a reply to: CriticalStinker
You are right that hydrogen is the better alternative.
But we have hit a roadblock to its adoption: storage and transfer. Each one of those problems is what is limiting hydrogen fuel cells (that and the
high cost of HFC manufacturing).
It sounds so wonderful, “most abundant element in the universe”... but nobody really says, “on earth it is locked up in other molecules and is
not really free floating around”. Which means that it will take energy to extract it from wherever you are taking it from.
Material science has not scaled to make pure H2 storage feasible. They can do “lab top” scale but scaling to 10,000 cars a month is still years
away. Membrane tech keeps evolving and is not that efficient (it seems to take a bit of high temp and pressure, iirc, no numbers off the top of my
head). Maybe when graphene is perfected in production we can line “hydrogen gas tanks” and keep gas from leaking out. But that is not now.
That being said, Australia is claiming that it has a membrane that can convert ammonia, on demand, to hydrogen for fuel cells, at near ambient
conditions! Pump in NH3 and out comes H2s and N2s (again, iirc) with the nitrogen vented and the H2 used as fuel. I have a thread on it from a few
years ago when it was demoed.
BTW, all “clean” energy sources (renewables, fusion, etc), all are gearing towards hydrogen production so it will probably happen. But not as soon
as I wish!
Check out the Olympics, there should be several hydrogen vehicles around!!
I agree with you! It has to happen! Heck, we should be able to extract H2 from waste plastics!!
Problem is, that Big Oil, will say that, “You should extract it from natural gas”... which is dumb. All renewables that are not used should make
hydrogen in at least ammonia form and we should switch off coal.