The only real advantage to hydrogen is it’s in almost limitless supply. Then when you burn it, the residue converts back to it’s original source.
If you want stored solar energy just use nuclear fission.
When they can synthesize the equivalent of gasoline, it will probably be one of the safest mobile energy sources available.
The only solution is a mixture of all sources...and that includes fossil fuels. The idea that WE can change climate is absurd. Mad scientists they are.
There is already fabulous way to store hydrogen that works well and is used every day. You synthesize organic molecules to make long chain hyrdocarbons and benzene rings and put it together into complexes of varying viscosities and volatility. It’s called petrochemicals otherwise known as fossil fuels. They are relatively safe, easy to store and transport and have very high energy density - higher actually than explosive compounds - which are burdened with carrying their own oxidizer.
And we already have industrial scale plants that can synthesize these kinds of chemicals from coal.
That's a remarkably stupid plan.
Hydrogen is very difficult to store even as a compressed gas, and impossible over extended periods, because it can pass right through steel walls. And it’s so light that it requires a larger volume to store any significant amount as compared to gasoline or LNG. It’s not practical. Elon is using methane to power his Starship, which makes a lot more sense than hydrogen.
>> What I call the “energy storage conundrum” is the obvious but largely unrecognized problem <<
This is how you know your source is an unserious, muck-racking no-nothing. Your utility companies are spending tens of billions of dollars on this issue. It’s problematic to say it’s well in hand, since lithium is a big issue in global politics because it sure as HELL is NOT an UNRECOGNIZED problem, but there’s no mystery about how this shakes out, so it’s not anything that needs vastly more attention than it’s getting. And newer technologies are already ensuring that we’ll replace the need for lithium long before it runs out.
Only “fossil” fuels and/or nuclear can supply the needs of an industrialized economy. We know that the left wants to destroy our industrialized economy. So the quickest way to do that is to eliminate production of petroleum products, which they are now doing.
“Hydrogen Is Unlikely Ever To Be A Viable Solution To The Energy Storage Conundrum”
Duh..... that’s because it has to be designed as an on-board on-demand system to be viable.
Better solution - face the truth that there is no such thing as man man climate change, ignore all environmentalist, and go back to what works.
Coal burning power plants and build more dams for Hydro electric power.
Low cost energy is the road to wealth for a nation.
So many issues, so many questions, NO ANSWERS!!!
Anyone ever heard of a power storage facility???
The only one I can think of is what was found beneath cross country telephone microwave towers that have pretty much gone the way of the dodo bird. A building full of batteries. I believe it was to power the line if the microwave link went down. I’m not an AT&T guy so that could be bad info.
Power is produced and consumed. Storage is something else and is usually associated with self contained solar power systems in a home or RV.
Hydrogen fuel cells? That particular problem has been worked at least since I was in College back in the late fifties. Basically zero progress. It ain’t viable yet and that’s it.
The power grid is a known quantity, or was until radical stupidity came into fashion. Now it is a shadow of what it needs to be to power America. Time to get on with LIFE and stop the stupidity of the left from destroying what our forefathers built for us to enjoy and maintain.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
The safest and easiest way to store hydrogen energy is in a carbon source. In doing do the carbon source, say coal, is converted to a hydrocarbon. The hydrocarbon can be easily stored with our current infrastructure. What is the hydrocarbon?,...manufacturing grade petroleum.
As a matter of fact, hydrogen does not has that much energy in itself. Burning a mole of hydrogen is a lot less effective than mole of natural gas.
The only thing, which makes not so smart people loving hydrogen is that it is light!
So there is a lot of energy in a Pound of hydrogen, but only, because a pound of hydrogen is a lot of hydrogen!
If only there was away to combine Hydrogen with Carbon and make a perfect fuel that takes many forms.
Also, in the book “Skunk Works” by Ben Rich, they were developing an SR-71 replacement that would be hydrogen fueled. He went into great detail about the extreme dangers and difficulty of storing the huge amounts of hydrogen needed for just one aircraft program.
This is like looking for something besides grass for cattle in the field to eat. Use hydrocarbons.
One word: CARBON
Why would anyone in their right mind want to make cheap fuel from the most abundant element in the universe?
How odd. The cop that was shot recently in the Buffalo, NY, shootings had converted his F-150 truck to run from hydrolysis of water. His name was Eric Salter, Jr. He has a video where he is demonstrating to patent examiners his work.
His video mentions ‘cooling system’ as he did not use distilled water, but rather, tap water, because the crud adds electrical charges that allow greater percentage of hydroxy to be produced. At the cost of heat production, apparently.