Electric California ( on the way )

[Lightning]

True on a small scale. Look into the amount of hydrogen required for a hydrogen car and aerospace future, then calculate how much electricity is required to manufacture that hydrogen then answer the question where is this going to come from. There is a gigantic black hole that is kept out of the public limelight. Hydrogen is a great future fuel option but the question needs an honest answer. Without generating capacity it will not happen because it can't.

They are on the case.

The Future of Hydrogen – Analysis - IEA

The Future of Hydrogen - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

 

[willwander]

D

They are on the case.

The Future of Hydrogen – Analysis - IEA

The Future of Hydrogen - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

The vast majority ~95% of all hydrogen is currently produced from Coal and Gas

 

[Lightning]

D

The vast majority ~95% of all hydrogen is currently produced from Coal and Gas

Yes, currently.

 

[Ch1pbutty]

D

The vast majority ~95% of all hydrogen is currently produced from Coal and Gas

The Japanese (Jera) purchased the Coal desk from EDF Trading a few years ago, which gives them huge resources to produce hydrogen:

JERA Global Markets

www.jeragm.com

Tepco and Chubu transfer fossil fuel assets to Jera JV

The fossil fuel assets of Japanese utilities Tokyo Electric Power Company and Chubu Electric Company have been passed to their Jera joint venture, as a requirement of power market liberalisation, leaving them with transmission, distribution and retail businesses, and their nuclear plants.;

world-nuclear-news.org

 

[Wildcamper]

Last year the UK used a bit under 50 billion litres of petrol and diesel (RAC data). One litre of petrol/diesel is equivalent to about 10kW.h of electricity.
One litre of hydrogen gas at a pressure of 50 atmosphere (not an easy ask) is equivalent to 0.13kW.h of electricity.
One litre of liquid hydrogen (a very uneasy ask) is equivalent to 2.36kW.h of electricity.
As hydrogen has to be made, it takes 40kW.h of electricity to make 1kg of hydrogen. The density of liquid hydrogen is 71g/litre (liquefying hydrogen is very energy intensive), so 1kg of liquid hydrogen will occupy about 14 litres. One can't store liquid hydrogen very long, in its Phase Diagram the triple point is in a very unfavorable place so liquid hydrogen needs to be continuously vented to a avoid over pressurisation. At normal temperature and pressure 2 grams of hydrogen occupies 22.4 litres (one Mole of any gas occupies 22.4 litres) hence the need to compress - also requires energy. So if we require the hydrogen equivalent of 50 billion litres of petrol/diesel we need an awful awful lot of hydrogen which in turn required a frightful amount of electricity. Electric vehicles are great, hydrogen vehicles should be fine but......same question, where does the energy required come from? Being repetitive - sorry. All these numbers can be looked up. While such capacity will not be required all at once it will eventually be needed. As yet I see no strategy in place to even begin the required deployment. Even if I am out by 50% the amounts are still enormous.

 

[Calimili]

Last year the UK used a bit under 50 billion litres of petrol and diesel (RAC data). One litre of petrol/diesel is equivalent to about 10kW.h of electricity.
One litre of hydrogen gas at a pressure of 50 atmosphere (not an easy ask) is equivalent to 0.13kW.h of electricity.
One litre of liquid hydrogen (a very uneasy ask) is equivalent to 2.36kW.h of electricity.
As hydrogen has to be made, it takes 40kW.h of electricity to make 1kg of hydrogen. The density of liquid hydrogen is 71g/litre (liquefying hydrogen is very energy intensive), so 1kg of liquid hydrogen will occupy about 14 litres. One can't store liquid hydrogen very long, in its Phase Diagram the triple point is in a very unfavorable place so liquid hydrogen needs to be continuously vented to a avoid over pressurisation. At normal temperature and pressure 2 grams of hydrogen occupies 22.4 litres (one Mole of any gas occupies 22.4 litres) hence the need to compress - also requires energy. So if we require the hydrogen equivalent of 50 billion litres of petrol/diesel we need an awful awful lot of hydrogen which in turn required a frightful amount of electricity. Electric vehicles are great, hydrogen vehicles should be fine but......same question, where does the energy required come from? Being repetitive - sorry. All these numbers can be looked up. While such capacity will not be required all at once it will eventually be needed. As yet I see no strategy in place to even begin the required deployment. Even if I am out by 50% the amounts are still enormous.

So you are not looking forward to sleep above a tank full of of liquid hydrogen on the California Zeppelin Editon?

