Concentration camps and global warming

[BoldonLad]

Hydrogen = Electrical storage
Efficiency = 66%

Interesting, must look up how that compares to hydro-electric and battery bases storage, in terms of efficiency.

 

[albion]

Gas use is the norm but obviously that was when it was below the minimum 3p per kw/h cost of wind power.
What I dont know is how it copes with the stop start of wind, though obviously prediction is easy.

 

[icowden]

Interesting, must look up how that compares to hydro-electric and battery bases storage, in terms of efficiency.

Does this help?

The most interesting part of the study remains: Which energy has the best efficiency and is the most cost-effective for driving e-cars? Battery or hydrogen operation?
With battery-powered e-cars, only eight percent of the energy is lost during transport before the electricity is stored in the batteries of the vehicles. When the electrical energy used to drive the electric motor is converted, another 18 percent is lost. This gives the battery-operated electric car an efficiency level of between 70 to 80 percent, depending on the model.

With the hydrogen-powered electric car, the losses are significantly greater: 45 percent of the energy is already lost during the production of hydrogen through electrolysis. Of this remaining 55 percent of the original energy, another 55 percent is lost when hydrogen is converted into electricity in the vehicle. This means that the hydrogen-powered electric car only achieves an efficiency of between 25 to 35 percent, depending on the model. For the sake of completeness: when alternative fuels are burned, the efficiency is even worse: only 10 to 20 percent overall efficiency.

It's comparing apples with pears a little in that it compares lack of efficiency in production of the hydrogen with loss of energy in the transmission of the electricity (rather than how efficient the electricity is to generate) but I think it's the only meaningful comparison you can make unless you know exactly how the electricity is being produced rather than it being a mix of burning gas, solar, wind, nukes and wood pellets.

In Norway you would say that 92% efficiency is achievable as all energy is coming from renewables.

 

[albion]

Pulling 500 kg + of battery puts a heavy load on a motor. And the battery is a £10,000++ consumable.

Maybe the battery is safer otherwise hydrogen wins on most fronts.

As to tidal power. It has more chance of solving how to get it working than fusion, which itself always looks close to zero.

 

[matticus]

As to tidal power. It has more chance of solving how to get it working than fusion, which itself always looks close to zero.

<a layman butts in ... > I thought tidal was simple; provided you don't mind blocking off large areas of near-coast water.
I seem to recall the Severn Estuary being the most productive site under consideration, but issues of getting things like boats through was a major handicap.
<a layman awaits his butt handed to him ... >

 

[albion]

They tried in the 1970s with Salters Ducks.
The major problem is getting anything working reliably. 20 years on and it is still not solved, thus the comparison to Fusion.
Some 17 year old whiz kid will turn up and solve Fusion in his head. The 10s of billions spent are looking wasted.

 

[icowden]

Pulling 500 kg + of battery puts a heavy load on a motor. And the battery is a £10,000++ consumable.
Maybe the battery is safer otherwise hydrogen wins on most fronts.

These guys disagree with you...
https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news/stories/2019/08/hydrogen-or-battery--that-is-the-question.html

And if the automotive manufacturers think hydrogen is dead in the water, then it is. Because they are not investing in it.

 

[albion]

2019 !
"Volker Quaschning, Professor for Regenerative Energy Systems at the HTW Berlin, also shares this assessment. According to Quaschning, numerous countries would be dependent on the import of regenerative hydrogen to produce hydrogen cars in large quantities, which would hardly be feasible in the near future. "

Guess they know we have a Tory government.

 

[icowden]

Guess they know we have a Tory government.

I don't follow you.

 

[Bromptonaut]

They tried in the 1970s with Salters Ducks.
The major problem is getting anything working reliably. 20 years on and it is still not solved, thus the comparison to Fusion.
Some 17 year old whiz kid will turn up and solve Fusion in his head. The 10s of billions spent are looking wasted.

What happened to Salter's Duck?

Was it ever tried on a commercial scale?

 

[albion]

I meant 50 years on. Wiki says they gave up in the 80s. I knew they tested in Scotland and it says it was Loch Ness.
It made big headlines in its time.

 

[Mr Celine]

They tried in the 1970s with Salters Ducks.
The major problem is getting anything working reliably. 20 years on and it is still not solved, thus the comparison to Fusion.
Some 17 year old whiz kid will turn up and solve Fusion in his head. The 10s of billions spent are looking wasted.

A commercially viable fusion reactor is 25 years in the future. That has been the case for at least the last 40 years.

 

[albion]

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/wave-magnet-renewable-energy-swel-b2156572.html?amp
Unlike onshore wind which costs 3p per kw/h they think it can achieve 1p per kw/h.
Salters Ducks mark 2. All it needs is money, again.

 

[Bazzer]

A commercially viable fusion reactor is 25 years in the future. That has been the case for at least the last 40 years.

Indeed.
Publicity given to another breakthrough moment few months back.

 

[albion]

Yes, forever paid for flirting.