Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

news.umich.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 124 posts

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#11

Post by theshrike79 »

fsh wrote: post #9
defrost wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hydrogen is a small slippery hard to contain gas molecule. Ammonia transport and storage is far more likely.

Hydrogen is not at all hard to contain. Just put it in a gas bottle. The real issue is the very low density which makes the tanks rather large.

Then why do the actual people who work with hydrogen worry about transport losses if you just need a thick enough tank?

In Michael Liebreich’s Keynote Speech at World Hydrogen Congress 2022[0] he speaks about the problems of shipping hydrogen. you get around 1% of loss PER DAY (0.1% for LNG). And because of the huge tanks the energy capacity is 1/4 of a comparable LNG carrier. The economics just don't make sense.

[0] Michael Liebreich’s Keynote Speech at World Hydrogen Congress 2022 (16:00 mark about)

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#12

Post by defrost »

fsh wrote: post #9
defrost wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hydrogen is a small slippery hard to contain gas molecule. Ammonia transport and storage is far more likely.

Hydrogen is not at all hard to contain. Just put it in a gas bottle. The real issue is the very low density which makes the tanks rather large.

> Just put it in a gas bottle.

is a bit of an understatement.

Consider that a household LNG gas cyclinder (propane if you're central north american I guess) is typically built to contain between 100 and 200 psi whereas hydrogen requires high pressure tanks to contain between 5,000–10,000 psi.

That's a factor of 50 difference in required containment pressure capability.

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#13

Post by readthenotes1 »

natch wrote: post #3

Is hydrogen cheap to transport, cheap to store, and cheap to use though? I thought making it was only a small part of the problems with hydrogen.

I refer you to the current documentary on Netflix called _Glass Onion_ that examines this problem.

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#14

Post by skrebbel »

theshrike79 wrote: post #8
natch wrote: post #3

Is hydrogen cheap to transport, cheap to store, and cheap to use though? I thought making it was only a small part of the problems with hydrogen.

No, too many losses. Same problem with storage. Use isn't that expensive, fuel cells do exist. The problem with green hydrogen (made with electricity) is the inefficiency. It's only good for storage when you have already filled every battery and pumped hydro storage you have and are still making an excess. Electricity -> hydrogen -> electricity conversion is so hilariously inefficient that even petrol engines can bea…

I don’t understand that comparison. You can’t use electricity to make petrol, right?

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#15

Post by defrost »

Animats wrote: post #10

"The catalyst is made of indium gallium nitride nanostructures, grown onto a silicon surface." World gallium production is 400 tons a year. World indum production is 70 tons a year. How did "cheap" get into this?

Production is driven by demand and will very likely expand now that prices are rising again, just as production doubled back between 2011-2014 when last the price/kg rose [2] as it has in recent times.

Annual Gallium usage includes a substantial amount of reclaimed material from electronics which isn't counted as production against reserve.

> World primary low-purity gallium production capacity in 2021 was estimated to be 774,000 kilograms per year; high-purity refined gallium production capacity, 325,000 kilograms per year; and secondary high-purity gallium production capacity, 273,000 kilograms per year. [1]

[1] https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2022/mcs2022-gallium.pd...

[2] http://strategic-metal.com/products/gallium/gallium-price/

( Similar story with inidium )

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#16

Post by fsh »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #13
natch wrote: post #3

Is hydrogen cheap to transport, cheap to store, and cheap to use though? I thought making it was only a small part of the problems with hydrogen.

I refer you to the current documentary on Netflix called _Glass Onion_ that examines this problem.

While I really like the movie, the hydrogen technology part and its dangers are entirely fictional.

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#17

Post by adrianN »

kennywinker wrote: post #7
natch wrote: post #3

Is hydrogen cheap to transport, cheap to store, and cheap to use though? I thought making it was only a small part of the problems with hydrogen.

I mean, this doesn’t have to go into cars / be distributed widely… it could just used to time-shift solar energy to night time by burning it on-site. Which means you only need to solve the storage problem.

Which is already solved: salt caverns work well.

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#18

Post by DubiousPusher »

Is it just me or has it been like 18 months of one supposedly "game changing" hydrogen catalyst after another? I'm not trying to be cynical. It just seems the science press is awash in results from one research project after another in this area and I find it very difficult to rank which ones have any credible chance of utility.

Re: Cheap, sustainable hydrogen through solar power

#20

Post by fsh »

theshrike79 wrote: post #11
fsh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hydrogen is not at all hard to contain. Just put it in a gas bottle. The real issue is the very low density which makes the tanks rather large.

Then why do the actual people who work with hydrogen worry about transport losses if you just need a thick enough tank? In Michael Liebreich’s Keynote Speech at World Hydrogen Congress 2022[0] he speaks about the problems of shipping hydrogen. you get around 1% of loss PER DAY (0.1% for LNG). And because of the huge tanks the energy capacity is 1/4 of a comparable LNG carrier. The economics just don't make sense. [0]…

The talk is about liquefied gas. Bottled gas has way too low density to put it on a tanker. The losses are due to boil-off, not due to leakage.
Post reply on HN