Solid Hydrogen Explained (Again) - Is it the Future of Energy Storage?
Corrections: I've trimmed out a couple of sections from this video that misstated some facts about Plasma Kinetics and hydrogen production. I apologize for any confusion around this. As I mention in the video, I'm learning and trying to make each video better than the last. Thanks for the feedback.
Near the end of last year I published a video on solid hydrogen storage and it got a lot of questions, critiques, and push back from some of you. In trying to simplify a pretty complex topic, I oversimplified some things, which created problems. So is solid hydrogen storage actually a thing? Is solid hydrogen currently being used? Let’s take another crack at solid hydrogen energy storage and try to address some of the shortcomings of my last video.
Previous video on Solid Hydrogen, “Energy Storage Breakthrough - Solid Hydrogen Explained” - this video is now unlisted so it won't get served up by KZhead anymore, but I'm leaving it here as reference. There are some technical errors in the video. • Energy Storage Breakth...
Kurzgesagt "We Lied To You ... And We'll Do It Again" • ...And We'll Do it Again
Watch "Why Heat Pumps are Essential for the Future - Explained" • Why Heat Pumps are Ess...
Video script and citations:
undecidedmf.com/episodes/soli...
Get my achieve energy security with solar guide:
link.undecidedmf.com/solar-guide
Follow-up podcast:
Video version - / @stilltbd
Audio version - bit.ly/stilltbdfm
00:00 - Overview
01:08 - What are metal hydrides?
03:43 - Energy density
06:31 - Where are they used?
09:31 - Plasma Kinetics follow-up
16:03 - Hydrogen efficiency
👋 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.
I have done PhD research on this topic. The Metal hydride we were going to use was very very expensive which made it unpractical. But we shifted focus to Solid State Ammonia storage which can be used for hydrogen storage as well. The principle is exactly the same, except it works with halides. Some metallic hallides can store ammonia at very high gravimetric storage densities which makes it competitive to solid state hydrogen storage. The operation pressures are not high, materials are inexpensive and environmentally safe, and the storage pressure is below room temperature, so there is no risk of leaking.
Would love to know more on this
Use this and battery storage for shipping at sea, Off shore wind and solar for recharging.
North Sea wind to recharge ships at Rotterdam:)
You can look into ASME Power and Energy conference, Journal of heat and mass transfer, and Journal of Energy resources technology. You need to find papers on the topic.
In your opinion, do you think it's possible for metal hydrides to replace LH2 on rockets someday? Is it possible for hydrides to release its hydrogens fast enough to satisfy the huge mass flow requirement (kilograms per seconds) of a rocket?
Appreciate how Matt reviews the yt comments and takes feedback from the community to create a whole new video/explanation for us to fully understand. Thank you
Yeah, that’s empirical content creation at its finest.
One of the reasons I absolutely love his channel.
And yet he hasn't heard of 16:9 for god's sake.
@@jamesmelemede5610 agree
It's videos like these that earn my trust back. I saw a response video that tore the original to shreds. But I think everything was cleared up and explained by this video in more than sufficient detail. Big kudos to Matt on recognizing his mistakes and turning them into a learning opportunity. Keep up the good work! Your sincerity is appreciated, even if it takes you longer to make your videos.
Please address all the points in the busted. I know he's snarky, but he's a credible scientist making correct points. It's dangerous to promote disproven concepts.
this whole channel is "amazing new material" or "major breakthrough" and other clickbait titles... the LACK of proper research done is obvious and it comes out as more of an ad for the company making this impossible product, like the solar roadways that have failed over and over.
@@LoneWolf0648 It's beyond obvious to anyone who uses their brains on a daily basis
Matt the physics don't add up.
This channel is bullshit
@@JS-xf4ov LMAO
Can't wait for the re-redo, nothing here is correct.
Correction: Nothing here to correct.
@@FallenStarFeatures Right? So tell me how he firstly said that 300ºC was needed to release H from the metal and out of no explanation, that he just said it was only 95ºC, and after that he even says only 60ºC, and no explanation on how that was possible. I'm not even going to mention about the efficiency and "low cost" subject. He just spoke for minutes without really explaining anything. Throwing some shallow information and no explanation.
@@1LY4x8s96r - Agreed, there's literally NOTHING HERE. Hence, nothing here that can be corrected.
@@1LY4x8s96r He was talking about different techniques. When he talks about the 60ºC , he instantly mentions that it's an improvement over the 300ºC figure mentioned earlier. What's with these shallow critiques?
how much you are paid by ev idiots?
I learn a lot from you, not just the content of your videos but how to interact with a largely anonymous populous. Your grace and measured interactions are inspiring.
Thanks, Sean.
Perhaps get out more ?
@@thegreataynrand7210 unhelpful
@@joythought Why not? Too many people have no lives
@@joythought Don't feed the troll
THIS, is why I follow you. You are willing to re-do subjects, when things havn't been covered to your consistent high standards. Love it, and kudo's to you.
8 hank6
it's also important to add an extra layer of criticism to this company who is using the guys of proprietary research to shield their product from scrutiny, and an extra layer of criticism to literally any company that stands to profit from investors, like Tesla for example who releases CGI as proof of their products in order to get people to invest
THIS is why you are an ideout.
Yes agree. Kudos to you for taking the time to add to your information and making it clearer!
It still completely bogus, but whatever, he corrected around like 20% of his mistakes in the video.
Matt, you are so good at bringing us new technologies. Can you please do a video explaining how the earth is flat so we can finally put that to rest?
