What Is Green Hydrogen And Will It Power The Future?
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 12. 2020
- Hydrogen is a clean-burning molecule, meaning that it can help to decarbonize a range of sectors that have proved hard to clean up in the past. But today, most hydrogen is produced from CO2-emitting fossil fuels. Hydrogen produced from renewable electricity, known as green hydrogen, could be the solution to cutting our carbon footprint. But first, it must overcome a number of challenges.
» Subscribe to CNBC: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBC
» Subscribe to CNBC TV: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCtelevision
» Subscribe to CNBC Classic: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCclassic
About CNBC: From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Connect with CNBC News Online
Get the latest news: www.cnbc.com/
Follow CNBC on LinkedIn: cnb.cx/LinkedInCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Facebook: cnb.cx/LikeCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Twitter: cnb.cx/FollowCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Instagram: cnb.cx/InstagramCNBC
Subscribe to CNBC PRO: cnb.cx/2NLi9AN
#CNBC
How Green Hydrogen Could Be Key To A Carbon-Free Future
Do you think green hydrogen is the solution to a carbon-free future? Comment your thoughts below.
I believe green hydrogen can be part of the solution, but FCEVs will only take a tiny share of the market when compared to BEVs. For many fleet buyers BEVs now offer sufficient range, 200 to 300 miles for cars and vans, and 500 miles for Semis that operate from a central depot.
But hydrogen could be best option for for long haul trucks, marine transport, non electrified rail network, and aviation. But I think Daimler's decision to end development of fuel cell cars was a correct decision. I just can't see FCEVs, even with the advantages they offer, being needed by most car drivers.
I think BEVs have passed a tipping point, and will massively dominate future car and van sales.
With solar and wind energy coming down in price dramatically, green hydrogen will become so cheap in the future, that the lower overall efficiency compared with BEVs won't matter. People don't care if they use $5 or $0.5 to refuel a $30K car. It is such tiny cost compared with depreciation, insurance, maintenance, repair, parking, license etc.
And for some applications batteries simply are way too heavy: Long range aviation, shipping, yachts and boats.
An example: A fuel cell drone compared with a battery drone has roughly 3-4x the flight vs batteries.
@@videosforcatsanddogs214
Some people may not care about the cost of fuel for their vehicles, but everyone cares about how easy it is to fuel their vehicles. Most BEV charging is done at home or at work. And this will be supplemented by on street charging in the future.
I just can't see people who have switched from ICEVs to BEVs wanting to go back to having to find a fueling station for FCEVs for their everyday driving.
Hydrogen will never be green if it comes from fossil fuels. Think deeply and you will realize Elon Musk is right.
I would like to see it it's going to take time and market will dictate
As a scientist working on hydrogen energy, I say it will! We are making it happen!
that is great to hear from an insider ! I feel the same after my Interview with Mr Marsh czcams.com/video/mymph6VISm8/video.html
Government grant? (theft of taxpayer's life and labors)
Waste of time imo. We should spend the money on battery technology instead
Hydrogen is not a fuel, its an inefficient and extremely dangerous man-made energy storage 'solution.' Commercially it is produced either by reforming methane (another 'fossil' fuel) with high pressure stream or extracting it from water by 'burning' (making more CO2) in coking plants as a byproduct of the steel industry. Coke is produced from coal 'heated' (more CO2) to extremely high temperatures' in the absence of oxygen.
Both of these processes involve the production of high quantities of CO2. Because the general population is both lazy and ignorant, politicians exploit fact this by telling them that only collectivism (socialism) will yield this magic 'fuel.' It will not happen, but the politicians will extract their 'fuel' by from 'alternate energy' from the pockets of taxpayers by the gigabucks. The universal axiom that applies here is that if the government (politicians) are involved in it, it either wont work or can never compete with a free economy solution in providing mechanical power.
Batteries likewise 'fuel' nothing anymore than tightly wound springs 'fuel' wind-up toys.
The extremely low percentage of molecules participating in the chemical reactions within batteries as they give back a portion of the energy used to 'fuel' them will always make them a poor cousin of liquid fuels. Likewise the high scale production of exotic batteries offering slightly greater 'spring power' produce some of the worst (real) pollution on the planet.
So what is going on here with all this nonsense?
It turns out (coincidentally?) that virtually all of these alternative fuels are produced by the political fuel of collectivism (socialism.) The tell in this game is that all involved in it are likewise 'fueled' by government. Government in this sense is the converting of taxpayer's labors forced to participate in these scams in producing only monumental waste and political corruption.
The waste byproducts of socialism are declining quality of life for all those except those at the top of the pyramid it of power it produces. At the bottom of the socialist pyramid lies slavery, poverty, starvation, and early death.
CO2 is the only byproduct of these energy 'solutions' that is not dangerous; is completely natural; is required in order to sustain all life on Earth; and has no proven deleterious side effects on anything.
Anyone actually surprised to see Nikola truck in here lol
Nikola has left the chat
This video must have been in production for a long time... :-)
yeah, Nicola is a scam
Nikola Motors @ powered by gravity.
@@zapfanzapfan the dead koch bros was in charge of script production
did they really just use a Nikola truck video as an example?....who are the editors
well, the read ars technica less than you and I.
It is a very time intensive job.
Yup why Nikola truck, which a scam start up.
Product placing is a suble advertising in movies, music etc
You don't think Nikola has the fuel cell technology available to make their truck? They made some dummy trucks for advertisement and show. It does not mean that the technology doesn't exist or is readily available to purchase for such a large company.
@@videosforcatsanddogs214 no.
I have driven a Mirai for nearly 3-years (my lease and torture are nearly over). Of the 3 stations nearest to me since Oct 2018, 2 have CLOSED permanently. When there is fuel at available at the one remaining station, there is an hour+ long line to get fuel. The 5 min to fill up is not candid as it assumes ideal conditions with the station compressor and the ambient temperature outside (the station completely closes for ambient temperatures over 95F). The advertised range was near 300 miles, the reality is 210-220. Living in my area, I reserve 20%+ of the range to be able to find fuel making my effective range of practical use closer to 170 miles per fill-up. I have to drive at least 20 miles each way to get fuel and wait in a line for over an hour.... I am changing to a plug-in hybrid for my next vehicle.
Sir, you have depicted the problem as it is now, was 20 years ago, and will be in 20 years time...personal experience is the best educator.
Even Hydrogen is getting a reboot. Feels like the 2000's again
Lest we forget Stanley Meyer & his fuel cell
Fools errand. We need 40% more electricity to support a hydrogen economy than we would with an renewable + battery Storage economy. Just due to the inefficiency of conversion. Investing in a hydrogen infrastructure would cost trillions. Charge points are a couple hundred bucks. And electricity is already everywhere.
