Why Hydrogen DOES Have a Future. Go to brilliant.org/Undecided/ and get 20% off your subscription and a 30 day free trial with Brilliant.org! In the summer of 2023, the Rijnstate hospital of Elst, The Netherlands opened its doors. What makes this particular campus interesting is how it generates its energy. Heat pumps, PV panels, and an electrolyzer all work in concert to maintain a constant supply of power. The building collects energy from over 1,300 solar panels located on both the roof and the ground floor. When there’s a surplus of solar, that energy goes toward electrolysis, the splitting action that produces hydrogen. This then allows for hydrogen fuel cells to kick in as a form of reserve power when the sunnier supplies are low.
Watch Why This NASA Battery May Be The Future of Energy Storage • Why This NASA Battery ...
Video script and citations:
undecidedmf.com/why-hydrogen-...
Get my achieve energy security with solar guide:
link.undecidedmf.com/solar-guide
Follow-up podcast:
Video version - / @stilltbd
Audio version - bit.ly/stilltbdfm
Join the Undecided Discord server:
link.undecidedmf.com/discord
👋 Support Undecided on Patreon!
/ mattferrell
⚙️ Gear & Products I Like
undecidedmf.com/shop/
Visit my Energysage Portal (US):
Research solar panels and get quotes for free!
link.undecidedmf.com/energysage
And find heat pump installers near you (US):
link.undecidedmf.com/energysa...
Or find community solar near you (US):
link.undecidedmf.com/communit...
For a curated solar buying experience (Canada)
EnergyPal's free personalized quotes:
energypal.com/undecided
Tesla Referral Code:
Get 1,000 free supercharging miles
or a discount on Tesla Solar & Powerwalls
ts.la/matthew84515
👉 Follow Me
Mastodon
mastodon.social/@mattferrell
X
X.com/mattferrell
X.com/undecidedMF
Instagram
/ mattferrell
/ undecidedmf
Facebook
/ undecidedmf
Website
undecidedmf.com
📺 KZhead Tools I Recommend
Audio file(s) provided by Epidemic Sound
bit.ly/UndecidedEpidemic
TubeBuddy
www.tubebuddy.com/undecided
VidIQ
vidiq.com/undecided
I may earn a small commission for my endorsement or recommendation to products or services linked above, but I wouldn't put them here if I didn't like them. Your purchase helps support the channel and the videos I produce. Thank you.
Is hydrogen still worth exploring as an energy storage medium? Go to brilliant.org/Undecided/ and get 20% off your subscription and a 30 day free trial with Brilliant.org! If you liked this, check out Why This NASA Battery May Be The Future of Energy Storage kzhead.info/sun/Zd6AXb6qemZ4gmg/bejne.html
'cisro' is pronounced 'C. S. I. R. O.' specifically.
Personally, no still, main reason is you are converting H from something else - always - and thus you always going to never have a good return on the power you use. Granted, if it comes directly from the sun (not solar plans it self), but the light, then it will have a better value as the sun is free, but you are still using up a resource we still need such as clean water. Water that normally we have to clean up to some level and in some places clean from salt water that takes even more power. Batteries already have a return rate of 90% - and uses resources that can be recycle once mine out. Let alone, dont have to waste resources we need to live. At best, its a long shelf life of power storages, but even, I would argue that not even true because its hard to store the stuff from pressure to the stuff leaking from its storage container. Let alone the the floor space it takes just to make, store, and burn where batteries take even less floor space of that. The big move will be moving away from Li and into Na batteries along with switching from Carbon to something else like S or Si. Na allows for more batteries to be produce + reduce the cost while the other two help with power dens of the batteries themselves.
I still believe that hydrogen directly from solar panels will become a source of fuel for off the grid living. Batteries are a problem as vehicle fires increase as the Sun hits us with an EMP in the future as the magnetic fields weaken.
i have no future..
@@adr2t H is energy storage, not a fuel. Most currently comes from NG. It's just more expensive fuel than the status quo. Beware anyone telling you otherwise.
For reference, the Netherlands hospital hydrogen/solar example is a quoted 60% self-sufficient for total energy needs. Impressive for such a large consumer of energy.
It should be investigated how much Hydrogen is leaking during the production, storage, transport and usage. Leakage of hydrogen (already about 18% during electrolysis) is preventing methane from breaking down in the atmosphere. That is contributing to global warming.
@@BMWHP2 Yes, but with increased focus on _not releasing the methane in the first place_ Honestly, it's like proper forget "an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure" Or gram of prevention and kilogram of cure if you're not American.
While I think those reports are overblown (the benefits outweigh the negatives), it's an interesting point to raise.
@@BMWHP2are you referring to the Rocky Mountain institute briefing from Jan 2020? Just curious
@@UndecidedMF Matt those reports come from reputable sources: Priceton (acee.princeton.edu/acee-news/switching-to-hydrogen-fuel-could-prolong-the-methane-problem/), Nature (www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35419-7), UK Government (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/624eca7fe90e0729f4400b99/atmospheric-implications-of-increased-hydrogen-use.pdf), Columbia (www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/hydrogen-leakage-potential-risk-hydrogen-economy/)
As an opponent of people touting hydrogen as the salvation I welcome these developments. I hope they will in fact be able to commercialize these products at scale and it isn't just a scam to get venture capital.
Container embrittlement is often the issue, but on the large scale I like it’s storage duration. Mathematically the larger the vessel the less waste of containment material, which is part of why larger is better. Picture an inch thick water bottle’s internal volume vs an inch and a half thick vessel the size of an olympic pool. Bigger the better.. Also not soo much irretrievable waste as batteries leave behind.
Have you looked at liquid air energy storage?
Yeah, the inefficiency of electrolysis was the main problem I had with the idea of an H2 economy. (Although safe, efficient, dense and high cycle-life storage for transportation usage is an issue for that energy segment.)
I’ll believe it when I see it.
The key thing here is that hospitals also needs the oxygen making that part needed anyway making the power storage feature bonus. Without that so do I think batteries make more sense still.
The hospital use case of an electrolyzer to get hydrogen for heat and oxygen for medical uses is cool! But the obvious question is how does that compare to using that electricity instead for a heat pump and a conventional air separation unit for oxygen. Even assuming only excess solar is used, I'd hazard a guess that adding battery storage might make more sense. This is the type of analysis that matters and I'd like to see more of.
There is a group where I work that looked into batteries vs hydrogen storage, apparently hydrogen is much more economical. Air separation units are very power hungry and don't do well with fluctuations or sudden ramps.
