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

Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

hydrogeninsight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 454 posts

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#311

Post by flavius29663 »

schiffern wrote: post #298
flavius29663 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are ways to work around those limitations, basically removing the "very small and very reactive" part of hydrogen. You can bind it with Nitrogen to gen ammonia - which is till very dangerous, but much easier to contain or work with. The problem with H2, ammonia, biofuels and other synthetic fuels is not that they have some limitations, it's that they are not accepted by the green energy dogma. Some green energy…

The problem isn't "dogma," it's inefficiency. Throwing energy away is counterproductive, and Energy-to-Hydrogen-to-Energy throws away lots of it. If there were no alternative long-term storage plans this might be acceptable, but that's simply not the case. If you're using hydrogen to smelt steel or make ammonia fertilizer, then there's no energy loss (beyond what's needed to decarbonize petrochemicals anyway). The ar…

ICE vehicles conquered the world with abysmal efficiencies, they were around 10-15% when they already ruled the roads and the world. That is after we drill for oil, ship it, refine it, distribute it. Even today, manufacturers boast about engines with 40% efficiency in ideal conditions, which still translates to a meager 20-30% in real world driving.

Looking at efficiency alone is not enough.

> They're simply so much less expensive

Not yet they aren't. The upfront cost of an EV still makes it more expensive than an ICE vehicle. Also, they batteries are guaranteed to degrade, so the used market has very bad prices for EVs. At some point, they will probably be less expensive for most automobiles, but hydrogen can still play a part in trucking, trains, planes, boats and specialty operations.

Only about 64% of oil is used for transportation [1] and out of that, only about 50% for automobiles and light trucks [2] (even though for light trucks, motorcycles and other applications, EVs are not going to win probably). So BEVs could replace about 30% of all oil usage. The rest of 70% is up for grabs, so why not pursue hydrogen investment as a possible alternative?

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-produc...

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/use-of-energy/transporta...

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#312

Post by leetnewb »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #166
fy20 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about methane? There are already commercial processes in place to capture it from landfills, and there are industrial processes that can produce it from hydrogen with an 8% energy loss. So if the green hydrogen problem is solved that could be used here. A lot of Asian countries already have cars that run directly on CNG - from the factory -, as it produces less smog than petrol or diesel. I visited India recentl…

Methane is a greenhouse gas. It's more polluting than c02. Removing it from the environment is a good thing but creating more is not a good thing for global warming. I suspect for it to be an alternative to oil, an such, we would need to create it not just remove it from landfills. Compressed natural gas is mostly methane but we are trying to move away from fossil fuels so it's not a long term solution. Here's a link…

I don't think that is a good comparison. Fossil fuel is a carbon sink. Extracting methane from fossil fuels in the ground releases the carbon from the sink and into the atmosphere. If synthesizing methane from hydrogen grabs carbon that is already present, it is carbon neutral.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#313

Post by theshrike79 »

pif wrote: post #299
kibwen wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Natural gas distribution infrastructure is far leakier than you expect. It's a massive problem. We really need to get away from solutions that involve pushing gas through pipes.

> We really need to get away from solutions that involve ... Halt! Propose a working alternative first, we'll talk about banning later.

Electricity. It doesn't leak from cables.

Now: we need to get away from solutions that involve pressurised gas being piped or transported around the world. =)

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#314

Post by Mikeb85 »

Schroedingersat wrote: post #296
Mikeb85 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but batteries contain toxic materials and rare earth minerals, require lots of energy to make, lots of energy to recycle, etc... So energy to mine the materials, energy to assemble the battery, energy to recycle the battery after it's useful lifespan (5-10 years)... None of these are ever counted in people's calculations. I tried to find data on energy required to produce the batteries and they still didn't count…

> So energy to mine the materials, energy to assemble the battery, energy to recycle the battery after it's useful lifespan (5-10 years)... None of these are ever counted in people's calculations. I tried to find data on energy required to produce the batteries and they still didn't count the mining cost. This is a standard component of LCA databases and puts the ESOI in the 50-100 range for the first generation of b…

> This is a standard component of LCA databases and puts the ESOI in the 50-100 range for the first generation of batteries. Subsequent generations are higher.

Yes that's the number I found WITHOUT accounting for mining the materials... Just manufacturing the battery.

> Electrolysers also require mining, as do fuel cells, as does any source of heat for reverse gas shift or similar.

Yes but there's far less of those materials required than the sheer amount of battery cells being produced for automobiles.

> Hydrogen (or rather hydrogen derived molecules) are a viable method of seasonal storage, but that doesn't mean most of the hype doesn't exist to greenwash gas or that your talking points aren't propaganda.