@@davefroman4700 but we still need hydrogen for steel and ammonium production etc. not just as an energy source.
In the video they say now we have a lot more renewable energy than before..so they need a way to store these energy long term . And hydrogen is the best option for that. .good part of hydrogen cars are we have honda and toyota perfecting that side of technology slowly.
@@robertshegil The best way to store energy is pumped hydro. Hydrogen has conversion losses, and it has to compete with other energy storage methods from molten salt to compressed air and batteries.
Top Gear in 2008 - Lack of fueling station infrastructure
2020 - Lack of fueling station infrastructure
It’s very expensive and because there isn’t consistent demand and supply, there aren’t a lot of need for fuel stations
@@ShidaiTaino yes but now oil companies are getting desperate so thats the next gas they can have the next monopoly with yes you can make it at home for now but a nice law will be passed 😊.. they can't have a monopoly with electricity with wind and solar very accessible and other ways
@@lesstevens2370 I think their next monopoly will be on batteries. You can control the rare minerals it takes to build batteries and that's exactly what they're currently doing. I believe this is the hardest block for Hydrogen, hydrogen cars require WAYYYY less batteries than BEVs.
@@hamsterbrigade thats why tesla is going to do there own mineing now for there 4680 to lower costs
@@hamsterbrigade "control the rare minerals it takes to build batteries" LOGIC FAIL!
The chemistry of CELLs is constantly changing and is NOT FIXED. The only way to control rare mineraly would to make CELL CHEMISTY fixed permanent.
TLDR The RECIPE Keeps Changing.
This is kinda exciting, we are literally alive to see a changeover from fossil fuel (which has been around for over 300 years) to a new renewable source of energy.
Electric battery for 2-wheelers and small cars, fuel cells for large cars and trucks. The future is green!
Pretty much all road vehicles will be battery electric.
At this moment I don't see fuel cells playing a part in road transportation, shipping and planes? Yeah, possibly.
@Archangel17 well it does have faster refuel and longer ranges, so it might coexist with bev if it becomes available
@@SirDella Well high end EVs are already capable of an equal range and fast charging is often only a matter of half an hour. Hydrogen will always remain much more expensive but the differences between BEV and HFCV are getting smaller and smaller.
@@Simon-dm8zv But batteries suffer the faster you charge them, reducing their limited lifespan, I hope the new tabless batteries fix this
1:50 the statement the hydrogen production results in 843 metric tons of CO2 is wrong. It is million metric tons.
Only a small error margin 😂
@@richardlphillips This is a classic example of what happens when technical subjects are reported on by journalists who never studies engineering, science, or other technology. They might know how to write and how to draw attention to the story, but they get facts wrong and don't really understand what they are reporting on.
Carbon capture . Look at Exxon mobile and their contract with Fcel (fuel cell energy inc)
@@tjcanno Agreed
@@kobel1564 Yes I agree. Blue hydrogen will take off long before green hydrogen
Thank you for an informative and objective presentation on this important subject.
Every 10 years hydrogen is the next best thing
Hydrogen is the second most abundant gas in the universe. yes humans are going to try and find a way to extract energy from the second most abundant gas in the universe
@@capnsteele3365 You do not actually extract energy from hydrogen; hate to break it to you. Yes, it is an abundant element on earth (no point in bringing up the universe -- we don't live there), but it is usually found combined with other elements when you find it. You do not find naturally occurring H2 gas on earth (it's too reactive).
Water is a good example of where we find hydrogen on earth, combined with oxygen. You have to put a LOT of energy into the system to split that water up into hydrogen and oxygen atoms, which then combine to form H2 and O2 gas. You put lots of energy in to get the H2. So the H2 formed is more like a storage medium, kind of like a chemical battery. Then later you use that hydrogen H2 gas as a fuel to get some of the energy back that you used to form the H2 earlier. Like a battery.
@@tjcanno earth is in the universe
@@capnsteele3365
But excluding geothermal, our only natural source of easily accessed energy is our Sun, gravity, and the Earth's rotation.
@@capnsteele3365 Amazing discovery. Did you discover that we are in deep gravity well? Obtaining hydrogen from off-Earth is a pipe dream for the next 100 years.
Carbon Dioxide emissions from hydrogen production should be million metric tons not metric tons. 843 metric tons would be a laughably small amount
Double checked on the IEA website. It is in fact 830 MILLION metric tons.
Green hydrogen sounds like Job Generating as there is an entire infrastructure require to build or renew
It sounds a lot more like energy wasted; in human ressources as well as in renewable power generated.
Clean coal.
@MARK You are wrong. Why waste so much energy, labor and time on trying to use energy to convert water into hydrogen, only to then use the hydrogen gas to power something else. You're creating an entire unnecessary step where loads of resources are wasted for no reason whatsoever.
@Juan Arroyo That actually makes sense. Didn't think of that at first
Waste of energy and money
Clean hydrogen will be the future fuel of cargo ships, cruise ships, and passenger planes
buses, trains and semi trucks as well
No such thing as clean anything.
Success is about focusing Your energy on what creates results and using what you already know
That feelings of being able to spend as much money on pointless stuff is the ultimate goal in life
Investing is good but it's up to you to get pass those fears and trust yourself to invest in a life changing mastermind.
Investing in bitcoin is another way of ensuring steady cash flow, I have been earning every week for a year now.
Crypto is a digital currency and the Most profitable investment of the new century
It is better to put the price of discipline than to pay the price of regret tomorrow and make the right decision to join the winning team today
A very nice overview of the hydrogen sector except you probably should have tied the reason we need 4 times more electricity generation 13:50 to the fact that Hydrogen is so bad at storage from an efficiency standpoint. You only get 30%, best case, of the electricity out of hydrogen that you put into making it and throw away 70%. It's like the world's worst battery taking green energy from wind and solar and just throwing away 70% of the energy. Even pumping water up a hill (pumped hydro storage) has an 80% efficiency rate and only losing 20% of the energy. As a fuel for vehicles, it will always be at least 4 times more expensive per mile than using batteries. At the moment it's 30¢/mile for a hydrogen FCEV and a BEV is 3¢/mile. Even if battery technology stopped making progress to let H2 catch up, does 4 times the cost justify a 5 minute vs 30 minute fill time? To some it may, to an autonomous vehicle, I'm sure it doesn't care.
Good that CNBC kept it 100 and detailed the massive efficiency losses of hydrogen storage compared to battery storage
Ok, so the professor bloke has his own hydrogen company on the go. Explains his highly optimistic views on hydrogen and minimising of battery techs current state of play and high future potential.