Batteries have a problem where they are very expensive and they don't get cheaper with the more you buy. If you get a electrolytic separator, a generator, and tanks to store hydrogen for later then you only have the high capitol cost when you buy the generator and separator. More tanks to increase your capacity are very cheap in comparison. Liquid hydrogen stored in a tank is also much more energy dense than batteries meaning that you don't need a big building full of batteries and the associated cooling for the massive amounts of heat that they generate either
@@user-jm8sy5ox2j You can’t compare the energy density of liquid hydrogen without accounting for the refrigeration power. Cooling down to -253C isn’t cheap.
I'm pretty sure the hospital's accountants have checked the other options. They have more management staff than nurses after all.
@@bensemusxI don't think hydrogen is usually stored as a liquid for that reason. High-pressure tanks are more common, though those (and their pumps) are expensive as well. There's ongoing research into trying to store hydrogen adsorbed into what amounts to metal sponges to increase the storage density without high pressure. I'm not sure what the latest progress is on that, though.
I see hydrogen as another “battery” to transport and/or store green energy. We need to keep developing different storage methods because they will fill different situational needs.
Its super helpful at hospitals where there is a need for pure oxygen and distilled water unlike in most other places. Maybe some industrial uses could also use it.. but I don't know who else might need oxygen and have water like is needed.
Yes it is a battery (green hydrogen) of course. A very inefficient battery unfortunately due to poor performance of the fuel cell side (and less so the electrolysis side). I don’t see this changing unless we get a lot of high temp fission reactors with high temperature waste heat which can be used to get more H2 per unit electricity. I’m not even convinced that will do it. And regular batteries will also get better. H2 is a very tough solution.
Compressed air sites is a good candidate to store energy and accompany a high eroi
@@DaraParsavand yeah it's looking like batteries will be the foundation of our global civilization for the next few centuries, maybe until we won't even need to store energy anymore.
@johnhiggs325 did you know hydrogen can already be stored safely as a powder with the same energydensity as diesel? A Dutch startup called H2Fuel is in the process of making this commercially viable. No more compressing H2 in special pressurized chambers and no more any safety concerns. It is superinteresting tech. Combined with these technological advances in H2 electrolizers I think the future of H2 is bright.
I'm a student at the University of Newcastle, one of my old professors is working on some of this tech with the CSIRO currently! Super cool to see 🙂 Also much prefer your pronunciation of "Scissiro" Matt, we usually just say each letter in CSIRO 😅
How could anybody possibly not immediately pronounce it Cicero?!? 😂
Or however you want to spell the alliteration.
Although it's kinda funny because Marcus Tullius Cicero was a politician and one of the types we would generally refer to as a "Conservative"
That's awesome! But I should have pronounced it "Sci-ro." Not sure why I added the extra S in there (brain misfire). 😂
When working there, most say Sc-eye-row. It's an Aussie thing...
What I am missing from all these videos is actual running costs in terms of electrolyzer degradation. I've seen some very different numbers, and all were quite high.
Great video Matt. I would like to correct just a minor error in the video. As a 72 year old Australian, I can assure you that the CSIRO is never called Cisiro ! As I'm sure you know, it stands for Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation. It is ALWAYS referred to as the C S I R O, never as a single word. I've watched and enjoyed many of your videos, and I was quite confident that you would want to know what I have explained. Keep up the excellent work.
+1 to it mostly being spelled out C-S-I-R-O. I have heard people who work there pronounce it "sye-row"
Great response @improveyour woodwork11, but I'd like to make just one small correction. While not as senior as you, I can assure you, by being a Canberran and from knowing people who work there, CSIRO is also referred to as a single word by many, sounding like sigh-roe. 😉😁
@@fleachamberlain1905 +1 on sigh-roe
Agree, having done work with the Newcastle solar group, who are a great team. It's C.S.I.R.O!
You dug in deep there, Improve, yet 3 Australians in the same thread insist that even Sye-roe employees sometimes pronounce it as 1 word. Next you'll be insisting Kangaroos can run properly. For now, just worry about driving on the right side of the road.
Everytime new energy storage tech comes up. The number I always want is the round trip efficiency. For lithium battery it is around 90%. Pumped hydro is ~80%. What's missing from this video is exactly this, the round trip efficiency. If hydrogen battery have round trip efficiency of even 70% and cheap enough, it's usible.
what round trip efficiency do you expect, if hydrogen generation efficiency is 10%-20% and hydrogen generation is a part of "charging battery" part.
There is also need very cheap energy storage even if round trip efficency is horrible
@@s.i.m.c.a I don't expect anything. If hydrogen's round trip efficiency is 20%. Then unless there's a very good and strong strength elsewhere like density or price. We are much better off using batteries as power storage device. Let's say hydrogen is 1/4 as efficient as batteries. You literally need 4x the power to charge it. You are likely doing more good by selling your power to the grid instead. That way at least coal plants burn less coal.
However, if you are trying to fuel the battery by adding more hydrogen to it. Then the question becomes how is that hydrogen made. Is it low-emission enough to justify? Or is it better to just use batteries? I was expecting these answers form the vid. But I got no critical information
I am not sure you completely understand... The hydrogen IS the battery - you are not charging a battery with hydrogen, you are producing hydrogen instead of charging a battery, and then you use the hydrogen as a fuel source later when you need it, instead of using a battery. And the whole video was more or less about HOW the hydrogen was made. But to your first point, I don't think the roundtrip efficiency is very good, and that is the big problem imo, specially compared to batteries. You have a HUGE loss when you make the hydrogen, where you only get a few % of the power you use as potiental power in the hydrogen. And then I have to assume there is a loss again when you convert it back from hydrogen to electricity. It might have a lot promise on the surface, and 10 - 20 years ago, it probably was the most obvious solution- but batteries has come SO FAR, and the hydrogen tech is barely moving, and has little to no chance of catching up. Seems the challenges is a lot bigger than expected. @@clehaxze
Small correction: the CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) is generally just pronounced by its letters 😉
I came here to say that. Not quite CISRO haha
Correct but completely stupid. It's a right mouthful.
My parents, who both worked for CSIRO, would often just pronounce it as "csi-ro"
Yeah, I'm not sure why my brain threw the extra S in the pronunciation. I had some former CSIRO employees tell me to pronounce it as a word vs. saying the letters a long time ago. Might be a generational thing. Interesting.
I’ve worked at CSIRO, and it is commonly pronounced as an acronym, not an initialism. The pronunciation is sci-row though.