 

[Lightning]

Last year the UK used a bit under 50 billion litres of petrol and diesel (RAC data). One litre of petrol/diesel is equivalent to about 10kW.h of electricity.
One litre of hydrogen gas at a pressure of 50 atmosphere (not an easy ask) is equivalent to 0.13kW.h of electricity.
One litre of liquid hydrogen (a very uneasy ask) is equivalent to 2.36kW.h of electricity.
As hydrogen has to be made, it takes 40kW.h of electricity to make 1kg of hydrogen. The density of liquid hydrogen is 71g/litre (liquefying hydrogen is very energy intensive), so 1kg of liquid hydrogen will occupy about 14 litres. One can't store liquid hydrogen very long, in its Phase Diagram the triple point is in a very unfavorable place so liquid hydrogen needs to be continuously vented to a avoid over pressurisation. At normal temperature and pressure 2 grams of hydrogen occupies 22.4 litres (one Mole of any gas occupies 22.4 litres) hence the need to compress - also requires energy. So if we require the hydrogen equivalent of 50 billion litres of petrol/diesel we need an awful awful lot of hydrogen which in turn required a frightful amount of electricity. Electric vehicles are great, hydrogen vehicles should be fine but......same question, where does the energy required come from? Being repetitive - sorry. All these numbers can be looked up. While such capacity will not be required all at once it will eventually be needed. As yet I see no strategy in place to even begin the required deployment. Even if I am out by 50% the amounts are still enormous.

The report addresses your question I think. To produce it, the infra structure doesn’t yet exist, but could be built.

Dedicated electricity generation from renewables or nuclear power offers an alternative to the use of grid electricity for hydrogen production.
With declining costs for renewable electricity, in particular from solar PV and wind, interest is growing in electrolytic hydrogen and there have been several demonstration projects in recent years. Producing all of today’s dedicated hydrogen output from electricity would result in an electricity demand of 3 600 TWh, more than the total annual electricity generation of the European Union.

With declining costs for solar PV and wind generation, building electrolysers at locations with excellent renewable resource conditions could become a low-cost supply option for hydrogen, even after taking into account the transmission and distribution costs of transporting hydrogen from (often remote) renewables locations to the end-users.

 

[Wildcamper]

The report addresses your question I think. To produce it, the infra structure doesn’t yet exist, but could be built.

Dedicated electricity generation from renewables or nuclear power offers an alternative to the use of grid electricity for hydrogen production.
With declining costs for renewable electricity, in particular from solar PV and wind, interest is growing in electrolytic hydrogen and there have been several demonstration projects in recent years. Producing all of today’s dedicated hydrogen output from electricity would result in an electricity demand of 3 600 TWh, more than the total annual electricity generation of the European Union.

With declining costs for solar PV and wind generation, building electrolysers at locations with excellent renewable resource conditions could become a low-cost supply option for hydrogen, even after taking into account the transmission and distribution costs of transporting hydrogen from (often remote) renewables locations to the end-users.

Do you mean 3600Tw or 3.600Tw? A lot of folk are doing some great work on hydrogen. I admire ITM Power, good company with good technology. But it does not even come close to the requirements. Yes, the infrastructure can be built but it is not being built. Wind and solar will never deliver the required power demand, cost here is irrelevant. Nuclear could but how long does it take to built one station? 20 years? Hinckley C is a small station compared to what is needed and we are going to need many Hinckley C's - and Hinckley C will be at least 5 years late, the other two EDF reactors being built are years late and not on stream yet!

 

[Lightning]

Do you mean 3600Tw or 3.600Tw? A lot of folk are doing some great work on hydrogen. I admire ITM Power, good company with good technology. But it does not even come close to the requirements. Yes, the infrastructure can be built but it is not being built. Wind and solar will never deliver the required power demand, cost here is irrelevant. Nuclear could but how long does it take to built one station? 20 years? Hinckley C is a small station compared to what is needed and we are going to need many Hinckley C's - and Hinckley C will be at least 5 years late, the other two EDF reactors being built are years late and not on stream yet!

3600 TWh, according to the IEA report linked above. Their analysis seems to state that renewables can supply a significant proportion of the demand in a cost effective way. Presumably they have looked into it before publishing their report.

If the demand is there then capitalism should do its thing regarding the supply side. It seems to be technically possible, and the demand is increasing.