Thanks for the deeper dive in this topic. I believe that many, not understanding fully the tech thought this would be a good answer for powering a car/light truck. You didn't specifically point this out, but did explain with the numbers. This system might be a good fit for a fixed or large vehicle. But one issue not mentioned in its use for powering vehicles is one of transportation to fuel centers, where the transportation and storage costs would add to the overall lessening of efficiency.
Another popular hydrogen storage method is conversion to ammonia. The technology to do this, and reverse it, makes energy transport via ammonia quite viable, as well as purely for energy storage.
Here here! This, and liquefied air, should be our sustainable future.
A possible downside with ammonia, is its toxicity. Leakages could be problematic...
@@chrisheath2637 true, but so is leakage of gasoline, or for that matter heavy metals, we are just more comfortable with “familiar” dangers…
@@daleatkin8927 Not the best comparison, gasoline will stay in a bucket. Ammonia is more like propane (uses same storage tanks) it wants so get out (up to 140 psi? in the sun, though ammonia hydrogen combo might change this). And the way I see it ammonia is more dangerous because large leak or confined leak WILL have arial effect, while propane MIGHT (depends if it finds ignition source). Both can kill, painfully. Ammonia is dangerous, and everyone that can stay away from it does.
Noooo! Bad idea.
Thank you. I had no problem with your former video, but I admire your humility in this one. 🙃 Also, don't mind about the trolls- your work is impressive. I'm a researcher and never thought I'd see references in a KZhead video - you proved me wrong with your comprehensive video script and citations! 💪🏼💪🏼💪🏼
Thanks, Daniel.
There might be an economical turmoil but there is no doubt that this is still the best time to invest.
Best time to invest? thats funny though because in the last four months I have lost more than $47,900 in stock market which is the biggest I have loss since I ventured into stock investment.
you could be right or wrong . i once had similar problem but now its a different ball game for me because I was lucky to have met TERESA JENSEN WHITE, a financial manager and stock expert, I have made more than $165,000 in 6 weeks under her supervisions
Really? people are cashing in from the stock market and frankly speaking its comforting seeing someone admit to the fact that they actually seek help from professionals. please how can i reach TERESA ?
search her name on the internet to reach her
thanks for the info . Found her website and it impressive
Son, wheeres my glasses, I can't see the physics from here!!
Corrections: I've trimmed out a couple of sections from this video that misstated some facts about Plasma Kinetics and hydrogen production. I apologize for any confusion around this. As I mention in the video, I'm learning and trying to make each video better than the last. Thanks for the feedback. So what do you think of solid hydrogen? Do you think it will play a role in the future of energy storage? Or check out this video: Why Heat Pumps are Essential for the Future - Explained: kzhead.info/sun/apeqqrlwrYGZZ40/bejne.html
Please do a video on steam
nah
But the problem is that hydrogen come from natural gas, thats the whole fucked up thing
Whatever floats your boat
What you do a video about powerpaste it's a new Sammy solid hydrogen storage solution that can be a major breakthrough in the industry and have a higher energy density than lithium ion batteries.
I am learning English and your videos help me. Unlike boring lessons and lectures, I can watch your videos for long hours.
Glad you like them!
Saw this when we got in last night and I have to wonder whether Dave Borlace is gonna send a "friend" to mess with your kneecaps for horning in on his Sunday release turf. I like that you took us on a deep dive when you felt like you needed to improve on a previous release and not seem too dependent on one startup's marketing. Bravo!
Why can't we challenge a person who consistently puts out unscientific claims he repeats from not so credible or reliable sources?
You can,put out videos of your own,or be specific in your critiques.
@@stephencrowther524 - Well, for one metal hydrides are not referred to as solid state batteries, because they are not that. They have the potential to be used in a solid state battery, but by themselves they are not batteries. You have to have electrodes attached first and a specific place to attach them. That's kind of a basic error and it's made in the first 30 seconds of the video. Using fuel cells in a submarine works, the idea it could be used in any kind of aircraft is insane. The weight makes it impossible. Matt compares, the energy storage of GKM pellets to the energy stored in the lithium ion battery in a Tesla 3. OK fine, but you can't actually use it in a car or vertical take off aircraft. You have to heat up the pellets but you don't have to heat up a lithium ion battery. You just hook it up to an electric motor and it works. Heating up the GKM pellets takes space and the weight of the equipment that does the heating. Then there's the fuel cell and it's weight. Then there's the engine that actually burns the hydrogen. Not only do you have to take it's weight into account, there will be heat energy lost in that process, a lot of it. Plus, I forgot the energy needed just to get the hydrogen in the first place, seeing as there aren't any natural pools of hydrogen we can draw on. At least Matt mentions the efficiency; make that lack of efficiency, of hydrogen as a fuel. This isn't about science, but Matt makes a big deal about the company getting a relatively small government grant to study the feasibility of it's hydrogen storage idea, but a study isn't proof by itself. It's just a study. Wouldn't you want to know how that study turns out before you start declaring victory in the energy wars? Here's a link to a video that gives you an honest explanation of the potential and very real difficulties of using hydrogen to replace fossil fuels. It's somewhat depressing, but there's no BS in it, unlike some videos I can think of. kzhead.info/sun/jc-ln5iSaIWnnn0/bejne.html&ab_channel=SabineHossenfelder
This channel gives me hope for the future, makes feel... UNDECIDED about where we're going.
Forward leaning tech is cool but beware of scams, too many shady startups are making crazy promises that often don't even respect physics laws... and just scam investors. KZheadrs should always keep a very critical and skeptical mind when speaking about such things or otherwise they are just part of the scam.
