Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: (tk@bbs.kawa-kun.com)'s status on Wednesday, 02-Aug-2023 22:37:09 JST Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem:
   Who remembers hydrogen fuel cell vehicles?
   • Embed this notice
     purple 👊✊💨 (purple@nya.social)'s status on Wednesday, 02-Aug-2023 22:42:02 JST purple 👊✊💨

     in reply to

     @tk@bbs.kawa-kun.com i like the part where there are TWO fuel stations for them

     Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: (tk@bbs.kawa-kun.com)'s status on Wednesday, 02-Aug-2023 22:42:21 JST Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem:

     in reply to

     • purple 👊✊💨
     @purple And even that's generous!
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:19:02 JST feld

     in reply to
     it's a dead end
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:19:45 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     Toyota:
     
     https://www.topspeed.com/toyota-745-mile-solid-state-battery/
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:20:27 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     even heavy equipment doesn't want hydrogen. They invented a way to charge them while they're being used!
     
     https://thedriven.io/2023/06/23/bhp-says-battery-electric-cheaper-than-hydrogen-as-it-dumps-diesel-for-haul-trucks/
     Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:23:00 JST feld

     in reply to

     • △ DЄЙZA △
     it's real, they are gonna fucking pwn the industry once they put this into mass production. i should probably buy a bunch of Toyota stock
   • Embed this notice
     △ DЄЙZA △ (denza252@shitposter.club)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:23:01 JST △ DЄЙZA △

     in reply to

     • feld
     @feld @tk is this finally real or is toyota still trying to buy time
   • Embed this notice
     △ DЄЙZA △ (denza252@shitposter.club)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:25:54 JST △ DЄЙZA △

     in reply to

     • feld
     @feld @tk only reason i ask is cuz toyota's made announcements that didn't materialize before
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:25:54 JST feld

     in reply to

     • △ DЄЙZA △
     we'll know by 2027 i guess :laugh:
   • Embed this notice
     Anatoly Korenchkin (akorenchkin@clubcyberia.co)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:35:47 JST Anatoly Korenchkin

     in reply to

     • feld
     @feld @tk >the rapid development in battery technology
     
     The thing is: no.
     Battery technology has principally remained unchanged for almost 50 years. Lithium-[Polymer/Ion/C/Mn/NMC], NiCad, Lead-Antimony and all the other mainstays were developed decades ago. We just found better ways to pack them into smaller packages. Now all that free space to stuff more cells into has run out.
     
     All the new technologies we keep hearing about are fusion technology -- perpetually 5 to 20 years away. Carbon nano-tubes, anyone?
     
     t. Guy who contracted for Briggs&Stratton "Flexpack" battery technoogy & Tesla Energy.
     Fediverse Contractor and Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: like this.
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:37:36 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     > Now all that free space to stuff more cells into has run out.
     
     but it hasn't. When you don't need room for the lithium dendrites, you have a lot of extra space!
   • Embed this notice
     Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem: (tk@bbs.kawa-kun.com)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 00:39:47 JST Doughnut Lollipop 【記録係】:blobfoxgooglymlem:

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     @feld @akorenchkin Why not replace the passengers and driver with batteries? :blobfoxthinking:
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:20:09 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @akorenchkin @tk @feld

     Which is why cars of the future are going to be #hydrogen cars. People who oppose this are just short-sighted or even outright Luddites.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:20:09 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     why would we want hydrogen cars when we don't even want hydrogen heavy machinery? it doesn't make sense
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:22:46 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     read the goddamn article at least
     
     > With “fuel-to-wheel” energy efficiency losses of 70% for both diesel and hydrogen compared to just 20% for electric, converting mining truck fleets to electric is a no-brainer.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:22:47 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin The first thing to realize is that people are lying. There is no serious attempt to move past diesel/gasoline today. BEVs are just a sideshow. When the world gets serious, it will be #hydrogen powered vehicles.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:24:44 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     the only thing we're going to be using hydrogen for at scale in the near future (20 years, at least) is to replace bunker fuel in the tankers
     
     that's about the extent of it
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:26:46 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     this is just retarded
     
     I have a secret for you: the best solution doesn't always win, only the easiest to implement solution.
     