Greenwash gas? The whole point of hydrogen is to create it using renewable sources of energy... The whole problem with renewables is storing the energy since they don't produce reliable baseline energy. Hydrogen accomplishes that.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#315

Post by incrudible »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #282
rich_sasha wrote: post #210

I find it weird how hostile to hydrogen the "renewable energy gang" is. The story of how renewables take over the world and displace fossil fuels and nuclear totally relies on storage, in some cases seasonal storage, IE overproducing in summer and holding on to the energy til the end of winter. Does hydrogen work for it? Well, maybe, it could, there are unresolved issues but hey we are trying to do science here. It's…

I thought the article was fairly to the point: > There is a “common understanding worldwide that hydrogen should be limited to applications where it would be difficult to achieve decarbonisation with other methods”, says the report by the Tokyo-based non-profit think-tank Renewable Energy Institute (REI), but Japan has instead laid out a vision of a “hydrogen society where hydrogen is used in every sector”, while pro…

Pretty much nothing in the renewable sector is a "viable business case" without some sort of government interference. You're speculating that batteries will be better buffers than hydrogen, but in truth nobody can predict the technological trajectories and neither presents a solution in the foreseeable future. If there really is an upcoming climate catastrophe, it would be stupid not to hedge your bets, which includes supporting hydrogen, nuclear, synthetic fuels and many other avenues. The fact that mainstream climate activists reject so many potential alternatives out-of-hand tells me that they don't truly believe in the catastrophe. They believe in fighting the monopoly man.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#316

Post by slackfan »

rgmerk wrote: post #14
slackfan wrote: post #5

Spoiler alert, this is the fate of all Hydrogen strategies not based on massive investment into nuclear. But since when did physics ever stop anybody from believing in fairy tales?

If your strategy involves massive investment in nuclear you don’t need hydrogen in Japan. Northern Europe and Canada have very seasonally-dependant energy demand that inversely correlates with solar availability. Japan has hot humid summers that require the use of air conditioners, so energy demand doesn’t vary nearly as much over the year. In most of the country you also don’t get cold enough to worry about heat pum…

Counterpoint, there is an argument to be made for Hydrogen-fueled IC engines. Massive investment in nuclear does not solve the issue with lithium required for batteries (nevermind the environmental impact of such).

I seem to recall Mazda doing a thing around their RX-8 with dual-fueling, but that went nowhere a decade and a half ago.

But hey, why go for a significantly cheaper from a cap-ex perspective option where retrofititng existing vehicles to hydrogen (which can be done), and developing that tech, instead dumping more cash into rare earth development and going about hydrogen power in the most asinine way possible, because somebody is gonna get (more) rich off of doing this.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#317

Post by slackfan »

Panzer04 wrote: post #42
slackfan wrote: post #5

Spoiler alert, this is the fate of all Hydrogen strategies not based on massive investment into nuclear. But since when did physics ever stop anybody from believing in fairy tales?

How so? It costs more per kwh than renewables. If you are going to store electricity, it may as well be from renewables (which also benefit the most from storing power in a practical sense)

What's the total ROeI (return on energy invested) to engineer, build, deploy any piece of renewable? Multiple decades. What is is with nuclear? A day? A few weeks at most?

That's why I point out the physics bit. This isn't about the cost, this is about being able to generate energy, not just try to build what is in essense a perpetual motion machine.

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#318

Post by rob74 »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #282
rich_sasha wrote: post #210

I find it weird how hostile to hydrogen the "renewable energy gang" is. The story of how renewables take over the world and displace fossil fuels and nuclear totally relies on storage, in some cases seasonal storage, IE overproducing in summer and holding on to the energy til the end of winter. Does hydrogen work for it? Well, maybe, it could, there are unresolved issues but hey we are trying to do science here. It's…

I thought the article was fairly to the point: > There is a “common understanding worldwide that hydrogen should be limited to applications where it would be difficult to achieve decarbonisation with other methods”, says the report by the Tokyo-based non-profit think-tank Renewable Energy Institute (REI), but Japan has instead laid out a vision of a “hydrogen society where hydrogen is used in every sector”, while pro…

The "vision of a hydrogen society where hydrogen is used in every sector" is probably motivated by a desire to become technological leaders in this field. Japan has fallen behind in battery technology, and Toyota was an early leader with its hybrid vehicles, but when it comes to fully electric cars, Japanese car makers are also falling behind. So I suspect they are trying to find a niche where they can develop technologies that they can maybe export later. From that point of view, where the hydrogen is coming from is not that important. And: a battery electric car is also not really helping to "save the planet" if the electricity used to charge it is coming from a coal plant...

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#319

Post by cesarb »

theshrike79 wrote: post #313
pif wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We really need to get away from solutions that involve ... Halt! Propose a working alternative first, we'll talk about banning later.

Electricity. It doesn't leak from cables. Now: we need to get away from solutions that involve pressurised gas being piped or transported around the world. =)

> Electricity. It doesn't leak from cables.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corona_discharge

"[...] Corona discharge from high voltage electric power transmission lines constitutes an economically significant waste of energy for utilities."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overhead_power_line

"Transmission higher than 132 kV poses the problem of corona discharge, which causes significant power loss and interference with communication circuits. [...]"

It might be unexpected and surprising, but yes, electricity does leak from cables!

Re: Japan's hydrogen strategy does nothing for decarbonisation: study

#320

Post by slackfan »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #10
slackfan wrote: post #5

Spoiler alert, this is the fate of all Hydrogen strategies not based on massive investment into nuclear. But since when did physics ever stop anybody from believing in fairy tales?

This is nearly a ludicrous leap of logic with an ad hominem attack only slightly disguised.

Call me when the energy produced by solar and wind and hydro can produce enough hydrogen to fuel the needs to even maintain the existing solar, wind, and hydro.
Post reply on HN