Hydrogen has its place but I’m thinking ships and aircraft as well as domestic and commercial gas requirements, but not so much with land vehicles.
The problem with hydrogen is that it's efficiency over the whole cycle is very low (about 30%), while batteries can easily reach 80%. And Nikola seems to be a fraud...
No need to be shy now, Nikola is obviously a fraud.
Nikola is a fraud but low efficiency has not bothered ICEs until we forced the fossil fuel industry to admit they lied about climate change. Good batteries are all kinds of useful, but they remain heavier and more expensive than any form of hydrogen storage. Renewables frequently overproduce super cheap electricity so making hydrogen cheaply is not a problem. The only issue that remains is making a good enough cheap fuel cell that can be mass produced as easily as engines or batteries.
If you could have the exact same car as either BEV or HFCV, the hydrogen car would have higher performance and range than the BEV and quick refuel for the cost of having to occasionally visit a gas station. OTOH, you can charge the batteries really cheap, especially if your home has solar panels. Unfortunately for BEVs I foresee people would prefer to have the more powerful car rather than saving a little money considering they probably are pretty well off to be able to afford either of these options. Also, setting up an electrolyzer if you have a renewable power source isn't that hard, so refueling H2 at home might become an option too.
@@AnalystPrime There were no real competing technologies during the ICE age :D That's quite different currently. I would not bet on a technology with a 30% cycle efficiency. Battery technology is progressing very fast, there are lots of promising technologies for higher battery capacity and faster charging. I bet on these technologies
@@rondlh20 I bet on people being people. The first cars over a century ago were electric but ICE offered more power and could be refueled faster than the batteries charge, same can apply to fuel cells. And because the fuel cell itself is the only expensive part of the system a HFCV can have more range and power than a BEV for cheaper price.
@@AnalystPrime Why would I want to add a lot of complexity to my car by adding H2 to BEV? A H2-transfer and containment system, a fuel cell, and associated electronics will not be maintenance-free. So more complexity, risk, and cost does not sound like a good tradeoff. H2 would may add range to my car, but BEVs already have sufficient range, since fast-chargers exist, and charging time occurs during rest periods on long trips, so no time lost. As for H2 at home ... I suspect your local fire department may nix that idea.
I wonder who paid for this video? Zero was said about the safety risks of hydrogen as a fuel source. Not even a nod to safety as a concern to resolve...
To be fair, this may be a rather over-hyped issue as far as FCVs go (and *please* don't mention the Hindenburg!). Of course, that *may* change *very quickly* if one was involved in a serious collision which compromised the H2 tank (only a question of time?)!
Friendly reminder they are going to be using safety and fuel enhancement devices like the hydrogen sponge which prevents spontaneous combustion even in accident circumstances. It's an ongoing process on how to make a hydrogen vehicle including their safety devices.
@@MyWatchIsEnded Safety is a very long way down my list of deal-breaking issues with using H2 in a fuel-cell vehicle as a way to end our reliance on fossil fuels to power transportation. I'm not saying safety isn't important; of course it is. But there are *massive* technical, practicality and cost problems with the whole idea which would have to be overcome long before we need worry about things going 'pop' when they shouldn't.
@@martinwinlow fair enough good point
But with hydrogen, you have to compress it, transport it, build the infrastructure (which is way more expensive vs building a charging station). I think improving battery tech is the better solution.
nah
@@Dommy521 lol.. care to elaborate?
Battery has to become exponentially lighter to be used in heavy transport vehicles including planes
@@udipta21 agreed. I think aviation is going to be hybrid (electric and gasoline), until batteries get on the same level of power density of gasoline.
This vid talks directly about water & electricity making H2, as if that requires as much transportation or any from multiple on site locations (like right within an apartment complex, while energy storing).
I developed the basic concept in a youtube comment section about 10 years ago when someone needed a way to get cheaper energy. It's those kinds of questions from people that get people thinking of new ideas. There are academic papers from that time when I look now. I didn't even realize how important or if it was actually possible.
Within 200 years we will be mining the hydrogen from the giant planets of the solar system, and achieving near light speed travel minimum. But there are even more important long term survival ideas like gravitational wave drives (compressing space-time), or the ultimate: quantum travel. The last is the most important as it opens up the quantum realm of infinite probabilities where we can then escape Time.
Man just imagine if we had a source of energy that already goes into all of our homes and workplace already that we could power our vehicles with instead of making a new infrastructure...
The current infrastructure cant handle the new demands
You don't need to go to fueling/charging stations at all, if you charge at home at night...
With Hydrogen ?. It is stored at extreme pressure (Liquid Hydrogen)
You need fuelling stations for freedom to travel anywhere
@@24framedavinci13 with up to 900Km 560mi range, it's not a problem anymore
@@24framedavinci13 WHERE Else are you going to drive, INTO THE OCEAN???
The 2,800mile CANON BALL RUN record by a Tesla Model 3 is 46 hr 16 minutes.
Faster than that is Illegal Street Racing.
They are already blending green hydrogen (10%)with natural gas and supplying homes in a trial in south australia
my company is developing an Arc Reactor, a big one that could fly an Airbus Beluga
Good. We could elimate fuel gulping planes and get more passengers with more profit.
Is anyone in your company happened to be named Stark?
@@hreaper r/enoughmuskspam
What type of tech and else what company if you don’t want to answer I’m ok with that I just know a lot about tech
Are you guys hiring ?
These shorts have been amazing lately! Keep up the excellent work :)
Hi
😉
thank you fellow human thats why i dont,sleep my wheels alway turning iam tryin to solve ournworld energy problem iam novquiter i think iam on to it so was nicalas tesla
sorry my fellow gear head,gasoline is over you will care a1galon milk jug tell your buddy that ridin with you ok ralf where out of hydrogen grab the jug walk to the ditch get a jug of waterhydrgeen to get to gorgia in morning if we can design a converter for a car just pour the water in tank can you imagine a blown hydrogen rod one day i can dream ill go down in history forsure totaly
heres my analize agy how to build a salt dome now pay atention dig a hole as big as you need the dome put salt in the bottum put water in itwhile the water fills the hole put salt on the sides stop fillin with water once you reach capasity desire for dome top of water salt floats stick pump inside dome, remove water tus leevin salt dome i need to set up a a feild experiment to test my theoy i feel that a solution or make in the ocean option#2option 1 cost more
Rhode Island has actually had a refueling station since 2017. It's in a supermarket parking lot, accessible from interstate 95.
They are starting Hydrogen businesses every five years in Norway, and every time it goes the way of the Dodo...
Hydrogen can be a way to fuel ships and big trucks, but for everything else batteries are so much more efficient.