Can you cover Dimethyl Ether (DME) ? It stores like Propane, yet can be made from (Sustainable!) Biomass, or via Power-to-X Chemicals *like* Hydrogen etc Also it works well as a Diesel Fuel due to it’s high Cetane Value. Also it *cannot* produce Soot, thus Diesel Particulate Matter is WAY lower. I’m rambling, but this is a neat solution that needs more coverage and you could do a great job!
Hi matt, hydrogen systems engineer here. You did a great job explaining how power efficiency for hydrogen production is indeed a big arguing point against hydrogen power. Excited to see that efficiency improving! Thanks for sharing. There is going to be a whole other energy efficiency issue, around cryogenic liquid hydrogen storage and infrastructure. Currently tackling that with an aviation client. Would love to know your thoughts on that side.
Hydrogen has the lowest energy content by volume as a liquid (about four times less than aviation fuel) so theoretically requires four times the onboard storage volume - and kept refrigerated at extremely low temperatures. How would that be handled by aircraft?
@@maxhugen- contrast that to batteries 🔋- H2 has a higher energy concentration. H2 does not have to compete with liquid aviation fuel ⛽️, but with batteries 🪫, if the goal 🥅 is to stop 🛑 using carbon fuels.
@@DavidHalko Batteries are the Achilles heel of electrical-based green power. Hardly a surprise. At this point of their development, I'd call batteries for aircraft totally unrealistic apart from small private aircraft.
Are there any other countries besides China with solid hydrogen storage becoming active? Matt did a great video on metal hydrides.
@@maxhugen Safran and Thales put any plan direct use of hydrogen in airplanes far in the future. More direct usage in their plan is to synthetize kerosene with (green) hydrogen and atmospheric CO2 to use mixed with biofuel from alimentary waste like used frying oil (current airplanes engines apparently can technically support having half of their fuel coming from such waste, like a test last year with used frying oil), after improved both the engine efficiency to try to reduce fuel comsumption to a third or less or current fuel consumption, while trying to increase the amount of alimentary waste oil in the fuel that engine can support. Synthetic kerozene from green hydrogen and atmospheric CO2 is also something which is studied for space rockets, because while rocket using liquid hydrogen and oxygen is a solved problem, those rockets are finicky compared to kerosene rockets. And yes, those studying this option know that it will be even less energy efficient to produce this synthetic "green" kerosene , but the point is that kerosene is more energetic dense than hydrogen and above all far far easier to store and transport.
About your question at the end of the video: My favorite tech is the boring, basic kind: Compressed Air. It requires basic materials, can directly transition kinetic forces to storage without chemicals, and is adequate for short range uses, where energy density isn't important. People have created cars out of them and they work fine, but they're outclassed by electric and gas powered machines. It has some uses for low- cost deployment that is still green, particularly for remote areas. Not everything should immediately go hydrogen right?
Compressed air is one of the least energy efficient processes out there. Typically most systems only run at 10-15% efficiency. Now if heat was recovered for use it might go higher, but still not great. I did see a guy in France who made an air powered car, looked neat, but he basically took advantage of gas stations “free” air to operate. If he had to fill it at home, he wouldn’t use it, guaranteed.
@@brettgracey9682That is one of the other big downsides indeed! I double checked online for content, there's too many clickbait scams.
I wonder about using a caboose on trains going downhill to brake the descent using a compressor plant. As long as there's a local user for that air, it's all but free.q
Compressed CO2 seems a much more efficient system. Check out "Energy Dome".
The thing I really like about the hospital example is the 'green oxygen' - brilliant! The H2 is almost just a bonus. Even better would be to use the H2 to power a fuel cell for electricity when the sun isn't shining and then use the waste heat to heat the building. Also I think the future of H2 is to produce and use it on site, as it gets around the transport issues.
interesting thing about that, creating 02 by electrolysis isn't an FDA approved process, so it can't be used for medical use here in the US.
Or how about using a MegaPack for electricity when the sun isn't shining
nice to see a hospital using h2 splitting as a byproduct of O2 generation for patients. I have had to use o2 in hospitals before. the thing most people don't think about is semi-portable local generated.. vs our current route to get anything. If you can local produce something you have an extra savings right there.
I love seeing the titles of articles but good you also link to the articles please :)
Excited for the TBD follow up on this video. Hoping you can talk about what sorts of scales a Hysata electrolyser (sp?) paired with a fuel cell and PV panels could work at. It seems like this could be a decent grid scale storage solution but do you think it could work on a single home scale?
I think that adsorption based Hydrogen Storage is WAY more impressive than any advance in Hydrogen production. I would love to see some attention on your Channel about Plasma Kinetics and it's technology.
After the intro but before watching: Hydrogen seems best suited for on-site renewable production (PV, wind, water, etc.) as a chemical energy storage mechanism, provided that the electrolysis unit is NOT consumed in the process (within reason ... 5-10 year life span, preferably 20-30+). The thing about electrolysis (be it in lab conditions, an acid battery, galvanization process, the anodes and cathodes are either consumed/pitted, or grow spikes, and are irreversibly consumed in the process, giving a disingenuous assessment of "green" energy, as the replacement parts aren't factored in. If they've found a way for the electrolysis unit to suitably regenerate itself at sufficient quality for 10,000+ cycles, that'd be a good start. Then even factoring in the extraction, transport, refinement, transport, and installation/maintenance of consumables, it'd bring the average renewable energy up over the life.
I know it’s far less efficient but if it’s cost efficient vs. replacing the cells, you can always burn hydrogen in a piston engine, boiler or turbine. For something big like a hospital that’s reasonable.
Good job electrolysers are generally rated for ~80,000 hours of operation already then.... They do degrade, but think of them as a flow battery that you only ever charge. Users generally "discharge" the energy in another location or process. Given the pretty horrendous chemical environment generated within the stacks (remember H+ ions floating around in liquid media are generally just referred to as "acid") - that's not too bad.
Great video, thanks. I'd like to see more on ammonia as a hydrogen carrier, especially in light of the recent Japanese development of perovskites for ambient pressure ammonia storage. Thanks!
Hi Matt, loved the video, and your channel! Have you heard of the tower that is converting CO^2 and water vapor from our atmosphere into Jet-A or diesel fuel? It burns just like jet or diesel fuel but the emissions are just returning to the atmosphere from whence they came, thus, net zero. Have you seen this technology? I like the concept because if this technology is scalable, nothing has to change in terms of fuel storage, delivery, etc except for how it is generated. Is it ideal for congested cities where the concentration of emissions can cause unsafe to breathe city air? No but for certain solutions such as fuel for aircraft, shipping, trains, etc, it sounds like a viable solution. What are your thoughts? Would love to see a video on this. Thank you!