Matt, hitting it out of the park with this redress. Will H2 technology be useful? YES. Just like the myriad of different chemical storage types. You highlighted temporal efficiency as well as process efficiency. To rapidly and drastically increase the amount of energy storage we have for renewables, and make them truly useful, we’ll need EVERY solution we can cost effectively implement. And as ongoing research improves technologies, we’ll replace the less effective and efficient ones with better tools. Thank you for bringing the broad range of technology to be seen here in your channel!!!!
There is literally no cost effective implementation of this. This 30 year old technology has never gained mainstream success for a reason. Because its inefficient and a scam in any application like this.
Nice follow up Matt, which clarifies a few points, but I do have a couple of lingering concerns. You said, "When the hydrogen leaving those chimneys hits oxygen and combines with it, you get water vapour and those white plumes that you typically see coming out of them." Hydrogen doesn't spontaneously combine with oxygen to form water vapour. It requires the application of intense heat which then starts a self sustaining massively exothermic reaction, ie. it combusts. This is the exact process by which we extract energy from the hydrogen. If the gases in the chimney are hot enough to initiate combustion of the hydrogen (around 650°C I believe) when it hits air, then cooling it to the point it doesn't damage the hydrogen recovery apparatus is going to present its own set of challenges, and may negate the benefit of the hydrogen being available there in the first place. Secondly, I tried unsuccessfully to find more information about the energy requirement of dispensing liquid hydrogen. Where did you find the figure of 10MWh per ton (the link in your citations is dead)? I may be over simplifying, but simply allowing liquid hydrogen to absorb ambient heat at ambient pressure will convert it back to a usable gas with no requirement for an external energy source. Further the cooling effect could be used to advantage for other industrial processes. What am I missing here?
Making corrections is one of the main reasons I watch. We appreciate it.
I'm looking forward to Thunderf00t's video on this.
Yes indeed. Matt should have watched that in the first place.
it just came out a few days ago.
@@satunnainenkatselija4478 I understand your concerns, but the storage medium is already in operation. Lookup "Ammonia to Hydrogen Metal Membrane Separation Technology" , they are already building the plant to make green Ammonia for transport of Hydrogen.
@@ZE0XE0 I notice he just did another one on one of Matts bloopers. "Matt Ferrell says stupid things about Magnesium" I unsubscribed from Matt, he is just getting too unreliable and ill informed.
@@dnomyarnostaw he mentions the bloopers early on, but goes into more scientific detail later in his video.
A great mark of a man is his desire to learn and honesty to admit when he is wrong. Thank you for a great video
Glad you enjoyed it
@@UndecidedMF Can you do a video on flow batteries?
Good work to follow up on past, discussed topics. Let's keep the discussion going!
At 8-9 minutes into this video, you show for 3 seconds a 9 MW hour hydrogen storage tank that will be connected to a 1 MW hydrogen power system, that can allow emission free power to the grid during peak power needs! That is fantastic, and worthy of it's own video.
This is what Matt Ferrell such a class act. Great video!
Hey Ricky!
This is *WHY matt ferrell *IS such a class act
@@blackbelt2000 This is what *MAKES Matt Ferrell such a class act. ;-)
@@paulturner5769 hahaha tou·ché, tou·ché
As an investor of multiple decades, I have been interested in Hydrogen for almost 50 years. I always appears to be just around the corner, but the corner never is turned. Holy grail of renewable energy, or fool's gold? My head says that at some point a true breakthrough will occur, and be it hydrogen, or some form of fusion, or something out of left field. Just hopefully some energy platform that has little or no impact on the earth, and its animals, air quality, and other impacts. The earth takes care of us, but we do not take care of this earth, that must change. An excellent follow up and no reason to apologize. The field is changing rapidly, so picking the new ideas out of all of them out there is not easy, especially in a changing environment.
If you are that old you should have realized how much environmental progress and improvements have been made over the years.
@@thegreataynrand7210 I do! However, as always, we could be better guardians of the earth. Native American had a different view, the view was the earth could not be owned, we are supposed to persevere the earth for the next generation... Conceptions of the way we interact with the earth, could be improved, but hard to change...
@@christopherbarrett9749 The truth is the environment is getting better constantly and we find better ways of doing things.
@@christopherbarrett9749 - Both you and Matt have the correct attitude about how we as a species need to change how live to make a sustainable planet, but you're first comment about being an investor undercuts that attitude a little. However beneficial new technologies can be to the planet will always be secondary under the capitalist framework to making money. Matt always has a cost analysis about what the video topic is so he's keen to this as well. All it all, it isn't the science that is holding us back. Also don't take that other guy serious, they put Ayn Rand in their screen name, you can you tell they are full of shit.
What parameter (cost, techincal issues, etc.) do you think will cause that breakthrough? I mean what do you think we should focus on while developing these systems? I have done PhD research on this topic, and am interested in developing such systems. but never had the chance to get funding for a startup.
This video is put together so much better than the last video. I know that much of what is needed for publication on youtube is playing to the lowest common denominator, and thats really hard in short form media if you have to explain things and cite sources.
I don't get why some people hate on things just because they don't fit into their views... Many things have diverse applications that we (as individuals) haven't the slightest idea they exist, simply because we aren't exposed to them and/or because we haven't given it a deeper analysis. One tech might not work for one situation but, it could work for another. We shouldn't have tunnel vision towards finding that magic-bean-single-solution-for-everthing. Thanks for your videos.
Getting very close to that million mate !! Keep going
Thanks. I still find that crazy.
You deserve it mate . I watch all your videos and my niece is now also watching . It’s good to get kids listening to the right stuff and not rubbish TikTok videos I said It last year but honestly Fbr robotics is going global soon. The robots will be building houses down the road very very soon!