Carrying a suppressed H2 bottle in a car might be too dangerous, imagine a serious car accident...
Gasoline has been carried around in cars for decades. Carrying hydrogen would be similar.
@@avinash2503 Gasoline is liquid in normal pressure, but leaked H2 is explosive gas, which can be ignited by any spark in a car accident
@@ShuzhanSun Agreed. But technology will improve to make storage safer. Let's see.
@@avinash2503 hydrogen is a lot more volatile than gasoline requiring one tenth of energy to ignite gasoline . So it's not only volatile but also explosive . We all want a green future but you certainly won't want to be in a crash especially with a substance of instantaneous explosive reaction .
As a chemical engineer I’m telling you that there will be a lot of new technologies around this idea. We literally never had the incentive to do so as we don’t use it in most consumer products that much..
"The goal is to get hydrogen for vehicles to be down around the cost of todays liquid fuels"... Meanwhile the goal of electric cars is to be less expensive than cars today. I wonder which one will succeed?!?!
Look where the parts for thise electric cars come from. The holes they dig to get the lithium is horrible! Gas is not going away!!!
@@suesanders3000 Yes, lithium extraction and all metals in general is not great for that local area. However, burning gas affects the whole world through climate change. Unless we plan to stop driving and start biking, we will need transport. We will need to extract lithium. There are safer ways of extracting lithium that companies are working on but that will take some time.
Batteries weigh too much. Not a problem for a car but a huge problem from trucks, planes and ships.
@@RaghunandanReddyC Battery energy density has been increasing rapidly, and Tesla's new batteries are a huge step in improvement. It will be more than enough to make electric semi trucks a better option for most trucking routes. There will be a few where long hauls are needed where it makes sense to use hydrogen or gas for now, but eventually battery density will be good enough for most of those routes as well. Planes and ships will not go electric for a while, and for now that's the best we can do.
@@suesanders3000 There are pictures of copper mines doing the rounds claiming to be Lithium mines, it isn't true. Lithium mining involves the use of land, but it is often desert and undesireable land, its not like they are felling forest for it. Ultimately digging up a material once and using it forever is far better than digging up a material and using it once for its energy value. We will eventually have enough Lithium for our needs in the hands of owners and stockists, we will simply recycle what we need and mining will stop. Please do not believe oil industry propaganda about Lithium mining, all mining has some risk, but it doesn't harm the environment the way fossil fuels do. If you are against mining, by all means call for better environmental protection laws around the world, but without it we won't have transport, health care, houses, military, communciations etc.
The main reason that companies like Shell are researching hydrogen to show politicians that they aren't evil. It was a scam in 2000 and it's still working. I started in the fuel cell business in 2001 and was really excited. As time went on (and $100,000 later) I began to realize that the entire fuel cell industry was designed to keep politicians employed and College professors in jobs studying the thing.
Hydrogen as electricity storage is best compared to batteries. Battery use/production causes environmental damage almost same when using/producing fossil fuel.
7:40 knowing the clusterfuck that happened with Nikola, I doubt they'll be making much of anything unless GM can fix that sinking ship of a company
It got even worse!
I think GM backed a different horse instead
man this video game has a mind bogglingly long tutorial
Although hydrogen certainly has its place, it won't play as big a part as many people seem to think for one simple reason. As a storage technology, there are losses involved ie when you convert electricity to hydrogen and then use the resulting power either by burning or converting back to electricity, you loose a certain percentage of the original energy in the electricity, so if anyone can use the electricity directly, they will. For this reason vehicles will be all electric not hydrogen based. Its simple economics. There are some use cases in transport such as ships, or in industry where hydrogen makes sense, but I suspect that in the long term even smelting will find ways to use the electricity directly as it is cheaper. That said, renewables such as solar and wind will need to be over provisioned for consistency which will result in an abundance of cheap energy at certain times of day which will either need industries capable of using that energy on an adhoc basis, or it must be stored, and hydrogen is certainly one option for that, although batteries may prove more cost effective.
I do believe that Hydrogen is a smart way to reduce carbon while keeping vehicles moving. Also, for storage of energy.
I believe Saudi is moving in this direction.
Excellent report, thanks.
Batteries are heavier, take up more space, take a lot longer to refuel, and can be negatively affected by temperature fluctuations. Hydrogen fuel cell technology continues to make huge strides in production and efficiency. Hydrogen fuel cells sound like a good long term investment to me.
Unfortunately, hydrogen has to obey the laws of physics and chemistry - it will forever be expensive, and inefficient, no matter what.
Toyota Miria 4350 pounds
Tesla Model Y 4416 pounds
Seems like both systems are quite heavy. Also the fuel cell set up takes up a lot more space on a car then battery electric vehicles.
@@Baker.Matthew A Subaru XV weights the same as a two door mini cooper. Batteries are heavier than hydrogen storage, most of car weight is because the chasis so that is an invalid compararison
@@licenciadoleopoldocanoloza1144 are you comparing just the hydrogen fuel tank, compared to the batteries or are you adding in the fuel cell and all the extra equipment needed to convert hydrogen to electricity?
Seem strange to convert electricity to hydrogen then convert it back to electricity just to use a smaller Lithium Ion batter. Yes FCEV still have Lithium Ion batteries to store electricity.
@@Baker.Matthew but smaller ones making the propulsion system lighter overall. Idk lithium will always be expensive, need to be replaced every 15 years and unlike hydrogen it does not work with the electricity grid. Lithium have a lot of R&D, if hydrogen could have the same amount it could be the savior of the human race
Where’s Trevor Milton’s input on this topic?! 🤣😂🤣
Jail
Looks like CNBC journalists are still living in the 2000s
you don't understand, just like on instant noodle packages, "all images just for illutration purposes"
All their #talkingheads are so full of themselves #arrogantly #narcissistic they should all be #fired and #unscripted. #cnbc especially #jimcramer should go work on a #farm or a #factory and get a real dose of reality meanwhile #penbancorp is #borrowing #bitcoin #buying #tesla #shorting #oilfutures #saveyourpennies #youarehired
Nope, it seems there is a global campaign to push for hydrogen, as fears from the owners of the planet is becoming real losing control over the world due to cheap solar and batteries
@@alihyari7358 yes even on “who killed the electric car” documentary, they said the oil companies had there sights on hydrogen 20 years ago, they see it as the next monopoly for them i’m guessing. i’ll be buying a tesla as soon as i can afford one to stick it to them
@@pantac4493 It's a BS documentary.
Uh... hasn't hydrogen been "on the verge of disrupting the energy sector" for like 30 years now?
Just like fusion :D
HYSR with specific patents is known to be working on this for more than a decade and has made progress according to reports. Thanks
I hope you bought shares when you posted this.