I don't know if I have mentioned this on your channel before, but in Sweden there is a big project called Hybrit, it is using green H2 to make "green" steel amongst a few things. Maybe worth looking in to. 😊
What's your definition of green? If the grid is burning anything whilst the hydrogen elctrolisers are running then it's not green. You could have exported that energy to the grid and reduced the carbon emissions. Are Hybrit spending a fortune on electrolisers and then running them only when the grid is zero carbon? Sweden's grid looks pretty good per Wikipedia, but still 16.6twh of "other", which means burning stuff, in 2021.
@@cad4246 does the concept of transition have no meaning for you?
@@theharper1 Seems like @cad4246 believe less in "perfect is the enemy of the good" and more in "go big or go home".
Coal is now used to purify iron ore. CO is the gas that removes oxygen from the iron ore. Hydrogen can replace CO
Thanks Matt. Hydrogen will definately be worth the effort. Storing as ammonia has been tried and I think it works well. BTW we call the CSIRO by it's letters ie. it's spelled out C-S-I-R-O >>>> 🙂 Jim Bell (Australia)
Thank God someone realized we should use ammonia and not pure H2.
I’ve noticed a real uptick in the quality of your videos in the past few months, Matt. Bravo! This was a really interesting, thoughtful take on the subject. It seems to me that much of the green hydrogen hype just assumes it can replace natural gas in the existing pipeline/storage infrastructure, which just isn’t true - not enough pipe density. But as *locally generated* energy time-shifting, it’s very promising! If the products are available, it allows individual facilities (like hospitals) to operate fully off-grid for long periods of time in a completely clean way. And building-scale electrolyzers can benefit from economies of scale and relatively low-risk manufacturing. Contrast this with the lack of ANY industrial scale electrolyzers on the market, due to the intense commercial risks for the first movers. I like it when I get new ideas about how the green energy transition can work!
Good video, but pronunciation of CSIRO is sigh-row, not Cicero 😅
Honestly, even if production issues are panned out, I am skeptical about storage and transportation ever being anything but expensive. I am supportive of research but realistically, development likely only makes sense in niche environments like space exploration.
Aluminum containers, surrounded by carbon fiber is pretty common, and not for space exploration. Aluminum is cheap, light.
One can clean the urine from a hospital on site. And then recycle the water as...... hydrogen and oxygen,........ Saving on sewage..... And the spaceships can be good metafors for how one handles a small unit and its issues..... CarbonCapture included...
It's hardly ever mentioned, but in the old days of 1860 - 1960 many towns and cities in Europe used to produce their own "towngas" from coal. It was stored at day time in big "floating" iron silo's and piped in the evenings to the customers for cooking and lighting. Remember those romantic old streetlights that needed to be lit at evening? Now what is "towngas" you will ask? Surprise! A mixture of 60% hydrogen, 25% methane and the rest was most poisonous carbon-monoxide (CO).
A few years ago there was a news story on Israeli television about a startup called H2Pro, which was founded by a university team, and they claimed their way of electrolysis separates the H2 and the O2 production into two separate steps, which "eliminates the need for the membrane, the most expensive and delicate part of an electrolyzer" and enables high pressure, scalable and relatively cheap hydrogen production. Supposedly it has a "98.7% HHV inside the cells and a 95% system efficiency." One of the interviewed scientists from the company went as far as saying "we can win a Nobel prize for this". I haven't really heard anything from them since, although looking up their name now shows they did sign a $250 million hydrogen supply deal with a Japanese company called Sumitomo. Anyway, I wonder how their electrolysis technology compares against the one with the capillaries discussed in the video.
the major problem is not the bubbles but the overpotential. Both hydrogen and oxygen need higher voltages (compared to the theoretical voltage) to discharge at the electrode. Hydrogen overpotential can be reduced using expensive and specialized electrodes (like platinum) but the oxygen overpotential has not been really tackled. One trivial solution is to carry out the electrolysis at high temp when the overpotential is reduced. But high temp electrolysis cells are messy and expensive. Getting a theoretical efficiency of 95%++ is really difficult.
Sounds like VC hype
@@janami-dharmamPerhaps they discuss that aspect in their Nature article. It's called "Decoupled hydrogen and oxygen evolution by a two-step electrochemical-chemical cycle for efficient overall water splitting".
@@xIQ188xThat did seem a bit like it, although I think they already had investors such as Bill Gates and Hyundai.
@@janami-dharmamThe problem is the bubbles as they block the electrodes and cause the over potential.
Really great video! I have to nitpick though - it's the see-ess-eye-are-oh, not "cicero"! Occasionally people say sci-roh, but usually we just spell out the initialism.
Big problem wit H2 remains medium to long term storage . The molecule is so tiny it will escape thru any container wall . More than a few days and your tank is empty . Not a good way to store that precious green energy
It is certainly worth exploring. H2 is very useful for many industries; in short, we need it. The key is in realizing where it fits ... and where it does not. It certainly has areas of both.
As a potent GHG that leaks most readily, it shouldn't even be contemplated for domestic usage.
@@Timlagor Given the level of use for the stuff (this isn't going to be car transport, etc), environmental impact shouldn't be an issue. Not in the quantities that make sense.
UK has been talking about pumping H2 into gas mains. I don't think it's going to happen but it was seriously mooted.@@JT_771
The future is Hydrogen!
@@Timlagor The future is Solid Hydrogen, Lasts forever!
Great video, once again inspiring me to ask for a video on the HydroMax process. Uses molten iron and tin to make hydrogen from waste hydrocarbons and then reset with water injection to make carbon monoxide. Seems like a natural for sewage waste treatment especially if you consider the hydrogen content found in urine. The two main inputs for the process are found at every sewage plant, water, and bottled up hydrogen in the urine and solid waste. If you were to combine the hydrogen with the carbon monoxide you can make storable fuel with the Fischer- Tropsch process or combust the carbon dioxide and power an electrical generator to power the process with an induction furnace powered crucible. With hydrogen as your primary waste product.