I've seen metal hydrides for hydrogen storage to feed fuel cells in action first hand a decade ago. The cylinders they were stored in used ambient heat to charge and discharge over hours, they merely got hot when charged and cold when discharged. Was impressed. Sure, if you operate at high rates, you need active cooling or heating to achieve the high rates or it becomes self limiting, but it depends entirely on your power needs, you might not need them is you are content to work at lower rates.
There was a proof of concept done on an off-grid house in Austria a couple years ago, capable of storing enough hydrogen from excess solar collection in Summer to cover energy requirements in winter. There are a number of solutions on the market targeting homeowners looking to achieve self-sufficiency (autarkie) in a similar way, but all store the hydrogen as pressurised gas which puts everyone off. When they crack this on a scale that will allow metal hydrides to be used as a battery to store hydrogen in a residential home until winter to keep the heat pump running with less solar power available, then I see a pretty large potential market for their implementation. In cars not so much, but I remain optimistic...
Your response to aggressive discourse is why I watch your channel. Bravo.
Keep CRUSHING Matt and the TEAM at Undecided ! MUCH LOVE FROM NORTH OF THE WALL!
Thanks, Dave! Me and the rest of team undecided appreciate it.
Maybe it would be worth while to have you and TF talk this one out? I'd watch that video. I felt like this screamed scam tech the first time around. You may have had the wool pulled over your eyes mate.
Thanks for the effort. This second video is definitely better than the first. I appreciate your videos.
Since when do we have H2 in exhaust gases? We have H2O, NOT H2 in those streams.
Thanks much for the in-depth work to reply to questions and further our/your understanding of a complex, promising tech. Really appreciate what you do.
Just want to say that I appreciate your videos. As with everything online, trying to get all your information from one spot doesn't work. Starting conversations, adding content and adding context to topics that have so much societal-anathematic nuance is needed, and you certainly contribute more than your fair share. Solutions to the worlds problems aren't simple, nor are they one size fits all, nor are they all or nothing. Thank you for all your efforts, and for continuing to do what you can to help the conversations.
Marc, What scent of Snake Oil did you order from matt? Jokes aside, Please consider doing some research. This guy is not on your side, Heres proof kzhead.info/sun/mrV9iNWHnXVsZI0/bejne.html
Thanks Matt great info once more, personally the balance with 'dumb down' & 'science' for me is spot on the mark.
Far more than I ever knew plus I appreciate your style. Thank you.
ooops , pass matt a paper bag to hide in
One of my favorite things about your channel are videos like this. Deeper dives, updates on topics as new information is available, and corrections are what make you stand above the norm. I can't wait to see the first house videos, when is the first one planned?
Thanks! Still TBD when the home series will kick off, but most likely late summer early fall. August/September timeframe for the first videos hopefully.
@@UndecidedMF I can see why you put up that thing about not allowing spam in the comments, I've been seeing that on several people's channels. It's really Annoying to get spam.😑
@@UndecidedMF The world is too far down the electric vehicle path for hydrogen to compete.
@@UndecidedMF what info did you use to verify the claim that hydrogen can be collected from waste management exhaust. Ive seen data that shows that there is 0 molecular hydrogen in the exhaust.
@@UndecidedMF You should address this kzhead.info/sun/mrV9iNWHnXVsZI0/bejne.html
Thanks for this, your throwaway comment about metal hydrides going back to the 1930's. My Uncle who passed away in the 1970's talked about 'Solid Hydrogen' and where he was working achieved this. This now makes sense, though as a 11 year old I got ribbed mercilessly about me talking about it at school. For me, it's a little satisfaction that he wasn't off his head and that those who mistreated me were wrong. Made me smile. Strange World we live in. Sometimes we shoot the messenger because we know the majority is right.
If anything its really good to see so many different approaches to the energy problems.
Matt, there is something fundamentally suspicious about the whole process. It talks about "pushing" Hydrogen atoms into metal's chrystalline structure creating hydrides. That implied absorbsion, like water gets absobed into a sponge. But a sponge filled with water remains a sponge with water filling up the gaps. Hydrides however, are a totally different beast. Hydrides are not metal anymore with chrystalline gaps filled with Hydrogen, they are chemical compounds of metal and Hydrogen, a result of a chemical reaction. Saying that that Hydrogen is pushed into metal structure making hydrides is the same as saying Chlorine is pushed into chystalline structure of Sodium creating table salt! Salt is not Sodium anymore, just like hydrides are not metals anymore. So, to release Hydrogen from hydrides you need to overcome not crystal bonds, but chemical ones. You are aware of the amount of energy needed to release Chlorine from salt, don't you? Unless a chemical compound is unstable (eg explosive or combustible) the bonds are strong so not sure where such low energy requirement calculations come for. Could you please clarify if you can.
Are you unironically expecting him to answer? haha
@@olegglushko8124 I know, just kidding. The whole project looks like a scam begging for funding from the gullibles..
He clearly isn't aware of anything you said. They don't have any scientific understanding of the matter, which should be fairly obvious from their videos. They just repeat snake oil claims from those companies.
@@Kujo174 what do you mean?
The difference is the reversibility of the process - metal hydrides are relatively easily converted back to metal and hydrogen. Salt - not so much! Overall, the process is between water in a sponge and sodium and chlorine reacting. Crystalline.
Interesting. But, how does this compare with ammonia for hydrogen storage and transportation?
This is very interesting concept for storing vast amounts of entergy underground. Especially in a Thermal Solar Field that is already operating at high temperatures. Great Video.
Excellent video as usual. Looking forward to the next one.