@@activechaos128 yes I'm have, holding 8.5 m shares, have been buying for several years. Believe in it. Thanks.
@@mhchoudhurymdgood to hear! I've got my toes wet with 10k shares recently. The technology looks promising. I can see hydrogen replacing diesel and jet fuel in the future.
The stock market is appreciating with the likes of various tech companies like TSLA. no doubt that dude be stealing the show lately. thanks to my man Anmol Singh,who relates with the market well enough.
for months now, I've come to understand the full effectiveness of forex trading through the guidance of Anmol Singh.
in other to avoid loss in my trades, I've my funds invested with Anmol Singh for weekly positive feedbacks.
@@jorgesalvador9069
Being an entrepreneur trading and investing with Anmol Singh, earning income biweekly is like luck meeting opportunity and I'm so glad.
i never really understood how to go about fx and the stock market; not until a month ago. with much appreciation, I was guided Anmol Singh. The helper troll.
Given the pressure to earn enough to make ends meet, you would think that low-paid workers would be clamoring for raises. But this is not always the case. it was in my best option to invest with anmol Singh.
Hydrogen is a very efficient power source which is also very clean. The problem is right now, we derive it mostly from hydrocarbon sources or use carbon fuels to strip it into molecular form. Iceland has led the way, using geothermal resources to separate hydrogen to fuel their vehicles, etc. But with the cost of storage, the problem of leakage, the potential for combustion (remember the Hindenburg), the cost, and the fact it's derived from or with carbon fuels, it's not much of a solution right now...
It isn’t clean as they say 😂😂😂
Right now i believe this is the only page on the internet with relevant content about energy transition, with an open discussion. Let's be straight about this, energy transition to a full electric systems is not viable because is too expensive, that's the only reason, also the extraction of rare metals is highly polutive. In my view we can't just throw away decades of mass production of combustion engines. In fact, it seems to me that hydrogen combustion is quite viable and the least expensive transition we can make right now. It is not totally green has some claim it to be, but the same systems that are used in fossil fuel engines, like catalyzers can also be used in hydrogen fuel combustion, wich is renewable. Hydrogen combustion also forms some nocive particles like NOx, wich emissions can be reduced. The energy transition is much easier and faster if we redirect mass production to this kind of fuel, and slowly integrate hybrid electric systems into these kinds of engines. If we try to anticipate more then what we can handle right now i can only see failure ahead of us. We can have in fact green production of hydrogen, even thou the consumption is not totally green. Just hope the economies can understand this before they throw away money into less viable options.
1:50 umm... There's no way UK and Indonesia's yearly carbon emissions is just 843 metric tonnes maybe it's in Millions of metric tonnes.
Hi in from indonesian 🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩
Yep you're right.
@@kol257 Yes indeed, just a ton of concrete production produces about a ton of Carbon dioxide.
Yet CNBC actually cites a source from the IEA. You are not, so you’re just guessing from thin air.
@@downinla4076 Bruh anyone with a spec of intelligence can say that it's impossible. Just a ton of cement production produces abot 0.9 Tonnes of Co2. Imagine the no.of cars and fossil fuel power plants in a developed country.
You really should mention steam-electrolysis at some point, and how it dramatically reduces the electrical costs of hydrogen production.
Ballard Power is based in my backyard in Vancouver, Canada. It’s a pioneer in the application of fuel cell on automotive vehicles. I have rode on one of it’s buses around the city many years ago before Tesla have existed.
This makes me miss Mazda's Hydrogen RX-8.
This would’ve been a great video to have last week as I was writing a paper which talked a lot about this very topic for my final
If you can please share to us your essay? Thank you very much!
@@yengsabio5315 I would like it too please!
How can I get it?
@@danijel8494 check out the link I posted 8 months ago in the comment thread
@@thegenerikshow8545 i dont see it
Is this another nikola ad? How much do you guys have invested in their stock?
😂😂
We should have invested more in Hydrogen a long time ago. President George Bush Jr. was encouraging the production of Hydrogen Fuel Cells in the 2000s. The challenge was bring the cost down. Also, the 2008 recession delayed the development in the Hydrogen Fuel Cells in America.
The challenge is, and always remains, to increase efficiency. But that is impossible.
For passengers hydrogen doesn’t make much sense, but there’s a clear use case for long distance freight, whether by truck or boat. And if not hydrogen then ammonia processed from hydrogen
If you are looking for a way to help the environment you can use ecosia they are a search engine that plants trees
Can someone explain to me how hydrogen being energy dense "partially mitigates" its efficiency issues? Per your own chart, most of the energy loss is before it gets to the vehicle. That's the problem. For personal transport, you'll need need several times the power to provide for a FCEV versus a BEV. Until we hit a point where we have a gross surplus of renewable power, it's just wasteful to go the hydrogen route. Set up level 1 and level 2 charging at workplaces, charge EVs with surplus renewable power, problem solved. Green hydrogen may be necessary for some segments of some industries, but personal transport is not one of them.
Plus most ppl would rather just charge at night. Rather than use the old gas station model but with hydrogen. I haven't heard anyone say that they are excited to go to the gas station.
Additional demand from green Hydrogen transport will have to be met by fossil fuel production delaying a zero carbon grid, whereas batteries fit in nicely supporting renewable load factors without having to increase overall capacity significantly, efficiency is king. Industrial Hydrogen is worth it, but for transport we have a far better alternative in BEVs.
Charge BEV all you want, because H2 is not against Battery and will not replace Battery. Business decisions are made based on cost, and not based on efficiency. As long as Green Hydrogen is more cost-effective than the rest of Green Energy, then that's all that will matter.
@@trungson6604 Efficiency directly impacts cost. Green hydrogen is by definition made from green energy. If it takes 1 kWh of green energy for a BEV to drive a certain distance, it'll take 2-3 kWh to make the green hydrogen to allow a hydrogen-powered vehicle to travel the same distance. And it'll cost 2-3 times as much for the raw power use, to say nothing of the cost of the water, the electrolysis equipment and the land/buildings to house it, storage tanks and compressors, trucks, people to drive the trucks, and construction of new stations. All of these things add cost.
Imagine if I wanted to fill a pot with water. I could fill it directly from the faucet, or I could fill a cup, then messily pour it into another cup, losing water each time, until only 30% of the original water ends up in the pot. The water comes from the same place and goes to the same place, just one method is more complicated, wasteful, and as long as you're paying for water? more expensive too.
we already have a gross surplus of renewable power in some places.
More of this please, you're educating the decision makers for tomorrow.