For those that don’t know, The HydroMax process is a simple process that takes place in a crucible full of molten iron and tin. Water is injected into the molten metal. The oxygen in the water gives up its bond to hydrogen and chooses a stronger bond with the iron leaving the hydrogen to boil off and be captured. Then the iron oxide with tin that works as a wetting agent is scrubbed of its oxygen by injection of carbon waste that has a higher attraction to the oxygen than the iron producing carbon monoxide as a byproduct that is then captured to be burned or used as needed. In the process resetting the iron to capture more oxygen in the hydrogen production process. The temperatures it operates at breaks all the bonds down on the atomic level thusly cleaning the input materials from their less than pristine conditions prior to the process. Any excess materials are cleaned off of the iron in the form of dross and can be processed for their elements or even used as a substitute for Portland Cement reducing the co2 that is typically made in the process of making Portland cement for the construction industry.
Love your work bro. CSIRO is normally pronounced by pronouncing its 5 letters individually.
Rijnstaete Elst is practically around the corner for me (just 3 trainstops/15 minutes away) and I was really surprised about their hydrogen solution as a sort of "backup power".
Even as a stationary battery, it doesn't seem as good as a flow battery or even LFP based chemical storage. Still need rare earths for the hydrogen catalyzers. LFP you need lithium of course, but it is highly recyclable. I believe the platinum and nickel anode/cathode in a fuel cell does slowly get used up.
In a lot of use cases hydrogen is just another battery. So I would be interested in other battery technologies as a comparison. Especially in large scale applications / industrial applications.
Short time energy storage and balancing: battery, or things like pumped hydro. Long time energy storage, that also be scaled up to huge capacities: hydrogen (or its products that are easier to store). It is much cheaper this way.
what happened to the hydrogen storage discsthat France came up with a couple years ago? Could we get an update on that?
Could you do a review on the Lavo Hydrogen Home Enery Storage System power wall now that it has been available and in use for three years. I would be very interested to see how it is going.
This is good to see. I think all the self sufficiency solutions from here on out will involve a pastiche of methods that work together. Thinking that solar or wind alone will carry the day is naive at best and dangerous at worst.
Viable hydrogen production and its use may not be available yet, but it's really going to blow up in the future.
Did you had to say "blow up?"
@@beaudavis3808It was quite likely deliberate.
aha...with side effect like increased consumption of fresh water...same problem like electric car increase without updating network grid.
I see what you did there ... and I like it. 😂
@@s.i.m.c.a Not necessary. The hydrogen fuel cell would be another part of the water cycle.
I did a bit of research (Please correct me if any of my information is faulty) but according to some sources, Hysata's technique uses about 33.33 KWH to produce 1 Kg of hydrogen. Compared to gasoline, my research stated that it can take 4 KWH to produce a Kg of gas. Also I found that hydrogen has approx. 3 times the energy output as gasoline. This would mean it would take about 11 kwh to create what we produce with gas with 4 kwh. So we are not on the same playing field with gas (yet) if we look purly at energy consumption to energy output, however, seeing that we are narrowing the gap gives me hope.
Interesting video Matt, thanks for your work on this, and presenting.
I would think battery storage would be more efficient, more economical, and make more sense. Hydrogen storage is always going to be a big problem at any scale.
and safer..
It makes sense solely for mobile applications, and specifically for aerospace, where high energy density and fast refueling can be worth the inefficiency. Also, hydrogen has a lot of use in the chemical industry as a feedstock, mainly for producing ammonia which fertilized all the crops on earth. That need will not go away any time soon, so developing green(er) ways of making hydrogen is very important
This is not really true. Hydrogen storage can be at least tens of times cheaper than batteries if you only want to store energy accumulated in summer to use in winter. There is also the benefit of scaling- being able to use underground gas storage facilities with huge capacity, while there is simply no way to scale up battery production that much. And then, you can also tie hydrogen atoms with nitrogen to produce ammonia for energy storage, which is easy to store, easy to burn, and production of which will have to scale up greatly as we transition from agricultural ammonia made from gas (production emits CO2), to green one.
Battery storage has nowhere near hydrogen's energy density per mass and can be produced with simple electrolysis as opposed to often harmful and complicated processes of fabricating modern batteries. Just for comparison, NiMH batteries provide 0.4MJ of energy per kilogram. Lithium based batteries provide 0.72MJ of energy per kilogram. Hydrogen provides 142.5MJ of energy per kilogram - a value on an entirely different scale. Now that said, it does come with a whole lot of disadvantages (or challenges to overcome). Reliable and lightweight storage will be one of the most crucial problems to solve. Once that is done, I could see us even filling our cars' fuel tanks with water instead of gasoline, and letting the car do the electrolysis and run on hydrogen.
@TarisSinclair Energy density per volume unit. And it takes enormous energy to compress or condense hydrogen to a meaningful density, given that it has the highest specific heat capacity of all known materials
Those two hospitals you mentioned in the video are great examples of how hydrogen technology can be successful deployed. There, the H2 is created with excess solar, stored on site, then used to generate electricity when needed. The O2 is also a very useful product for them. Hats off to them. I am uneasy about H2 tech being pushed into other sectors. The oil industry has recognised there is a move away from their products towards greener technology, and this is how they can retain some of it. By promoting hydrogen for transportation, or even in place of natural gas it spreads out the research spend. They know that it's by far easier and cheaper to create H2 using their products than in any other way, creating a demand that otherwise would not be there - all the while releasing carbon.
Would love to see some videos on the companies recently featured on the Forbes 30 under 30 list. Saw some interesting companies on there with little to no detailed videos even though the work seems amazing (Aquagga getting PFAS out of the drinking supply, Aquaria air water generators, Calion zero-emissions refrigeration, etc)
Great video! Was wondering if it could ever be efficient enough for on site production and consumption? Storage seems to be a pain due to raw physics, maybe smaller and more numerous is a possible way to go.
Glad you liked it! That's the big question ... to me that's where it makes a lot of potential sense. Side steps the need to transport it. There are companies doing this right now. GKN has energy storage systems that produce, store, and convert back to electricity in one trailer sized unit.
Matt is going to need a new channel now. UnOreoed with Matt Ferrell. It's the same exact channel and content as before, but everything is explained through the manipulation and destruction of Oreo cookies. The Nabisco sponsorship writes itself. In all seriousness, thanks for the content. It's great to see this space evolve as the technology behind it comes out of its infancy.
I understand why Matt used Oreos in his analogy, but he had a real opportunity to make a Hydrox cookie pun and he missed it.
How does the on site energy storage solutions compare with those large and heavy in place batteries, in terms of cost?
That's a video unto itself, but in general batteries aren't cost effective when you get to the 4-8 hour storage range for large scale facilities. Other tech becomes more cost effective like pumped hydro as an example (even though it's nowhere as efficient as batteries). Hydrogen can scale better than batteries in those terms too (in theory).