     Batteries are much much easier than hydrogen.
     
     Hell if we were going to do the "best" solution we'd have nuclear fusion powered cars by now
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:26:47 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin People are lying about many things, including efficiency. It's worth noting that fuel cells are electrochemical systems just like batteries. A lot of these claims don't hold much water.

   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:29:09 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Which is another lie. One requires vast amounts of metals to be dug up. The other is made from water.

     Which of the two is greenwashing and which actually sounds like a real solution?

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:29:09 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     One requires way too much energy produce and doesn't even have a worldwide distribution network for the energy
     
     the other can just be plugged in anywhere on the planet that has electricity
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:38:46 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     gtfo with your hydrogen proselytizing. you're either willfully ignorant or holding a giant bag of hydrogen assets in your portfolio
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:38:47 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Like I said, fuel cells are also electrochemical systems, just like batteries. Those claims don't hold much water.

     That's the same story told about biofuels. It was just reusing "existing infrastructure." But it was unsustainable and not green at all. BEVs are the same story.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:42:47 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     The only viable sources of hydrogen are gray hydrogen (methane and co2 byproducts) and blue hydrogen (from natural gas)
     
     if we have the free energy to make green hydrogen we don't need hydrogen, we can just use the free energy instead of wasting some of it by converting it first
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:42:48 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin And what about you? Do you own any BEV related stock, or perhaps own a BEV?

     It ultimately doesn't matter what accusations you make. BEVs aren't sustainable and will die off due to their own limitations. Those are the facts of the matter. The rest is just noise.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:46:59 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     we're never going to make green hydrogen at scale until we have a breakthrough energy advancement
     
     go back and recheck the math and the finances please
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:47:00 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin We're talking about green hydrogen, made from electrolysis of water using electricity.

     And again, a fuel cell is an electrochemical system. There is no difference between this and charging a battery.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 05:52:20 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     also fuel cells are not some magical utopia for hydrogen. they still are at risk of leaking hydrogen, which leads to 💣
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:13:38 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     It's under pressure (350 or 700 bar, depending on the design), but gasoline is not. And it only requires 4% concentration in the air for a static discharge from anything to ignite it.
     
     Which means tiny leak == lots of hydrogen
     
     you haven't even studied this. Please, just go away
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:13:39 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Which is pure fearmongering. #Hydrogen is safer than gasoline. There is minimal danger.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:17:13 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     > It's also in a carbon fiber shell. Cracking the shell is not easy.
     
     LMAOOOO this is some real Rush Stockton shit
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:17:16 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin It's also in a carbon fiber shell. Cracking the shell is not easy.

     There are no tiny leaks. They're tested to not leak. This all well known to people who actually build these things.

     You are being a total hypocritic. You have no idea what you're talking about. You clearly have never done any studying except swallowing pro-BEV propaganda.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:19:53 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     You ever see a carbon fiber bicycle explode while someone's riding it? They didn't even need to use bullets!
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:19:54 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin They've literally fired bullets and into them and not caused a leak.

     You are just bullshitting this whole time. You're being a total stooge of the BEV industry by acting like this.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:22:26 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     That's what Rush thought too
     
     I can't wait for this future where there's a recall for all fuel cell cars by X brand because of a potential defect in the shell and everyone's freaking out because they're bombs on wheels and they can't be safely transported or stored for the recall service
     
     this is a million times worse than a battery that just becomes a fireball you can't put out very easily
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:22:27 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Luckily, it's not a carbon fiber bike. It's something far thicker and stronger.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:27:41 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Carbon fiber SBCA cylinders need to be hydrostatic tested every 3 years
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:27:42 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin They're already thousands of carbon fiber tanks being used all the time. There are no known issues according to the engineers that build them. You are just being a Luddite here.