If the aerospace industry is proposing switching to hydrogen with the first aircraft entering service in 2035, then they must think it’s possible for that industry in the timescales they are looking at.

 

[Wildcamper]

So 3600Twh for the UK? I need to consult my calculator.

At present the alternative power programs are being largely funded by research grants, EU, UK, USA etc. rather than capitalism. Under normal circumstances a research grant only pays for part of the research (state aid rules and all that). However, if you play the "game" well one can get one's project 100% Government funded. I have sat on UK and EU funding panels and worked for grant writing enterprises. Seen it all. The "game" requires the applicant company to apply for overlapping projects tailored to different research calls and to load the overheads, and/or to apply for grants for work that has already been done, and/or to work with a second enterprise where one applies for one aspect and the second another. In this way the proposals go to different assessors in different programs so the overlap is hidden. I know of companies that are 100% funded by grants - even profitable. Some fantastic research on alternative energy is being done, really good stuff, at no risk to the company. There may well be some very short range passenger flying by 2035, trans Atlantic - forget it.

 

[Lightning]

So 3600Twh for the UK? I need to consult my calculator.

At present the alternative power programs are being largely funded by research grants, EU, UK, USA etc. rather than capitalism. Under normal circumstances a research grant only pays for part of the research (state aid rules and all that). However, if you play the "game" well one can get one's project 100% Government funded. I have sat on UK and EU funding panels and worked for grant writing enterprises. Seen it all. The "game" requires the applicant company to apply for overlapping projects tailored to different research calls and to load the overheads, and/or to apply for grants for work that has already been done, and/or to work with a second enterprise where one applies for one aspect and the second another. In this way the proposals go to different assessors in different programs so the overlap is hidden. I know of companies that are 100% funded by grants - even profitable. Some fantastic research on alternative energy is being done, really good stuff, at no risk to the company. There may well be some very short range passenger flying by 2035, trans Atlantic - forget it.

3600 TWh world wide presumably, it’s directly taken from the IEA report linked above.

The Airbus concepts launched in a programme this week for Entry Into Service in 2035:

The first concept from Airbus might carry from 120 to 200 passengers more than 2,000 nautical miles (roughly 3,700 km), propelled via a turbofan design that includes a modified gas-turbine engine fueled with hydrogen instead of jet fuel — which may be stored in tanks behind the rear pressure bulkhead of the plane.


The second concept calls for a turboprop design, and would use a modified gas engine and carry up to 100 passengers 1,000 nautical miles (roughly 1,850 km) — for short-distance trips.

 

[rich-s]

Going back to my schoolboy physics. You can't create energy. You can only convert it from one form to another. I think that the human race has already reached the tipping point where we have realised that fossil fuels are not a sustainable way of fulfilling our desire for energy.
Under current technology that really only leaves nuclear, wind, solar or tidal as viable alternatives. With all of those providing a method of generating electricity. Therefore we need to expand on that science in order to harness that electricity. Whilst I agree that current battery technology is far from ideal, relying on harvesting precious metals which have a similar negative impact on the planet as drilling for oil. Until another form of energy is discovered, we need to focus our attention on making what we do have as environmentally friendly as possible. One argument I completely disagree with is peoples obsession with the range of current EV's. Yes I know its great to drive for 500 miles, spend 5 minutes in a fuel station and drive 500 more. But this attitude is what is destroying our planet. What drove me to buy a full EV as my daily driver was this. Every time I was filling my ICE car, I would spend that time thinking about the origin of the diesel. The processes that the fuel had gone through throughout history, to end up in my tank for me to put my foot down and burn it in a few minutes. Don't get me wrong - I'm not deluded to think that there is an overnight answer to this issue. The manufacture of batteries might not be perfect yet. But the instant society we live in, where we don't even want to wait 30 minutes to charge enough for another couple of hundred miles (which is absolutely possible today with my Audi EV), is in my opinion selfish, when we consider the future of our planet. Rant Over and thanks for listening.

 

[Ch1pbutty]

Lots of issues to consider...One being child labour which is still accepted in a handful countries, the majority of which hold the raw materials required for batteries. If a big company such as Glencore goes in and seeks to stop child labour (as quite rightly it goes against their and most other companies / countries policies) the locals then lose income and will eventually seek to cause as much damage as possible until that company moves out.