@@UndecidedMF ah, interesting. A video on that would be interesting I think. "Hydrogen" seems really like a bunch of fairly different things depending on what you're trying to use it for
Matt thanks for the video, what is your take about Natural/White/Geological Hydrogen?
I love that Australia is a world leader in this field. I feel like Australia is an ideal location for hydrogen as well given our massive amount of sunlight.
Agreed, but it's a shame that so many Australian inventions (especially from CSIRO) have been bought and buried. On the other hand, some have been spectacularly successful like WiFi. CSIRO has also developed more efficient methods for converting hydrogen to ammonia for simpler storage and transport.
30+ years ago Australia lead the world in solar PV R&D, and most of it paid for by the taxpayer. It seems it was all given away for free, and in particular to China who have many of those researchers working for various Chinese corporations. So the question is, will the same happen again, especially if the funding comes from entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, or shareholders in the private sector who have a tendency to sell IP to the highest bidder for the highest short term profit if this IP is not under the total control of the founders or the CSIRO. Imagine where Australia would be if the Solar technology was nurtured here into an industry and the profits feeding back into developing better PV and other "green" energy production and storage.
Hey matt, great video! I remember a few years ago hearing about a physical hydrogen tape that helps solve some of the storage issues, but they had to pause research on it because the US DOD stop them or something. I'd love more info on that if there's anything new
Love your videos,,, this one left me wondering about he cost of power when all or part of the green energies are combined together in a small project such as that hospital or a farm. Mega or bigger is not always better may be a false assumption ... Maybe blended and compact or mobile is better...
So I may have missed this at some point and someone may have mentioned this in the comments already but could you eventually address water usage in regards to green hydrogen. I’ve yet to see someone talking about the water requirements which as of spring last year the best overall techniques required 19 kg of water per a kg of hydrogen. With the entire world on the brink of a water crisis what’s the plan to combat this. Desalination of sea water through reverse osmosis adding additional energy requirements to the whole process? Thank you
water availability is the elephant in the room for hydrogen. since green hydrogen should not be made from fossil fuels, and many areas of the world are now under water stress, it becomes a non-starter in many cases
I really believe that in future there WILL be a parallel economy with Green H2/Fuel Cell and EV's complementing each other in different areas. For applications like Locomotives, Heavy Trucks, Ferries and even Shipping, I think there is a good possibility for H2 to capture that market. Not to mention manufacturing industries like Steel, Cement etc. Another use for Green H2 would be the possibility for it to be converted to Synthetic Fuels. I am keenly watching this segment. Thx. for the videos.
Most land based shipping should just be conventionally electrified, ie with overhead wires. We've had the technology to fully electrify our railways for more than 100 years, and we are starting to see pilot projects for electrified highways for trucking. Hydrogen does have great potential for ships and aircraft, and some land based vehicles. As long as we get places where vehicles can fill up on hydrogen, I think we are going to start seeing plug-in hybrids with fuel cells as backup replacing fossil fuels.
@@pin65371 For trains they are a nobrainer, tracks already have height limits with tunnels and bridges, I agree it can be a problem for roads, the solution I've seen proposed is electrifying the leftmost lane on the highway, so if you need to drive something big you drive with the other cars, there have also been proposals to put the transmission wires on the side of the vehicles instead of above. The first solution would obviously only work for 3-lane+ roads, but all solutions have issues.
In New Zealand we built a natural gas to petroleum converter in the late 70's. Just before fuel prices crashed back down. It has been mothballed nearly 30 years now. Unfortunately now that fuel prices are rising the gas field is close to collapse.
Hi Matt! Have you looked into propane fuel cells yet? Lots of mine sites use them to recharge their batteries in remote locations in the few months where solar power is low. I feel like a consumer option would be game changing.
what is the benefit given that propane is a fossil fuel? more efficient than a generator?
@@ThomasBomb45 The main benefit is that it can be incorporated into a consumer's system without expensive infrastructure changes. A home that would otherwise be using an inefficient gasoline/propane generator could use the efficient fuel cell to charge their batteries when solar input is insufficient. Renewable propane is currently made on small scales. I'm not sure about the possibilities for wide scale carbon neutral propane.
BTW @UndecidedMF, CSIRO isn't pronounced as a word, but as the individual letters like USA (but 'Yousa' would be a funny way to say USA)
I believe hydrogen transportation at high pressure is going to be prohibitive. If it is converted to ammonia with low-cost heat, it could maybe alleviate some transport costs. An ammonia video would be interesting.
Grid-level storage is definitely a good use for hydrogen since it’s much more abundant than lithium. However, in order to make it work for transportation, we’d need to start transforming the recent fusion ignition achievements into power plants. Deuterium, after all, cannot fit through a proton exchange membrane, so it’s literally a waste product of hydrogen electrolysis - so if Helion and other startups like them manage to succeed, then it may be possible to have a system where the energy powering the electrolyzers would cost absolutely nothing since it would come from the very waste deuterium that would otherwise just sit around in storage tanks.
Hi, in same discussion in regards to EV and HydrogenV it all summit up to how many km you could drive if both cars started with 1 kWh of electricity. The short answer is that the EV would drive 2,5 to 3,0 times longer than the hydrogen vehicle. Has anything changed or is still so that electricity directly used always would be 2,5 to 3.0 more efficient then going via hydrogen ? I’m looking for the progress we are talking about in your posting (and I understand that other factors then efficiency could have value here)
I'd be curious how the overall efficiency compares to other means of energy storage, be it CO² batteries, batteries or liquid air.
The main purpose should be to replace fossil hydrogen in industry. Later, when price comes down and volume goes up, it may serve in backup power plants.
I'm a big hydrogen fan. Nice to see a positive video about hydrogen amid this anti-renewables wave that is going on. Regardless of climate change and all the fighting that is going on around that, I think renewables are a great thing. I was a fan before all this started. The idea of on-site conversion has a lot going for it. I really like what this hospital is doing and I hope this thinking gets applied in many other areas
Efficiency is hilariously ignored in nearly all of these scenarios. Just charge and discharge batteries, multiple times as efficient. There are a few scenarios that makes sense excess power at a large wind or solar farm. Then sell the hydrogen to aircraft, big rigs or trains (new hypothetical ones😊)
Some times there are more important things in a project than just efficiency or cost. Take both hospital examples. In the Netherlands, where they use it as a power source for the hospital itself, they have the advantage that in case of a grid outage, they can also keep powering from hydrogen as long as you get the tanks refilled in time. The other one is reusing the oxygen, so that's also a big win that would not be possible with a battery system. This goes to show that while hydrogen has its downsides, it also has its use cases that we should not ignore to easily.