Worth considering: The most dense form of hydrogen storage is by connecting hydrogen atoms to carbon atoms. This is done by a process called photosynthesis.
And to release that energy you just need to burn it! aka fossil fuels.
@@MrTomyCJ Agree, but I think by now we all know the reason for exploring other areas. For instance why not look into converting coal into hydrogen for the energy and carbon for the soil to regrow new plant matter and eventually create a system to essentially just increase the cyclic rate of fossilization to fit humans insatiable appetite for [things on a silver platter]. Fossil fuels do work, errryday! All it is is reworking the formula to emit a ['less controversial' matrix of stuff]. Say you dont believe in climate change or global warming or whatever ppl call it now. Thats fine, but you have to see the economic opportunity that is afforded from the enormous amount of people who do believe CO2 acts as a thermal blanket and is an 'bad' thing (like we know; earth survived much higher levels of CO2 before, and who's to say humans couldn't too? Mars is on the table but creating our own oxygen on earth isn't?) Its all BS to attempt to make more money for more people. That is the eternal dilemma of economics there are the haves and the have nots, and pretty regularly the have nots are far more numerous - then all of them have an avg of more than 1.1 children so theres more people chasing the same stuff and blah blah blah it all comes down to timing. But getting so caught up in whether CO2 will cause North America to sink, or on the other hand not caring and simply recognizing the burn rate of fossil fuel reserves is faster then they are replenished and that is an obvious issue - both present a problem that requires solving. So my approach is lets solve something and stop wasting time regurgitating the same complaints Ive been hearing since grade 10. Sorry TomyCJ you are not even close to the worst offender. I actually like and support burning fossil fuels to keep the world running as it currently does. Most greenies dont understand why solar and wind will never be enough to sustain 'the world' any better than burning fossil fuels while also retaining our general way of living (aka being able to get this message to people Ive never met via the internet lol)
Pithy, I like - problem is human population rise vs photosynthetic rate.
@@MrTomyCJ when burning hydrogen, there is ZERO co2 produced
Right. If You have a standard of life of an Australian Aborigeny or Bhutan Citizen it will be enough. If You are a US or Western European Citizen You need additional energy. If it is a Fossil fuel You usually take it from places like Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran or Russia. The consequences You can see in the Evening News today.
Matt, you do a great job of making the complicated simple. I always enjoy your videos and learn something in the process. Keep up the great work my friend… 😀
Might not be so simple: kzhead.info/sun/mrV9iNWHnXVsZI0/bejne.html
That's one thing this channel excels at; The next great savior technology that never materializes. This channel is more about click-bait than anything else.
A temporary stationary storage was used for the gas grid in a nearby town to provide gas for the stoves and such in private homes. The storage was very simple - using half a tank with an open bottom floating in a fluid inside another larger tank with open top. The gas inside the tank kept the top half afloat and the weight of the top half kept the gas under a steady pressure. Adding gas will lift the top, consuming gas will lower it. As the pressure is very low the size of tanks need to be very very big. But much less energy is used to fill the tank. About same idea can be used with a sealed bag with a small weight on top, almost like a bagpipe.
So: you didn’t do any research for your last video, you were called out, and your response video is just a bunch of deflection and pedantry without admitting that you were just categorically wrong. OK! How can anyone trust you if THIS is your methodology?
Hes just reading a script! Someone else wrote it.
@@stauffap just lazy, clickbait!
We did do research and spoke to people who work in battery and hydrogen research.
@@UndecidedMF you asked this company what third-parties had validated their research, and you literally just accepted their lie without checking ANYTHING. You believed the equivalent of “my girlfriend is super hot, but you don’t know her because she goes to another school.” Then, you didn’t even do the most basic research into hydrogen capture, which would’ve shown that what they’re proposing is not only impossible currently, but absolutely ludicrous physically. Etc. Etc. Etc. And then you create a clarification video in which you ignore almost all the valid criticism and simply try to reframe your mistakes. You’re Streisanding the hell out of this, and I can’t fathom why. Just say “we didn’t research this and created a stupid clickbait video, sorry” and move on. Sheesh.
@@UndecidedMF The argument about hydrogen capture from flue gases alone is enough to fatally discredit the whole video. Hydrogen is a very flammable compound - it will combust in coal plants or incineration plants due to high heat and presence of oxygen. The resulting flue gas from these plants is composed of mostly nitrogen, water and some CO2. All of this would have been easily discovered through a Google search and is usually teached in high school or below - we learned that air is mostly nitrogen, and if nitrogen (mostly) is inert, most of the flue gas will logically also be nitrogen.
Thanks for the follow up Matt. Yes as someone who lives off grid with solar and batteries in Canada, Hydrogen storage has always intrigued me. How to store all that sun from those long summer days for winter? Metal hydrides sound interesting for vehicles but I would guess that they are cost prohibitive for stationary applications, although great if you need to save space. A tank full of metal sounds like it would be quite expensive to expand, much more than an empty compressed air tank. From my research I am thinking that ammonia or methanol have more potential with large gas bladders under the lake or ocean getting a nod of approval as well
Loved the content, this is indeed the future. We got to identify all the puzzle pieces and then put them In order.
One issues with a video like this, and a channel like this in general, is the reliance on manufacturer/corporate provided info - I remember one other company doing storage like this that thankfully I never purchased anything from, because their specified performance was so grossly incorrect it was definitely false advertising. There's a lot of random youtube tech channels doing reviews on "future tech" that never comes about, and a good percentage of the time it's not because they just need more time it's because the origin of the information was grossly untrustworthy and the goals set by the management are not realistic, generally to the major frustration of their engineering team. I'd love it if these companies performed as well as they said they could, but it's definitely a "believe it when it happens" situation.