The Hidden Risks of Batteries: Child Labor, Modern Slavery, and Weakened Land and Water Rights

With demand for cobalt and lithium surging, companies need to be aware of where they’re sourcing from.

www.greentechmedia.com

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

New battery

 

[AndyP12345]

Going back to my schoolboy physics. You can't create energy. You can only convert it from one form to another. I think that the human race has already reached the tipping point where we have realised that fossil fuels are not a sustainable way of fulfilling our desire for energy.
Under current technology that really only leaves nuclear, wind, solar or tidal as viable alternatives. With all of those providing a method of generating electricity. Therefore we need to expand on that science in order to harness that electricity. Whilst I agree that current battery technology is far from ideal, relying on harvesting precious metals which have a similar negative impact on the planet as drilling for oil. Until another form of energy is discovered, we need to focus our attention on making what we do have as environmentally friendly as possible. One argument I completely disagree with is peoples obsession with the range of current EV's. Yes I know its great to drive for 500 miles, spend 5 minutes in a fuel station and drive 500 more. But this attitude is what is destroying our planet. What drove me to buy a full EV as my daily driver was this. Every time I was filling my ICE car, I would spend that time thinking about the origin of the diesel. The processes that the fuel had gone through throughout history, to end up in my tank for me to put my foot down and burn it in a few minutes. Don't get me wrong - I'm not deluded to think that there is an overnight answer to this issue. The manufacture of batteries might not be perfect yet. But the instant society we live in, where we don't even want to wait 30 minutes to charge enough for another couple of hundred miles (which is absolutely possible today with my Audi EV), is in my opinion selfish, when we consider the future of our planet. Rant Over and thanks for listening.

Do you not worry about the environmental damage due to mining combined with the refining processes that the minerals go through to make the batteries in your EV not to mention the exploitation of the miners that produce the ore from which the materials are extracted

 

[WelshGas]

JCB signs green hydrogen deal worth billions

JCB will take 10% of the green hydrogen made by Australian mining company Fortescue Future Industries.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Velma's Dad]

JCB signs green hydrogen deal worth billions

JCB will take 10% of the green hydrogen made by Australian mining company Fortescue Future Industries.

www.bbc.co.uk

Interesting. The UK govt's aspiration for 'home-made' hydrogen is quite low - just 5GW by 2030 compared to UK current generation capacity of about 75GW - so would need to be imported if it's to make a bigger contribution.

 

[WelshGas]

Interesting. The UK govt's aspiration for 'home-made' hydrogen is quite low - just 5GW by 2030 compared to UK current generation capacity of about 75GW - so would need to be imported if it's to make a bigger contribution.

But as Prince Charles has said, and there is an element of truth in his statement, the Private sector has to step up, Government can’t do everything.

 

[Amarillo]

Interesting. The UK govt's aspiration for 'home-made' hydrogen is quite low - just 5GW by 2030 compared to UK current generation capacity of about 75GW - so would need to be imported if it's to make a bigger contribution.

I can see future wind farms, tidal lagoons or solar farms using excess electricity on windy days, spring tides or sunny periods to produce hydrogen. It’s hopelessly inefficient, but if we ever get to the position of over capacity with renewables and nuclear, it makes sense to produce something with it.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

Interesting video from Jerba.

 

[Ch1pbutty]

JCB signs green hydrogen deal worth billions

JCB will take 10% of the green hydrogen made by Australian mining company Fortescue Future Industries.

www.bbc.co.uk

Fortescue's Forrest says German hydrogen deal is just the start

Australian miner Fortescue Metals' newly-announced deal to supply green hydrogen to Germany is just the start as the rest of the world will catch up with Europe's lead, Fortescue's chairman told a Berlin industry conference on Monday.

www.reuters.com

 

[AdyB]

Been electric car drivers for a while , we have an audi and a Jag, love them both and fantastic for our everyday commute. We do though take the Cali out at weekends, the pure thrill of just driving without planning is fantastic. When the elec Cali gets to a range of 400 miles , then is the time to think about it.Although I still love the Cali and the open road with nothing getting in the way.

 

[studioTUNGSTEN]

Been electric car drivers for a while , we have an audi and a Jag, love them both and fantastic for our everyday commute. We do though take the Cali out at weekends, the pure thrill of just driving without planning is fantastic. When the elec Cali gets to a range of 400 miles , then is the time to think about it.Although I still love the Cali and the open road with nothing getting in the way.

400miles- reasonable distance however I do not feel the charging infra will be enough to that.
Long ago, I have thought T5.1 is the last using fossil fuel but Year of 2022, still there are only just 10% of vehicle is electric. In the next 10 years, maybe?