Human & material cost to replace dead ☠️ batteries 🪫, energy cost to recycle ♻️ dead ☠️ batteries 🪫 An H2 aluminum tank is better than a battery 🔋 for TCO & recycling ♻️ liability.
@@DavidHalko please look into the amount of energy consumed to make hydrogen then compress and refrigerate it so a significant amount can be stored in a given tank. Lead acid batteries have a very high recycling rate over 90% there is no reason other batteries cannot be readily recycled as well. All of these scenarios are better than the current grid sources. Also hydrogen is acidic and needs expensive materials for hoses and tanks. Also electrical infrastructure is everywhere and easily reconfigured.
@@dannywitz - “please look into the amount of energy consumed to make hydrogen…” Renewables suck. Peak solar usage is so high that there is no value in selling it back to the grid. They shut down wind turbines because the grid can’t handle it. When the sun is down & wind stops or is too fast, they have to crank up the natural gas turbines. H2 solves all these issues, by consuming the solar energy that is negative in cost, keeping turbines running when they are overproducing, and can be stored to be used for peak power so natural gas is no longer needed. Refrigeration is not required, is can be pumped underground for storage & retrieval, the renewable energy is wasted now anyway, so we might as well use it. “Lead acid batteries have a very high recycling rate” True, north of 95%! Lithium batteries have a low recycle rate, south of 5% worldwide… and lithium batteries are being used more. “Hydrogen… needs expensive materials” Aluminum is not expensive “Electrical infrastructure is everywhere” So is water, for H2 production. “Electrical infrastructure… easily reconfigured” Price getting a 50 Amp plug on the other side of your house and see how expensive that is. An EV charge is north of 4x the electricity a house uses, at least my house, and the EV has to be charged in 15 minutes??? Sorry man, think about that, when people are driving home to their apartments (~30% of Americans) and they all want to charge up before they park their cars in a lot… or on the way to work because they could not get a slot before dinner! This is a NON TRIVIAL problem. The size of the electrical lines and power will require unbelievable peaking during those times, and local power generators will likely be required. They are already deploying diesel generators at EV charging stations, today. NON TRIVIAL.
There are companies like HPS Home Power Solutions that already sell combined packs (like "Picea") that include fuel cell, electrolyser and hydrogen storage for home use. So far it is still more expensive than just using the grid, but there is an increasing number of people that use it.
Could the storage problem be alleviated by using a chemical process to turn it into a hydrocarbon similiar to gasoline?
It's been having a future for the last 50 years and still nothing
Electric cars have had more than a hundred years of development and they still suck.
@@ohsweetmystery In what way do they "suck". They are utterly reliable, cheap to run compared with a high maintenance ICE vehicle, they have great ranges and can charge anywhere there is a power outlet, they can rapid charge to 80% in 15 mins, well some can, and are ridiculously fast, they are very efficient and convert 95% of the electricity into propulsion, unlike the ICE car after over 100 years of development is still only 25% efficient, converting 75% of the energy is gas to heat. I think you will find that ICE vehicles suck after over a 100 years of developement whilst electric cars have only been in development for the last 15-20 years and already EV's out perform ICE cars
@@stevehayward1854 "Great ranges" 😂😂
@@James_ZA I agree, ranges of 350-500 miles is more than enough to burst anyones bladder 😜
@@stevehayward1854 you must be fun at parties
Each time you use " breakthrough" in your video title I want to subscribe and patreon you less 😮💨
"Be all to end all" is the phrase ... My Mum hammered that into me at an early age :) Best channel ever - we intend to go hard for solar/battery mainly thanks to you.
Methanol is the best form of Hydrogen storage we have and there's so many ways we can make it. You can use captured CO2 to interact with Hydrogen to make Methyl alcohol. There's already direct methanol fuel cells on the market ready for purchase...!
We need both nuclear energy and hydrogen extremely badly.
There's no one solution. The more options we have the better.
Agreed.
Hydrogen might bring more money to influencers, but it has no future for EVs or residential power supply.
Are you working in gas field
@@viability33 No. If I would, I would be in favor of Hydrogen, because it's made from natural gas. It's just that Hydrogen from natural gas is much worse for the environment than burning natural gas directly.
People were saying the same thing about EVs 10 years ago.
@@sheepuff5999 These two things are completely different. There is currently no viable way to create Hydrogen except from natural gas. "Burning" Hydrogen from natural gas is much worse for the environment than just burning natural gas directly. Hydrogen is hyped just to make fossil fuel look environmental friendly and to keep up the revenue stream for the fossil fuel industry. I'm perfectly fine with using Hydrogen as soon as they can show that it can be produced at scale using renewables in a way that is efficient enough to compete with other technologies for example batteries. As long as we lose 70% of the energy in the process it's better to use electricity directly.
Hearing CSIRO, based in my home town, pronounced that way was a real shock. I was so confused.
As you stated, it’s all about cost per unit of energy. A comparison of battery chemistry’s, hydrogen and other forms of energy storage showing cost in the past versus far past, present and projected future would show trends which might be useful.
Hydrogen is overrated.
How?
yeah, but we've seen enough tech find random breakthroughs and resurge that it's probably still worth some significant part of the market share. Interesting debate to figure out how big or small that should be though. :)
Hydrogen is underrated
I've always wondered if it's possible to harvest energy from the aurora's around the north and south pole? Seems to be a lot of energy getting discharged there..
I wonder if any of these electrolysis technologies can use less-than-pure water. I remember getting letters from startups chasing investments into ultrapure water production for electrolysis, as the lower amount of contaminants would allow the catalysts to last longer. This seems like an extra step not usually talked about, you cannot use your regular tap water for tour green hydrogen setup.
I'd be interested to see you give some serious consideration of the Hemp Batteries and related technologies; It seems that any discussion of Hemp in terms of Energy and/or Environmental Solutions is still largely taboo, one can only assume this is down to the Fossil Fuel lobby ... Discuss ?
Just a note for future reference, CSIRO is usually just spelt out when mentioned in Australia - See Ess Eye Are Oh.
