Viewing profile — Manfredo_1

> And you still are pretending that steam power plants running on hydrogen don't exist. Yet again, you originally said we could use gas turbines for hydrogen storage. Not steam tur…

I didn't reject future hydrogen gas turbines. In fact, I'm the one who brought them up . That's the entire point I'm making: hydrogen gas turbines are still in development. If hydr…

An electric car is as green as the grid that powers it. But a hybrid will never be green even if the grid is 100% green because it still burns fossil fuels. Same with a turbine tha…

Why? Electric cars don't use a mixture of gas and batteries. Those cars do exist and we call them "hybrids". But those are not carbon neutral and we don't pretend they are.

The goalpost never moved. If you want to use hydrogen storage in a carbon neutral grid you need 100% hydrogen fuel. We're not there there yet. And we won't be there for the better …

Most companies are targeting hydrogen gas turbines to be produced in 2030 or 2040: https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/news/magazine/2019/... They aren't "off the shelf" techn…

Why would it count in the context of climate change? It's still emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And again, this is one specific model. Many gas turbines are only capab…

> So how else we're suppose to interpret this statement: "No, hydrogen rapidly corrodes any metals that it comes into contact with. If they are interchangeable, expect drastically …

> nevermind this whole goalpost moving argument of "current gas turbine already in existence." This was the original goalpost. Let's re-read it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?i…

> This whole started because no one here thought someone would seriously try to argue that hydrogen gas turbines are impossible. For some of us this was too obvious to even bother …

If we aren't using combined cycle gas turbines round-trip efficiency of hydrogen storage is seriously reduced. I'm not moving any goalpost. This is your comment when you claimed th…

Yes, I'm familiar with moving the goalposts. It's exactly what you've been doing in this thread. First you claimed that existing natural gas turbines could be modified to run hydro…

Sure, we could burn hydrogen and drive a boiler like a coal plant. But that's not where this comment thread started. > Those gas turbines you're referring to can simply be modified…

Right. Lithium batteries won't cut it. That leaves geographically-dependent hydroelectricity, which isn't so easy to build. And then proposed solutions that are still in the protot…

It was done for a very short duration during the 1980s as a technology demonstrator. A prototype, not an actually commercially viable product. Yes, we can improve on a 33 year old …

For the third time, storage is only one part of the puzzle. We also need a way to cheaply electrolyze water into hydrogen, compress it into the storage facility, and then use it to…

Right, but then we're not talking about combined-cycle gas turbines to convert hydrogen back into electricity. If we're going to boil water than that's much less efficient than the…

> A gas turbine burning hydrogen does not experience any stresses that is meaningfully different from one burning natural gas or kerosene. Simply applied engineering can solve all …

A solar heavy network would still need 12 hours of storage to accommodate nighttime energy use. More actually, because of greater seasonal fluctuations further from the equator. Al…

That link you provided doesn't encompass gas turbines. Gas turbines capable of burning hydrogen do exist, but only at smaller concentrations, 70% methane and 30% hydrogen or less.

That's a question that can't be answered until people actually build hydrogen storage facilities at scale. Why shouldn't nuclear plants scale? They're mostly just steel and concret…