     A battery fire is actually the biggest danger among them all, mainly because it burns so much longer than anything. It also can't be put out with water. Again, more fearmongering from you and you are just repeating BEV propaganda.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:29:01 JST feld

     in reply to

     • SlicerDicer
     maybe I'd trust if the cylinders were made out of inconel lol
   • Embed this notice
     SlicerDicer (slicerdicer@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:29:02 JST SlicerDicer

     in reply to

     • feld
     @feld If they sustain any damage they are automatically condemned.
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:32:00 JST feld

     in reply to

     • SlicerDicer
     basically any collision and your car is totaled until the tanks have been taken out, examined, and tested
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:38:34 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     that's only pressure cycles and isn't making any claims about the material's structural performance as it ages which is separate from pressurization/depressurization stressors
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:38:35 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Hydrogen tanks are tested to 22,000 cycles. They likely exceed the expected lifespan of the car.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:45:02 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     > And if you're going to talk about this subject, you should also be aware of the lifespan of li-ion batteries. At some point they are also a fire danger.
     
     only if you don't use a BMS and your chemistry has a major flaw causing uncontrolled lithium dendrites to create a short! Which practically is not a problem with modern chemistries and BMS anymore.
     
     If my car has a battery failure while I'm driving I'll have plenty of time to pull over and get out of the car before the fire consumes it.
     
     If my car has a hydrogen fuel cell failure I'll likely be dead before knowing anything is going on
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:45:03 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin It is designed for 15 years of life even under heavy usage. For most cars, they're pretty much guaranteed to last the lifespan of the car.

     And if you're going to talk about this subject, you should also be aware of the lifespan of li-ion batteries. At some point they are also a fire danger.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:53:59 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     > they're tested to a high degree!
     
     There are only 15,000 hydrogen cars in the entire continental United States (California, specifically). There hasn't even been enough production of the cars to claim they've been "tested to a high degree". They have no track record. Zero.
     
     Just stop bullshitting man. I get it, you like hydrogen. It feels like the future. It seems sci-fi. The best possible fuel source -- the most common element in the entire universe!
     
     But boy are you gonna be disappointed in humanity's inability to harness it for energy outside some commercial applications.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 06:54:00 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Great! Then admit there's also no problem with #hydrogen cars because they are also tested to a high degree! There are no longer such risks!

     And again, there is minimal fire risk. Hydrogen floats away fast and poses a minimal fire risk even in a leak situation. You are safer in a hydrogen car than a gasoline car.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:04:41 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     You're right, he BEV will not be the final destination of the car.
     
     But hydrogen is not next. Not for cars.
     
     Plausible for trains to replace the diesel in diesel electric.
     
     Possibly for some long haul freight and certain sectors of heavy machinery.
     
     Definitely for the shipping industry as the tankers can replace bunker fuel with hydrogen.
     
     Likely even for some planes as batteries won't be energy dense enough and light enough!*
     
     But for cars: after the BEV it will be solid state supercaps.
     
     * until supercaps
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:04:42 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin That's well beyond a decent sample size. You're being as dishonest as anyone possibly can.

     No, YOU STOP BULLSHITTING. You are a fucking Luddite by acting like this. Time to stop being a stooge of the BEV industry and realize there are many ideas out there. The BEV will not be the final destination of the car. You need to stop being permanently stuck in 2010.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:16:20 JST feld

     in reply to

     • SlicerDicer
     • Hypx
     gonna be a while
   • Embed this notice
     SlicerDicer (slicerdicer@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:16:22 JST SlicerDicer

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Hypx
     @Hypx @feld I say we build a network of tubes and blast ourselves around like those bank canisters.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:16:24 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin So in your world, the post-BEV world will be powered by something with even worse energy density...

     I'll believe in synfuel powered ICE cars before that. And because #hydrogen is truly sustainable, it is guaranteed to play a role. People who doubt this are rejecting obvious real-world advancements while simultaneously imagining fantastical leaps in highly speculative technology. It is unlikely, and more than anything else just a sign of wishful thinking.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:18:04 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     > while simultaneously imagining fantastical leaps in highly speculative technology
     
     where are the fantastical leaps in green hydrogen production? You think there's gonna be money left in the pot to keep doing that research when the entire planet is on the precipice of a global economic recession the likes of which has never been experience before and especially fueled by climate change?
     
     Pressing F to doubt :f:
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:21:06 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     We have net positive green hydrogen production? And it's profitable? Where is it? Show me I'd love to see it.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:21:07 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin You are simply not up to speed to the world right now. Green #hydrogen production already exists right now. It is rapidly coming down in price and billions are being poured into the technology. You are just getting a wake-up call that it is no longer 2010 anymore.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:33:16 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     That's not answering my questions.
     