Thank you very much for the repeat/re-evaluated video. I found the first half (about the science) to be very well done. And doubly kudos for looking back and reviewing your own performance -- that's the mark of someone who is truly trying to do a first-rate job! (I'd welcome more videos where you go back after a time and examine progress in technologies you have reported on previously.) Unfortunately, listening to your presentation about Plasma Kinetics in the second half, all I hear is red flags (a mixed metaphor!). They are saying "We've got great stuff, but we can't tell you anything because it's all proprietary! Trust us." While this occasionally turns out to be true, 98% of the time it turns out that the company was actually desperately searching for funding to build something they *believed in*, but didn't actually have working...and which never works. (And too often it's an actual fraud.) I think you'd do a lot better avoiding such a heavy focus on things you can't verify for yourself. In this case, it appears you are still too trusting of the Great and Powerful Oz.
Appreciate the feedback. I’m in a trust but verify mode of thinking with Plasma Kinetics. They’re working on pilot studies, so we’ll know for sure if this was smoke and mirrors. I’m definitely keeping tabs on this.
@@UndecidedMF (Sometimes , people working on an innovative product, find it hard to see the wood for the trees, and it can seem (to them) that there is a rosy outlook for future success, whereas they are actually heading for a dead-end. Equally, of course, people may be overly pessimistic, with setback after setback, and yet be on the verge of a massive breakthrough !. It is, naturally, massively difficult to know the future...)
@@chrisheath2637 Some things about the future are fairly predictable, for example solar panels are now relatively cheap and can be manufactured at a large scale, northern economies need energy in the winter but can produce more, in summer, and small electrolyzer + big storage fits that seasonal storage use case better than batteries. It doesn't mean they won't also use batteries, because solar doesn't work in the dark and never will, but they will never use batteries that charge in June and discharge in December. Except flow batteries, maybe.
This was a great video If you ever are running low on ideas for videos I am more than willing to watch old topics revised and improved like this one
FANTASTIC....! I have no need to watch the "first" video, since this was so informtional.... Immediate subscription
Go have a look at thunderfoot's latest reply. You will learn the differene between real science and pseudo science.
Hi Matt, graphitic Carbon-Nitride works much the same way holding Hydrogen up to 10% of the gCN total mass. Made of urea and sugar. Releases hydrogen at 300°C. The difference here is solar exposure is all that is needed to separate hydrogen from water.
Careful, there might be a shortage of "pink salt" for Big Macs!
Excellent clarification, Matt! Thanks.
I know very little about solid hydrogen except to hear that other hydrogen producing methods are costly. I know in the past 6 months various uploaders have claimed this is the new battery break through for the EV auto industry be it graphene or sodium lithium or solid state a combination of both. Thanks for the updated clarifications in this video, Matt. Good, useful knowledge is so important in my books !
A family member works for a major power company in California which uses solar power to pump water up hill to a reservoir to generate power at night. He says the system loses 20% (80% efficient).
Hey student electrical power engineer here. Everything is about efficiency because this is what drives ROI. My first guess is this project can only exist because its has a big funding. Once this stops, 80 % efficiency is not going to cut is... I wanna be hopeful but also realistic. Would love to be wrong and learn more about this
Huge respect for giving this another go with more context. I didn't have any problems, but I saw that some other people did. This is a great jumping off point if I wanted to learn more.
Thanks for followup, Matt.
I appreciate the perspective you offer. many info sources lean an spin. The information is a stand alone and Thank You for the brain food.
Thanks for this video. Always interresting to see “eventual” competing technologies.
Not according to musk:"hydrogen is dead and stupid"
Of course test it but it's used in submarines isn't it proven just find most suitable applications.
Great work man. I can imagine this work isn't easy. Keep it up! You are a valuable resource to lots of people
Reading a white paper, and accepting all that is promised = hard work in the USA (probably).
What scent of Snake Oil did you buy?
@@youtube.really.stole.my.handle I like his content. Gets you thinking and helps you keep up with tech
@@AquaCoalaNest perhaps. I personally like staying up to date on technology and see the possibilities. You don't change the world staying in a box
Hey Matt, take a look at Ambri. They have an all liquid battery for large scale operations. Solves a lot of the safety aspects, or so they claim. Would love your take on it.
Really - REALLY - interesting. Ty so much... In the end, the comments made you bringing up many facets of the topic. A lot of work we can figure 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Much respect for admitting imperfection and correcting it so precisely and thoroughly here.
I recall several news releases over the last few years from Perdue & other Universities on fuel cell tech. The first book I read on this subject was called Powering the Future. What became of the Canadian fuel cell efforts in metropolitan buses? Have there been suppression techniques employed such as your description of classification issues slowing the patent process in other realms of energy production & storage? Lastly, why didn't the 500 km range compressed air car the Germans developed go anywhere?
The fuel cell buses in Vancouver were quietly discontinued because they don't (and never did) make economic sense. Like most Hydrogen announcements, they were more about green-washing and scoring PR points than actually advancing real solutions. As for the compressed air cars, the technology works but the vehicles need to be ultra-lightweight and efficient since compressed air is not very energy dense. 500km is extremely optimistic as most models trying to get into development today are less than 150km.
Compressed air also loses efficiency by thermal losses, and releasing that energy causes stresses in valves because they get rapidly cooled. Thermal recycling at the grid storage level can improve the efficiency of compressed air.
There's no conspiracy here, it just didn't work as intended.
Thank you for the information and the effort made to make this video ❤
Thank you for your time and hard work. I believe there is a place for all renewable energy sources. With ever evolving breakthroughs in technology there is no renewable energy source that can be ruled out, fusion for example. Wishing you Happy Holidays and good health in 2023.