Matt, there was a recent article in the New York Times about how France has discovered naturally occurring hydrogen in an old mine. It's being called white hydrogen. They think there's a 5-10 year supply (based on worldwide current hydrogen use) in a single mine. The US also admitted that hydrogen is often found during oil well drilling but is often flared off (similar to natural gas flaring - both are a huge waste and in the case of natural gas, an unnecessary source of CO2 emissions). I think it is the future of clean energy storage despite the low round trip efficiency because at the end of the day, battery manufacturing is a huge source of CO2 emissions and just nasty pollution in general. I find it comical that so many so-called environmentalists have embraced battery storage when the manufacturing (especially in the short term) is so environmentally noxious.
We really need pipelines to be more readily built for H2 and such,not blocked via regulatory agencies.
What ever happened to that 'cassette tape' thing that could store hydrogen? How about a follow up video on that?
Exciting stuff, hope it works out. May the best clean tech win! Also, subscribed!
When talking about the efficiency of electrolysis, you cannot forget about all of the energy required to process water until it is pure enough to use for electrolysis.
How much energy is lost in production, storage, transportation, compared to photovoltaic and a battery or heat storage.
Matt, my mate. Would you say if you use overproduction from a nuclear power plant 5o make H² its green and/or net zero. Since in the creation of there isnt any carbon released?
I know you've had a problem with the pronunciation of our Australian peak science agency, and thought you might like a little tip on Aussie pronunciation of CSIRO. You actually have 2 options. 1. You can pronounce by saying each letter individually which is the traditional way. 2. The modern way is start saying science - 'sci' and finish with the 'ro'. Join them together and say as one syllable. The 'I' should be the emphasised letter in the modern pronunciation. I hope this helps.
Im not sure how the O2 cylinders are made, but even if the efficiency of hydrplysis is less isn't it producing both H2 and O2?
I read somewhere that the mass of the two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom after splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen is fractionally more than the mass of the original water molecule (due to the energy captured from the electrolysis process). Is this true? Has the difference in mass ever been measured?
Matt, what about replacing natural gass for cooking? I read that gas stoves can be easily converted over to Hydrogen.??
Matt Ferrell, Cleanplanetinc from Japan expect to build a hydrogen boiler called Ikaros in 2024. They already tested Ikaros 2kw output for more than 500 days. It will be able to power a private home with heat and electricity for 10gram of hydrogen per month, if a kg of hydrogen cost 3dollar, then your energy bill could be 3cents per month. It really doesnt matter what price hydrogen are sold at
Love it. CSIRO is pronounced as it is spelled C S I R O not Csiro as a word. And as you said it is the federal govt owned Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. They are very prominent also in agriculture development and pest management techniques.
When are you doing an episode on the Cybertruck and a Fuel Cell Range Extender?
Can photovoltaics in water splitting be used for eventually cheap desalination?
I love that there are hospitals using both the hydrogen AND oxygen from the process. That is the kind of efficiency we need to see.
What about green ammonia to store hydrogen at room temperature, and contains nitrogen instead of carbon, and also useful to make fertilizer?
When the major barrier being cost per kWh can be broken down it is a very promising way of energy storage for homes. The capacity of batteries is limited and they will lose charge over a period of time. In moderate and cold climate zones the periods of maximum gain of PV and the usage for heating do not match, and as a result in the summer when demand for electricity is lower in general PV is overloading the grid with partially unwanted power, in the winter fossil fuelled power plants have to jump in to provide the power demanded. An H2 storage system could provide enough storage to be charged during the summer and provide electricity for a heat pump during winter, and all this within a reasonable space. An H2 storage battery with the size of an average propane tank could store enough energy for at least half and probably the whole heating season, provided the H2 is used to generate electricity in a fuel cell which then powers a heat pump. Waste heat from the fuel cell can also be harnessed to heat the house. Such a system is developed in Germany but the cost is excessive, more than 100K€. The payback time therefore is too long, more than 50-60years. When such a system can be made for half the price it is getting very attractive for home owners, as this will enable you to be almost or completely self sufficient. Remains the legal aspects, as authorities probably will not be too happy with hydrogen storage at every home in a built up area, and maybe the technology will be better suited for use at a neighbourhood/community level where a complete development is erected with self sufficiency in mind.
Good video. It is about use cases, and we need the mental discipline to apply it to those technologies and not oversell it. That said, once again note that the economics are conspicuously absent. How much money? How much of the public coffer must go to these specialized use cases?
The electrolysis method a nice advancement, but also only 1/3rd of the problem. The other two thirds are (b) storage and (c) conversion back to electricity. Storing the hydrogen efficiently in a metal hydride entails fairly significant cost as well as maintenance, and converting the hydrogen back into electricity with a fuel cell also entails fairly significant costs and inefficiencies. As well as low energy production rates per unit cost.
Why inefficient coversion and hydrogen storage? Why no use exponentially more eficient batteries?
In Alberta, Canada there is increasingly stringent GHG emission costs; currently $80 and going to $170/T CO2e by 2030. A lot of hydrogen is used oil and gas to improve product qualities but it's generated using steam-methane reforming and as a result has GHG emissions. Is there a GHG cost per tonne at which the use of these new hydrogen production methods become more attractive than steam-methane reforming? The other option is to add CCS to the hydrogen production facilities but this is again quite expensive. I could do the math myself but I'd be interested to see a video on the topic. At what price of carbon do new hydrogen production methods become attractive vs. steam-methane reforming (with and without CSS). Reply to this post if you want to collaborate on such a video.
The number target is to lower energy when producing green hydrogen at the moment it takes 50KW of electricity to produce 1kg of hydrogen gas. So 9 tonnes of water and 2.7 tonnes of KOH is needed and what to do with spent KOH salts use reverse osmosis to obtain K salts and water which consumes 5KW of electricity so 55KW of energy is needed. At the moment only small electrolysis units of 5MW are on the market and hopefully 50MW units will be on the market by 2030 .
Not convinced by the Sparc's direct sun to H2 approach. With pv been so cheap now and it's relatively high efficiency - so less racking - it would surely be cheaper. What's more from PV you get electricity which is a very flexible energy source. In my mind it only makes sense to produce gree H2 with surplus electricity.
Perhaps Matt, and doubtless others, have discussed this before, but I'd be concerned about it blowing up. That's one reason I've never liked gas appliances like gas stoves and hot water heaters. I suppose hydrogen could just be used in a centralized power plant to generate electricity, but even here, could hydrogen storage onsite pose a risk to the surrounding community? I'm thinking of something like in the move Chain Reaction. Are safety concerns of this nature as substantial a concern as that movie might imply, or are safety concerns with hydrogen overblown or relatively easily mitigated?