     Does it still require more energy to produce than what we get out?
     
     What is the primary energy source going to be for this?
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:33:17 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin

     We are seeing big leaps in electrolyzer capacity. That is a sign that green #hydrogen production is currently happening and rapidly expanding.

     https://www.energyintel.com/00000186-0a01-d2f7-a387-af9b7f360000

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:46:49 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     How are they making the hydrogen? You said green, so we're splitting water from the ocean I presume
     
     What is powering this process? Nuclear? Wind? Solar? Hydro? Geothermal?
     
     Nuclear would work if there was a plant nearby that needed to increase their base load so the hydrogen is just a byproduct. We need to build a lot of new nuclear anyway, so maybe this is something we will do. I'm not certain we have enough nuclear plants in ideal locations today. I'll have to look into this, but it being a common energy source due to excess generating capacity will be rare.
     
     Wind works by the ocean and we are building some absolutely ridiculous turbines now (16MW just went up in China) but I wonder what fun we have in store with the trade winds being rather unreliable
     
     Hydro is a blessing but we can't make that everywhere.
     
     Geothermal has some potential in a few places. Still going to be an uncommon solution for a country/region
     
     We probably want to be by the ocean, right? So the smartest solution is probably to use solar which we can put on land or even float on the sea.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:46:50 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin That's the same dilemma as a battery. It is energy storage, not a new energy source.

   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:51:16 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin Electrolysis of water from green energy sources. It can be anything. It is literally the same marketing spiel as what BEVs promised: The energy source is now fully agnostic and can be anything.

     And yes, one very smart idea seems to be seawater electrolysis. It can be done entirely off-shore:

     https://www.offshore-energy.biz/china-tests-hydrogen-production-through-direct-seawater-electrolysis-at-xinghua-bay-owf/

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:51:16 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     That one is possibly being powered by wind (as seen in the photo). I've seen others with solar. They seem to be the most common plant design and we're gonna need a lot of this to power every car on the planet
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 07:57:54 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Your biggest criticism about BEVs was the battery's rare earth minerals / metals which are terrible for the environment to mine
     
     I have some bad news for you about the solar and wind farms that will be required to do this... the amount of energy required to manufacture solar and wind is more than the finished product ever produces across its entire lifespan. And they require a ton of the rare earth minerals / metals.
     
     And you're just converting it to hydrogen which we lose energy on, and then lose again when converted for its final use...
     
     
     This is literally worse than BEVs, I'm sorry.
     
     This is why I'm confident hydrogen will be important in our energy mix, but it will be a specialty fuel for specialty applications where we cannot escape the needs of hydrocarbon energy density. Cars are not in this class.
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 08:00:11 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     All that wind and solar needs to be used in applications where there are as minimal losses as possible to be profitable.
     
     Why build a giant solar farm for hydrogen when you'll make more money selling the energy for other uses?
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 08:04:33 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     The only way we make hydrogen a primary energy source is if we solve our 1 Cubic Mile of Oil per year problem and go oil (and natural gas! Usually left out of the equation) free.
     
     That solution requires over $100T of nuclear investment in today's dollars.
     
     The work required will take nearly 100 years by current estimates. The massive uranium mines we need to build won't be pretty either.
     
     When we do that? I think we will have hydrogen cars. It would be the only responsible way.
     
     I hope we get a real energy breakthrough in my lifetime.
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 09:16:30 JST feld

     in reply to

     • SlicerDicer
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Also why do you go through all this work to build an energy generation plant for hydrogen when your profit margins will be razor thin to be competitive with electricity and you could just make more money by just selling the raw wattage back to the grid?
     
     It only makes sense to produce hydrogen with excess or free/trapped energy sources. This can't support a world economy. Oil runs the world because it's so damn cheap for its energy density
   • Embed this notice
     SlicerDicer (slicerdicer@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 09:16:31 JST SlicerDicer

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Lets try some complex things here, I know a little bit about gasses, tanks and pressure. What it means to do all these processes.
     