1:46 is factually incorrect. 843 tons/yr globally is comically low - I checked their source (IEA) which states: "As a consequence, production of hydrogen is responsible for CO2 emissions of around 830 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year, equivalent to the CO2 emissions of the United Kingdom and Indonesia combined."
I'm guessing they confused Mt (million tonnes) with metric tons.
I think hydrogen should be used to industry,planes,ship,some military vehicles and cars/lorries should be battery powered
I agree with you
Yep. And long term energy storage
I agree as well. Hydrogen is better suited for industrial use.
I'd still like to see hydrogen / lithium hybrid automobiles to reduce refuel time, and not be dependent on one source of fuel.
Exactly. Electric cars have so many benefits. For almost all trips, even an 80-100mi range EV (especially a small one like a Leaf or Mini Cooper) is more than enough, and the ability to charge at home every night, from solar panels on your own roof is huge plus. For long distrance trips we have buses, trains and planes, or a family might have 2 cars. 1 with shorter range to save cost and lithium. 1 with longer range for road trips. The 5 minute fill up of hydrogen is just not needed for passenger cars and I hate that toyota still hasnt figured that out yet.
Of course large trucks, planes and ships exclusively do long trips.
no, you can convert all current road vehicles to combust hydrogen in their combustion engines. there will be less power but nothing a turbo or supercharger cant fix.
The problem with storing excess solar energy in hydrogen is the same as for transportation: Inefficiency: You lose ~3/4 of the original energy converting it to hydrogen, compressing it, and then regenerating energy from the hydrogen! You can reduce some of that inefficiency by not compressing it, if you have a really large open space like the salt cavern you mentioned. However you’re still losing around 2/3 or so of the original energy.
Flow batteries are a far-more-efficient approach. They’re sort of a hybrid of batteries and fuel cells.
Business decisions are made based on cost, and not based on efficiency. As long as Green Hydrogen is more cost-effective than the rest of Green Energy, then that's all that will matter.
@@trungson6604, reasonable point, but with low efficiency also come higher cost, so...
@@mr88cet --Gasoline cars are very inefficient in comparison to Battery and Hydrogen cars, but the low cost is what makes gasoline cars occupying 90% of the market.
@@trungson6604, compared to BEVs, yes, but HFCEVs are not all that much more efficient than gasoline cars, well-to-wheel, the “well” being green electricity, or fuel from a filling station:
PEM electrolyzer ~70%
Hydrogen compression ~85%
HFC ~65%
Inverter ~90%
Motor ~90%
All told, ~30%.
This, assuming zero transportation cost to a hydrogen filling station.
Plus of course, HFCs and PEM electrolyzers, at least for now are far from cheap! Yes, given sufficient mass production, costs will go down and eventually. Efficiencies will go up too, but not by a whole lot.
czcams.com/video/f7MzFfuNOtY/video.html
@@mr88cet --All automobiles are very inefficient in comparison to subway trains and buses, and they cause huge traffic congestion and high transportation cost. To be much more efficient and to avoid massive traffic congestion in major cities, we should be working toward public transportation.
Funny how they completely fail to mention 2 critical things. Hydrogen can be a direct replacement for fuel in ALL combustion engines on the road today (the timing of the engine must be changed slightly to adjust for the difference in combustion) and it could easily be produced in small at home facilities to negate the losses in transportation. If we could get over our reliance on companies providing us with the fuel and just let them provide us with the technology to capture the free fuel around us, we could get over so many of the self destructive issues we face today.
ideally you dont want to cut out jobs, people need to make money, which is why home facilities for vehicle use probably wont be a thing.
@@zeropride1133 Jobs reemerge in different industries. Renewable energy creates more jobs and more economic activity leading to more jobs.
@@zeropride1133 social credit score will give you an allowance for income and energy usage. This would also explain why there is the whole socialism movement going on
Producing hydrogen at home facilities has one major reservation which is the electricity produced by renewable sources. Majority of homes in the world is dependent on electricity produced by thermal power plants. This defeats the whole purpose of "green" hydrogen. Solar Rooftop plants in a home does not produce enough electricity to run an energy intensive process i.e., electrolysis. Storage issues and the cost of maintaining the entire apparatus are other obstructions.
@@pbj3041 There's off peak charging but also...should the grids be more efficient resulting in power that costs pennies? Large buildings can produce more hydrogen and house engines that specifically run on hydrogen..ie power plants....homes are different true, but theyre being stultified by large power grid companies or higher up really. Homes can use rooves and various methods to harvest power ...Another interesting thing is...watch videos on oil into gas "refinement"...watch the grift happening.
This 15min clip can be summarized in just 7 seconds starting at: 13:53
I like how at 3:20 cnbc has shown correct volume ratio of o2 and h2 after electrolysis
Not sure whether they are interested in a correct 1-to-2 volume ratio, rather than disguising the fact that only 11% of the original mass ends up in the H2-tank.
6:11 Frees up more room? As indicated by the 5 meter long 4 seaters that Toyota has been making..
The Fuel Cell Generation equipment is soo much more Bulkier and TALLER. BEVs Skateboards & ExoSkeltons are simply way better packaging. The future of BEVs is integrating battery cells into the Chassis like a Rib Cage structure. This is based on AI Generative Design.
www.carbodydesign.com/2018/05/gm-uses-generative-design-for-vehicle-lightweighting/
HYSR is the other company based in Santa Barbara California is working on this zero emissions clean green renewable energy. But it not there yet.
I have played with electrolysis in my childhood (generating on small scale hydrogen and oxygen) same as electric powered toys, engines and one simple powered by compressed CO2.
What about Yellow (Nuclear) Hydrogen Could Be Key To A "True" Carbon-Free and Mining Future?
Da sound dangerous, tell me more.
@@notapplicable4567 Nuclear is actually much cleaner than any other source of electricity. Only downside is toxic waste.
@@angelgjr1999 Nuclear energy is clean but we dont need another Chernobyl
@Jason Tempel English please.
@@angelgjr1999 It's proving to be much more expensive than wind and solar. Solar continues a multi-decade price decline trajectory with no end in sight and already about the cheapest new source available. (hydro aside as it's mostly tapped out)
Your time limits are too optimistic.
Go for 100%. Hope for 10%
And yours are gonna screw over my kids
@@meoff7602 You can hope for it, but making unrealistic goals doesn’t help anyone.
If we’re just gonna makeup timeframes for completion based on nonsense, why not just say well get it all down next week?
@@brian2440 The goals are actually quite attainable if we would actually just put the effort to do them.
The only real thing holding us back is the cost. That's only an issue because no one wants to pay to clean up the mess our consumption creates.
Bottom line, everything that is needed to do it exists. Except the will to do it.