8:48 The part I was missing is where an electrolyzer is used to "recharge" the hydride It goes from H2 to water with the fuel cell and back to H2 again using the electrolyzer.
Weird!!! I am truly concerned.
Hi, I'm new to this channel, and am pleased to have found it. I found the subject matter very interesting and well presented. I'd like to level one criticism re presentation. I'm a none expert. A lot of the content took me time to 'digest', i.e. understand. Matt, your pace of delivery is rapid, very rapid. Throw into the mix that you also have a North American accent (I'm from the UK) and a wearer of hearing aids and I was repeatedly stopping and replaying this to comprehend the content. The speed of delivery was tiring. I watch quite a few tech channels on KZhead: Just Have a Think, Real Engineering, Greg's Planes and Automobiles, Curious Droid. Some fairly heavy weight subjects. But all of them have a slower pace of delivery that allows the synapses of my brain to connect and get an understanding, before cantering onto the next part of the concept. I'd add that the presenter of Real Engineering has an Irish accent, but he's still slow, and comprehensible. I hope you don't find the above upsetting. Your content is really interesting. I will be investigating further. Thanks.
Please watch this video, the speaker has a much slower pace and im sure youll find this VERY interesting kzhead.info/sun/mrV9iNWHnXVsZI0/bejne.html
Great video. Love the detail. The research you must do to put these together is mind boggling. Thanks for all your amazing work. Channel's like yours are the reason I haven't turned on the TV for years. Knowledge truly is freedom.
What I'm always missing from these kind of videos is a promise vs reality comparison for similar technologies, e.g. in this case lithium-ion batteries. Or how many claims and expectations for the project had to be toned down already from previous claims. For example in that last part of the video there was already a mention of gas tanks, even though one of the claimed advantages of the technology is that there's no need for them. This and the previous video felt more like "Hyped up with Matt Ferrell" rather than undecided.
Love this channel, every new video, I almost always think its the best one yet, but this one is undeniably so. Though I'm not finding much info on my particular interest, decentralized energy production and storage, like the idea of a thorium reactor in every home, and the engineering of homes that minimize dependence on enclosed spaces (obviously, such a thing is geographically dependent).
if you havent already, take a gander at off-grid living solutions, but to be honest, most use geothermal, solar, wind and/or hydro combined with batteries and earthen heatsinks combined with air flow solutions and window angles for optimal conditions to reach passive house standards so as little energy is needed as possible I dont like the idea of thorium reactors in every home, because half the population is below average intelligence. As safe as thorium is, it is not idiot proof
@@kimwarburton8490 agreed, good as I believe LFTR's are, they are more suited to municipal or district level use where expensive monitoring is more practical. I wish more people would consider their use.
@@gregbailey45 would be good for hospitals and industry imo where theres already a pool of people with appropriate talents
edit, and high energy demands
Beats the hell out of a SMALL THERMONUCLEAR DEVICE in every abode... 😎
Thank you for making a second video to clarify you da best.
Wow....Hydrogen storage is moving along at a faster pace and addressing the safety of storage and release.....this sounds very promising for heavy industrial users such as ships, trains and possibly for construction and farming equipment....
I wonder what kinda ideas people are going to think up for us to do with all these giant holes we dug looking for things like lithium.
Wow .. 14 days underwater. Amazing! Nuclear subs can't even begin to compare to that, with their 3-4 months.
6 months in war
But a battery (as was the point) can’t compete. This is also one of the quietest sub ever built. Battery boats are by far deadlier. And why DARPA is helping the navy research it.
@@planexshifter Nope, but if they want to use it as a battery, I doubt they'll put it in contact with water, they might just keep it inside the submarine where, usually, there isn't any water.
And if you don't want to go nuclear, but still want weeks of submerged ops, there's the Air Independent (liquid oxygen and diesel) Stirling motor subs from for instance Sweden. Silent enough to first get in and "kill" a US aircraft carrier and then evade the escorts...
Thank you for the update! It's okay to make mistakes that we learn from. We appreciate your team's effort to get everything covered as best as possible. I look forward to your next video whatever it may be. I believe hydrogen would be a great to master given its abundance in the ocean. Perhaps somthing will be discovered that will revolutionize this industry if the technology finds a way to greater efficiency.
Hydrogen is not a 'fuel source', it's a method of energy storage. It's presence in flue gases does not make it as 'abundant' as you make out either, more that it shows a failing in the energy efficiency of the processes involved.
Thanks for the update IMO, it will be a long time, if ever before it makes sense financially.
I absolutely love how you took ownership and refined and addressed your opinion and stance on this. It truly shows that you are somebody genuinely interesting in bringing us the most factual picture of your topic. Keep up the wonderful work, subbed!
The main problem with the last video was Plasma Kinetics. They (Plasma Kinetics) people really scream scam. Just because somebody looked at your stuff doesn't mean they like or agree with what you did. The USPTO is really crap and will let you patent anything, so later you can sue the people who really figured out how to do it.
The main problem with the last video (and this one) is that it makes it clear Matt doesn't understand anything that he is trying to communicate. Channels like this benefit no one and really go to show why proper science communication is so difficult.
