Green Energy

2110 readers

104 users here now

everything about energy production

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Hydrogen Policy’s Narrow Path: Delusions And Solutions (energyinnovation.org)

submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Light-duty vehicles = Terrible

I can read:

FCEVs currently outperform BEVs on range and refueling speed.
However, 96 percent of LDV trips are less than 125 miles, meaning BEVs can complete most trips on a single charge. [^66]
- main advantage, look like not actually needed

BEVs are much more efficient, requiring two to three times less clean electricity than FCEVs using electrolytic hydrogen. [^63]
- efficiency; but we have excess on a windy or sunny day

[^66]: Amol Phadke et al., “The 2035 Report: Plummeting Costs and Dramatic Improvements in Batteries Can Accelerate Our Clean Transportation Future” (University of California, Berkeley, April 2021), 25 [^63]: Sam Wilson, “Hydrogen-Powered Heavy-Duty Trucks,” 9–10.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, there are times when there is excess, but big capital expenditures like an industrial-sized electrolyzer come with ongoing interest payments, so there's a huge financial incentive to run them 24/7. Running it only sometimes means sharply higher capital costs for each mole of hydrogen produced. It's a nasty balancing act.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

actually, that's not true. I built a hobby-grade hydrolysis machine in my garage for a total of $3. I can't imagine hydrolysis machines to be significantly expensive in general.

The reason why they're expensive today is because they're completely over-engineered. But that's not physics' fault. It's just someone seeking the "highest-quality product" instead of one that makes economic sense.