If we treated it like an enemy nation. Climate change would be a nothing solve.
Look at your statement and break it down... you obviously see a glaring problem! Yeah, that’s oil getting too expensive as we run out of it and we crash our world economy in the process.
It’s renewables or bust! Don’t pass go, don’t collect 200$. End of life as we know it if we can’t science our way out of this in the next 10 years.
Supressed Patents: carbon foam ambient pressure storage, Stan Meyer HHO, etc, etc
There are a number of issues with hydrogen as a green fuel. The first and most fundamental is that the energy efficiency is poor. Hydrogen fuel cell cars, for example range from 25% to 35% energy efficient compared to a battery electric vehicle of over 80% efficient. Then you need to store the hydrogen either under high pressure or in a compound of which liquified ammonia is an example. Under high pressure hydrogen requires heavy pressure vessels which with associated plumbing need regular checking for failure and leaks. Ammonia, particularly as a cryogenic liquid, is easy to transport, but extremely dangerous being highly inflammable and very corrosive. The potential for loss of life and environmental damage using mass fleets of tankers to move liquid ammonia around is very high. I should add that hydrogen itself is of course highly inflammable.
Basically what we need is an efficient cheap way of storing energy and then retrieving it. I suggest that for motor vehicle transport it is game over already, clearly batteries can do that job and even heavy transport trucks will work with battery technology. While batteries are not perfect yet, future developments will likely achieve faster charge and discharge rates with high energy density and long cycle life. The research momentum is behind much better batteries and if something like a lithium air battery can be built its energy density means all forms of transport except perhaps ships can run on batteries.
We are also seeing batteries form grid level storage systems and again the research and commercialisation efforts going into all types of battery storage will lead to further improvements in cycle life and energy density.
I suggest hydrogen a hydrogen economy is not viable because as a fuel it’s fundamentally inefficient compared to battery systems.
Green Hyrdogen doesn't have the economic forcing function that lithium-ion cells currently has. By the time Hydrogen storage is able to displace fossil fuels, lithium-ion cells will have already displaced them all. Hydrogen is being championed by fossil fuel producers -- because 99% of hyrdrogen is produced from fossil fuels.
The supply of Lithium will run out before long, with escalation in usage.
Hydrogen gas can be easily produced using nuclear reactors. For free
But even freshwater is a rare commodity.
We have now electrolysis of steam at 90% efficiency. No freshwater necessary, any water that can make steam would do.
Why is gasoline the chosen fuel for cars. 1) It is easy to make, you drill a hole, oil comes out, you cook the oil and turn it into gas. 2) It is easy to store and as a liquid it can take the shape of any container. 3) It is easy to transport, either by truck or pipeline. 4) you get incredible amounts of energy from a small amount. 5) It is relatively cheap.
Water water everywhere, and no one friggin noticed, lol 😂
Electric vehicles will be the choice for the general public. Hydrogen vehicles will be the choice for commercial purposes, trucking, taxis, patrol cars, delivery vans. Tesla is wasting resources on the semi. Commercial vehicles need to be fueled quick and be back on the road that’s why hydrogen will dominate the sector; also hydrogen stations storage and delivery will be too complicated to serve the public.
Assuming that battery technology won't improve
Battery technology hasnt reach it's full potential yet , we are already reached 1000 miles an hour charging speed. Battery technology is on the verge of a major breakthrough that could double or even triple the current battery capacity
@@cuddlemuffin.9545 even with improved battery tech the material used will eventually run out. Also the weight of the battery will always be a negative. Hydrogen has a higher energy density per unit of mass that even the experiment solid state batteries can’t overcome. Fro heavy long haul vehicles it’s a he best option.
“Direct Methanol Fuel Cells” and “Beyond Oil and Gas: The Methanol Economy” by George Olah, Nobel Laureate... for anyone out there really trying to solve the major problems with hydrogen storage and transportation
The big problem with clean hydrogen produced by renewable electricity is that it has a large loss during the conversion. To get 1kWh of energy to drive your car you need a lot more energy to produce the hydrogen. So it will allways be twice as expensive to fill your car with hydrogen than with electricity. So I prefer to wait a few more minutes at a charging station and save a lot of money in the long run
Goeie keus Dries.
10:30 this guy sounds exactly like Ed Snowden. At least on my phone.
I would definitely appreciate some further investigation into hydrogen's use in industrial heating. Transportation only represents a quarter of global CO2 emissions and we've got a long way to go on the other 75%.
Nuclear is way more effective and greener solution. It can produce CO2 free hydrogen for transportation at the same time.
@@poulwinther It refers to replacing the burning of gas to produce steam by hydrogen. Steam is used in most process-related industries. You can't do that with nuclear, since you're not going to put a nuclear reactor in every industry.
@@sergigil9439 Can't is a very strong word, especially when that is what small modular MSR manufacturers plan to do. Look up the deal as of yesterday between Seaborg and Samsung Heavy Industries.
No, not every industry, just the big ones that really matter.
It’s fascinating to think about the potential for hydrogen in storage and transportation. Despite the inefficiency of producing it for storage, it has an infinite shelf life and a large amount of uses in manufacturing. the inefficiency could be mitigated by supermassive production facilities located in key places with excess power production, such as potent offshore wind farms or nuclear power plants that have no potential to store excess energy. Storage tech and electrolysis is constantly evolving, with the potential for a catalyst that may allow ammonia to act as a stable hydrogen storage option one day.
OK let's get this correct !! #1 The only reason radio waves and AC current travel out in space and down a wire is because of the "CENTER " of a magnetic field. (The "B" field), The North and South poles are the weakest part of a magnet !! Just like Tesla said, you got to look at things you can't see !! At the center of a magnet is anti gravity, (just tap the center on any glass or plastic and it will loose weight), The center can repel water if vibrated at the correct frequency, If you vibrate the "B" field into granite rock it will become soft and you would need copper tools to work on same , you don't want to disrupt the magnetic (B")field ) with other iron. Once you understand the "B" field of a magnet and how it relates to the entire universe we live in, you will then understand what Tesla was telling everyone "LOOK FOR WHAT YOU CANNOT SEE"" .I believe the pyramids were inter galactic communications and transportation systems. Stone Henge and Gobekli Tepe , power plants. Take a look at Coral Castle Florida on CZcams and you will see a similar pilar. I believe these horizontal pillars were oscillators that would provide excitation for many things from crops in the field to anti gravity
"Hydrogen is like a fart, you would feel good unleashing it but then you would want to leave the room right after." Someone.
4:38 Thought I had increased the playback speed!
Nikola? Is this video compiled 10yrs ago?
What we need is a plan to achieve efficient long term transportation.