Great job, Matt, addressing the questions. I really admire your dedication to getting the story straight. It is a high virtue. On to the the subject-at-hand, I have concluded that the most befitting applications of metal hydrates ("solid hydrogen") is in ships and airplanes. The weight consideration leans more to ships (including submarines!) but I think we all know that batteries are not going to cut it for commercial aviation because of a multitude of issues. I am a subscriber to your channel and have not been disappointed. You are providing a good voice for explaining some seriously complicated topics. One direction you might want to go deeper into is how we might affect the lowest economic echelons of society with technology, compassion and respect. Finally, it would wild too if you and Dave Borland of "Just have a Think" could do a collaboration. You both are, IMHO, at the top of the game when it comes to communicating about sustainable living!
totally agree! they are my top two as well :D though 2bit da vincii runs a close third Edit; do you know of any other reputable channels that run to a similar degree of good quality?
It would be a great answer for ocean shipping in combination with a battery backup, it will take many different solutions like this one to get rid of the majority of fossil fuels for our industry and heavy transportation.
Not a great job, watch Phil destroy Matt and explain exactly why Matt is a fool! kzhead.info/sun/mrV9iNWHnXVsZI0/bejne.html
11:03 a very very different story than [i paraphrase] "so market disrupting it got banned by the government" ... no it was just the typically slow bureaucratic process of taking years to consider consequences and granting or refusing a patent .. btw. very good message here, humble and going trough it in detail, huge thumbs up
Great Video. Have you guys covered the Allam Cycle for power generation, NET Power?
I sincerely hope everyone will be as respectful as possible when commenting. Matt is going out of his way to share and inform at no cost to us. I like learning about all of these energy technologies, even the ones that will never fit in my laptop. At the very least this one seems like it would work well for capturing wasted industrial Hydrogen and maybe work well as an ad on to renewables for capturing "Extra" capacity for later release.
I like these longer and more explanatory videos better. ....you could start making more of these videos.
Good feedback. Thanks.
I hated hydrogen because of inefficiency of production and dificulty of storage. I'm starting to become a fan of it for long term energy storage, aviation and heavy ships which batteries will never power. After looking into efuels, that would need us to take carbon out of the atmosphere, or E-Nitrogen fuels which would produce toxic nitrous oxides, hidrogen seems to be one that would have all the emissions dealth with at creation rather than end of usage. (carbon capture/ nitrous oxide toxicity)
Thanks for the deeper dive.
I think that at least for the mid-term, hydrogen only really makes sense in a few applications, like city buses for example. My old college town just ordered hydrogen fuel cell buses (with rooftop tanks) that they fill with hydrogen produced from their own solar plant. There's no reason a vehicle like a local bus can't use hydrogen, especially when you only need to build the infrastructure at one or a few depots. Diesel buses are so expensive to maintain in comparison to electric modes, but the overhead wire infrastructure of trolleybuses, and the recharge-time and service-life issues associated with batteries are big problems. I see locally-produced hydrogen for bus transit granting the best of both worlds.
And gaseous storage works just fine.
Battery busses make more sense. For the electricity used to make that hydrogen, the busses could literally travel 3x further.
so the produce solar electricity...to turn it into h2 on terrible efficiency, to run expensive fuel cell busses. rather than just putting the electricity straight into a battery with very few losses.... yea doesnt seem smart
@@williammeek4078 But how long will it take to charge electrical batteries compared to filling up on hydrogen? Buses don't make money when they are waiting to be recharged. Then there is the daily grind of the batteries being used for public transport, will it be up to the task or will the life of the battery drop significantly? My view is watch what the military is testing as that what will ultimately be the final decision of any government, and there isn't an army in the world that's going to sit back and wait 8 hours for a main battle tank to fully recharge. And the most promising is what the US navy is working on. It can run on the current global fleet of vehicles with minimum modifications of the engine which means we don't have to scrap over a billion engines. www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/fuel-seawater-whats-catch-180953623/
@@stewartleslie3292 City buses don't make money in the first place. They lose money. And most buses don't need to be in service for many hours of the day. So taking a long time to charge isn't a problem for city buses. What matters most is cost and dependability.
8:33 50kWh/100kg is significantly better than what is in model 3. Model 3 battery weights roughly 500kg and has only 80kWh. Even when talking about cell level energy density, you will not get much beyond 25kWh/100kg (250Wh/kg is traditional metric) in mass produced lithium batteries.
That's per kg of metal hydride though. The weight of the entire system will be much higher.
I'm also interested in the statement of 50kWh/100kg. Is that just a claim by the company GKN or is it something that has been published and peer-reviewed?
The big problem for me is, that even if it stores 50 kwh/100kg, if you convert it back to electricity in a fuel cell with 60% (current top values) efficency, 30kwh/100kg aren't that impressive anymore.
Does this already take the needed heating into account? Also, the reversibility is usually quite bad, meaning that a lot of hydrogen is still left in the metal structure, reducing the efficiency.
You do a GREAT job explaining concepts in your videos and when you don't explain it as thoroughly as some may want (viewers' constructive criticism), you do a REALLY GREAT job owning the oversight and making it right--very refreshing attitude in today's world. Thank you for the great videos that inform and inspire!
Soooo.... metal hydryd storage for Hydrogen was my 7th grade science fair project... in the 70s. It's interesting that we are just now to the theoretical density limits that I found back then... and still large scale is the only real good use. Good to see that science is still science in some quarters.
How future is future? 5 years or 25 years? I always have a hard time with these videos regarding stuff that's more in a research paper than in a factory
Many of the examples in this video are here now or are in pilot phases, so within a few years if successful.
Same here. However, since it is currently being used by the military, it's chances are a lot better than most, because the military tends to get a LOT more resources.
Easiest manner to avoid THINKING about a topic is to relegate it to an UNCERTAIN FUTURE. Alternatively, not limiting one's IMAGINATION to a RESTRICTIVE TIME SCALE tends to pay dividends in both either the LONG or SHORT run... Food for thought...