     First off everything needs to be cleaned, not cleaned like you think but cleaned to the point it wont explode. That means removing all contaminants. Once you do that if you contaminate it for any reason you must reclean it.
     
     Then you have the problem of you wind up with two gasses, oxygen and hydrogen. If you take that at face value you will be able to pressurize this slightly by electrolysis. This means that you need to take that hydrogen and oxygen and boost it to store it. So you go to boost it right? What is the multiplier of the equipment you are using? So you are compressing very little gas expending enormous amounts of energy. I know I do it for diving, its very wasteful but I do not care. I need 3000 PSI Oxygen.
     
     Now assuming you boost all that and have used all this energy to make the hydogen and oxygen, then boost it and what? you tap a tank and its condemned?
     
     DOT has rules for tanks for a reason as well.
     
     As a complement I see it being viable to use hydrogen but it is not the solution. I have never seen one study that actually includes the energy required to boost gas. I think boosting its like 2kw per 20 cubic feet. It is pretty horrid ratio.
     
     So resolve the boosting problem? It might be worth it. Assuming we have free energy from something like waste energy not being consumed. Then it is not waste, it is just using what would be not there.
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 09:19:53 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     • SlicerDicer
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Hello, I am car shopper. Should I buy the BEV which costs 14c per kWh and 80% energy efficiency or a hydrogen car whose fuel has to cost much more per kWh and less than 80% efficiency but a HUUUGE fuel tank?
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 09:36:02 JST feld

     in reply to

     • SlicerDicer
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     I guess we could flare off the oxygen? Maybe even use a generator to turn that back into electricity!!! :bigfive:
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 09:45:48 JST feld

     in reply to

     • feld
     • SlicerDicer
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     the more you analyze the economics of hydrogen the worse it gets. It's almost enough to turn one against it
     
     And who would want to give up being able to fuel up at home / off grid?
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:41:56 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin That's totally false. The main problem is that we curtail large portions of wind and solar. The problem is overproduction, not underproduction. That gives us free energy to make green #hydrogen.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:41:56 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Yes, excess energy like this exists because it's too expensive to build the transmission lines. I'm very familiar. It's growing in popularity to use this excess energy for bitcoin mining which actually makes money, unlike hydrogen.
     
     I don't know why you'd want to make make any hydrogen off of freshwater when we are running out of it in many places
   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:46:14 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     We can't just turn on 2000 nuclear reactors by 2035. It's not possible. Calling nuclear scalable is a lie. It's a damn good investment but it's too slow.
     
     We may have some small fusion reactors coming soon. But there's no guarantee
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:46:15 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin The amount of available energy from renewables is many orders of magnitude greater than global energy consumption. This is not a problem. Nuclear is also easily scalable because it needs very little fuel. Uranium + reprocessing completely solves that issue too.

     The energy breakthrough you're looking for already has happened. You're just in denial about it.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:56:16 JST feld

     in reply to

     • SlicerDicer
     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     No we can't.
     
     It's a cubic mile of oil. Do you have any idea how much that is?
     
     Just to meet the energy use of the world in 2010 we would have to build 92 million solar panels per year every year for 50 years. Just to wean ourselves off the 2010 level of energy usage. And it keeps going up.
     
     Building these things to get us off the bad energy to the good energy requires we massively increase the bad energy usage to build the good energy generators. This is a very tough problem to solve.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:56:17 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • SlicerDicer
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @SlicerDicer @akorenchkin Again, we have basically infinite energy for this. We can easily replace oil if we wanted to.

   • Embed this notice
     feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:59:02 JST feld

     in reply to

     • Hypx
     • Anatoly Korenchkin
     Yea it is possible but its energy source is better utilized doing something not hydrogen. That's why it will be a specialty fuel.
   • Embed this notice
     Hypx (hypx@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 03-Aug-2023 10:59:03 JST Hypx

     in reply to

     • feld
     • Anatoly Korenchkin

     @feld @tk @akorenchkin As the scale we're talking about, there will never be enough transmission lines, nor will there even be demand for it on the other end.

     You need energy storage too, and #hydrogen is the ultimate form of it.

     And you are forgetting your own words: Saltwater electrolysis is totally possible.