Tesla has such a plan and is executing on it. Their longest range cars already have 400+ miles of range. They are about to produce a semi truck with 500 miles of range and a cybertruck with 560 miles of range. Electric air travel will also be possible once batteries reach 400 wh/kg which is on the horizon.
Electric trains and cars. Though some cars will have to still burn gas or diesel. Airplanes will still need jet fuel. Big ships can run on CNG.
All remaining fossil fuel use is off set by reforestation and grassland reclaiming. Which allows plants and soil organisms to sink carbon.
Lots of nuclear power plants to compliment solar, hydro, and wind
@@jemezname2259 lithium mining is already destroying whole landscapes, earth can't support such an amount of batteries.
@@jona_archi Not really. Lithium is bad for the environment in the first place without human intervention, nature created it. We just take it from underground and use it to make batteries.
Even hydrogen cars require batteries. Did you know that there is a rare material in the hydrogen car, platinum and titanium, this material is very rare rarer than lithium.
Mike Strizki from New Jersey has done the hydrogen conversion and it's perfect. No fossil fuel pollution, or battery pollution. Look him up
Governments wants something similar to the oil economy we all currently operate under. This hydrogen model from the video would fit the bill. Unfortunately it will take decades to implement and move to. The better answer is a decentralized model. Imagine a home with solar, wind, water, geotherm, whatever generation method you have available which runs an electrolysis system in your shed, to produce hydrogen. Another option is the current natural gas infrastructure that is fairly well distributed, which can be converted to deliver very low pressure hydrogen. For road trips, you can have gas stations that have on-site hydrogen production, fed by grid or renewable electricity. It breaks the economic model that allows the government to make money, but...I am sure some other means of funding can be devised. All I know is that the 2 hydrogen plants I have seen which are already in production in Mexico are amazing. Both are residential installations, very off-grid and middle of nowhere. They purchased fc stacks from a company in the US, and they run electrolysis for hydrogen production. Their fuel cell stacks produce massive amounts of heat which they use for steam generation to add to their efficiency. Their main power comes from solar, wind, and one also has a river nearby that turns a water wheel. It works there...so why not everywhere?
Hydrogen catalyst is moving away from Platinum with advent of newly discovered cheap material.
In Japan there are 130 stations nation wide as of May 2020.
It is projected to become 180 station by the end of this year(2021) and reach 320 stations by 2025.
Japan, China, Southkorea , Europe have a commitment . Europe f.i. for 80GW of Electrolytes by 2030 ! It´s was very interesting doing the interview with Plug Power CEO Mr. Marsh czcams.com/video/mymph6VISm8/video.html
I want to see fuel cells without rare minerals and Hydrogen production using algae or something microscopic
You can easily produce rare earth elements using a nuclear reactor
Perfect video. Content and execution.
The problem with renewable energy like wind turbine or solar Cell is they are unstable. Hydrogen could be one of some several way to store the energy generated from renewable power plant so we can use it any time we need it.
Cant wait to see Sam Alexander rip this video apart!
Its mostly a good video against Hydrogen IMO.
I am also looking forward to Sam's "feedback", but this video wasn't so bad. I often thought something was one sided, but then they usually clarified later.
@ 1:50 should say million metric tons.
yeah, there's a unit issue at 1:48. 843 tons of CO2 is "only" the emissions of ~200 cars/year.
Statement of the Millennium
" if we are SERIOUS about de carbonization we have NO CHOICE but to switch to Green Hydrogen "
Created hydrogen requires more energy than it releases, so I don’t see how
There may be a few specialized sectors where hydrogen can make sense. But as energy storage and in regular cars it's too expensive, which will also not change over time since the potentials of cost reduction are rather limited in this technology.
people say this while companies are spending millions developing hydrogen to make billions in the future.
@@zeropride1133 I don't see this heavy spending. In Europe most green hydrogen projects are funded by state subsidies. There is no business model yet that makes green hydrogen cost competitive.
That's because we are still using gas to back up our variable renewable production. That is a relatively cheap way of addressing the shortfall. If you want to do away with fossil fuels entirely then storage becomes much more valuable. In today's market where gas is used it's not economical to use hydrogen storage. But if you banned or heavily taxed gas then the electricity price would climb in periods of high demand which would make storage more commercially viable. In the UK and similar climates we don't use air con much because it doesn't get all that hot but we need a lot of energy for heating in the winter. If you built enough wind farms to produce enough electricity for the year on average, we would have a surplus for most of the year and a deficit in winter. Using the surplus to make hydrogen then using that during the winter could help balance things out over the year, as well as providing a backup for calm days.
Failure to fully impose carbon taxes on fossil fuels is currently resulting in an effective subsidy of intermittent renewables by avoiding the need for storage which at the moment is still enormously expensive.
@@adrianthoroughgood1191 In theory, I agree. And maybe at some point we'll get there. However, energy prices have also a economic and a political dimension. If countries like China don't join the climate club, it will be difficult for western countries to impose such taxes without impairing their company's competitivness. And energy is like the daily bread for the common people, which will take the burden of higher prices only to some degree. Already now, with energy prices rising due to the Ukraine conflict, politicians are getting nervous and spend government money to keep prices down.
I believe that internal combustion vehicles can also be inexpensively converted on a hydrogen combustion engine but currently it makes no sense to do this as hydrogen fuel is scarce and expensive. Hydrogen fuel cells as expensive as they are are also more efficient than hydrogen combustion engines.
JCB, are doing some interesting work with hydrogen powered ice vehicles.
Hydrogen combustion still creates NOx. Kind of redundant.
BMW had that car build in 1993. In a 7 series.
The bionic leaf has some really good promise in splitting water
Clean Hydrogen is promising. It being a store of energy for a long period of time is a clear indication of its future potential. I can’t imagine my stress level when having to deal with battery charging every time rather I can drive to a fuel station and pump in kilograms of clean hydrogen quickly. 🙂
*Elon musk has left the chat*
Yeah he wouldn’t waste his time on fool cells.
@@Simon-dm8zv because he can't make short term money on it
@@MrTeka500 or long term or any money at all.
99% of h2 is produced using fossil fuels, tell me who is the fool now? Dumb ppl
@@MrTeka500 Lol no, because it doesn’t make sense from a physics point of view. It’s stupid.
Hydrogen is a good solution to the climate change when it comes to reducing CO2 emissions, but there are other climate gasses like Methane and N20 that is producing way more heat to the atmosphere than CO2 does.. so this is only one of the many ways we need to go in able to save our planet.
Cool, all we need is a really complex gas storage and transport solution globally and a giant metal gas tank in our gardens. i'm sure i wont lose any sleep worrying about it.