS WITH THE RELIANCE IN COLD WEATHER showing up the problems with renewables no electricity to pump gas no gas fired power station , coal des not require electricity only A SMALL AMOUNT OF DIESEL . ALTERNATIVE ENERGY IS A FAIR WETHER FREIND AND USELESS IN TO HOT WET COLD OR WINDY CONDITINS ???
Elon Musk has described Hydrogen as _"a pernicious molecule..."_ it's difficult to store, as it seeps through most materials eventually. It's colorless, odorless, and burns with an invisible flame. What could go wrong? LOL!
As European Union is not permitting the use of how this energy is used, I wonder what even is the sense of anyone developing for it. For trucks, planes and heavy industries a synthetic fuel that will be cheap is being developed.
The next revision for this policy in the EU is in 2045.
Three times the energy of blue hydrogen is in methane gas. So gas producers love blue H2 as they seek 3x more for same energy. Better to just burn methane gas.
8 Rivers zero CO2 emission natural gas plant is a real thing. A 25MWe pilot plant has been running in Texas since 2018. The plant produces a nearly 100 percent CO2 emission stream that is easy to pipe to another location for sequestering at what 8 rivers claim is a piece equal or lower than a conventional combined cycle natural gas plant. The first commercial scale 250MWe plants are scheduled to come online in 2026 in the U.S. and Britain, so we should know very shortly if the technology lives up to the hype.
Lol, want to buy some swampland?
Not only is 'Blue' Hydrogen a fraud, its manufacture is based on another fraud, that of CCS.
CCS relies on the CO2 being stored as a supercritical liquid, underground, for EVER.
And people are nervous about nuclear waste being stored for only 10.000 years.
If a nuclear waste facility is breached, maybe some radiation escapes - big deal!
If CO2 sequestration is breached (by a large earthquake) all the CO2 escapes; all that effort for nothing.
Sam, the Texas plant *failed*. Maybe mention that? Best wishes to you and your family.
Yes! Thank you!
Sounds fantastic apart from the fact natural gas is still needed it's still used. Co2 imishions in the extraction of natural gas. They have not solved H2 storage H2 corrodes metals, and if released, it bonds with gsses in the atmosphere and creating chemicals we don't want that. The combustion engine is also not a good place to burn H2 it's inefficient, and leaky this move will prove to be bad for the environment. When raw H2 is released to the atmosphere reactiing with gases and sunlight it could bond with other gases if enough is ever released it would be disastrous. If the H2 coroded the engine metal and your driving along and it leaks it could egnite and you would not know you may end up with a invisible H2 flame burning out a part of your engine it may even unwell a engine mount and that would be fun. I have seen a video of a Hidrogen car explode that's not for me I'll stick to my EV at least I'll get time to get out of the EV.
Using 100 % renewables while a noble goal needs to occur slower than the optimists understand. Just the increase in copper demand alone limits the growth. If this blue hydrogen can fill the gap fine. I think smr nuclearvwould be better but it's growth also to slow.
What do you think of Red Hydrogen? Japanes make it in their Helium cooled Nuclear Power Plants. Could that be a Solution?
0:14 Why "therefore"?
Wao beautiful ❤
Safe travels 👍🙏🇺🇸
He's not going to Mars mate.
@@robertfonovic3551 Just a frozen mountaintop.🤔🤣
As long as leaked methane and leaked hydrogen don't overcome the benefits.
We will use fossil fuels for at least a few decades. For that time these technologies are more than welcome. If it works good enough we might consider to use it a bit longer, side by side with renewables. I hope it works as advertised.
The Mirai fuel cell car must have parts that go brittle from H ? Yes... and all fuel cell vehicles the same? If not, maybe H not so hard to use. If demand for gas and oil decline because it’s outlawed, then it could be cheaper than now. Far cheaper. But it depends on legislation. We need to reduce global population with laws that require parents to pay for and raise their children thus solving the pollution issues ❤😊
❤
You still have the energy loss.
And, if you have companies drilling profitably. They are going to forget the co2 storing, that's not profitable.
To use hydrogen in chemical prosesses, you don't need that mutch.
So, produce it from electrictrisity is the best.
And, for transport, it's already solved.
What's left is ships and planes.
When the batteries are cheap enough the ship can use them as balasts, too.
And, on cruise ships some amont of battery and electric propulsion should be mandetory.
There was a big potensiale cruise accident in Norway, because to mucth waves stopped the oil to the engines. If this ship had been a hybrid this would not happend.
You forgot to mention the harmful effects of hydrogen leakage into the atmosphere and how it reacts to create more greenhouse gasses.
If it sounds too good to be true..... are they just looking for "investor" finance? 80% easily captured, the remaining 40%...?? and surely SK innovations produced the cells responsible for the latest Kia battery recall?
Morning mate
Tat is the best cancer treatment ,not available yet
Hydrogen could be a viable energy if not burned in engines, engines produce nitrogen oxides (smog) when it burns fuel. Fuel cells could convert hydrogen and oxygen to produce electricity but are expensive and have short operating life. If fuel cells can be made cheaply with a long service life then ok. The only other obstacle is storage and transport. Hydrogen stored under pressure requires energy to compress the gas and strong tanks to hold it. A method to reduce the storage problem is to convert the hydrogen to a hydrate like that proposed by Plasma Kinetics. Hydrogen then can be stored at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. Or hydrogen could be incorporated into silicon particles using ball milling in a hydrogen pressurized tank. These methods of storing hydrogen would make hydrogen more viable for use but a whole new infrastructure will have to be put in place. In the meantime batteries are dropping in price, are safer, increasing in energy density with short recharge time, and are increasingly available. Hydrogen can play a role but it's unclear what.
You can only produce NOx if you burn air, as air is 3/4 nitrogen. Also produced when combustion temps are too high.
I would not trust carbon capture and storage until it's been vigorously assessed by multiple neutral government scientific agencies. Especially not when an American company is making the claim.
If it involves sequestration then I seriously doubt it's actually cheap.
The smallest leak all your savings for a year is gone.
Might be a good way to power jets and ships
it’s too hard to store and liquefying it alone throws away 30% of its energy.
A Hydrogen explosion from a plane crash would be devastating.
Say what you like about Twiggy but at least his hydrogen is green.
Clear Blue Hydrogen? Go ahead and replace the steam reforming plants 1st for fertilizer and steel production.
Compare apple to apple. To compare hydrogen to EV u must start with the process of mining lithium etc and the energy source for charging them. We forget Evs only transfer energy. No energy in ev batteries.
…Or you could just use renewable energy to hydrolyse water. Why are we trying so hard to rescue the fossil fuel industry and save those invested in it from their own poor investment decision?
Burning hydrogen in oxygen produces water. Wouldn't burn hydrogen in air produce smog gases NOx
Gotta love CZcams’s warning propaganda.
Yep
I don't see it. Whereabouts is the warning?
Propaganda warning? I've never heard of this
I didn’t get that
maybe we could. you have one the the whownist chanels
how can whe commicate verbaly
Who are they going to sell all this extremely expensive hydrogen to ? 😂