showing zero-emissions air travel could be on the horizon.
Hydrogen must be separated from water using electrolysis. That requires energy. Where did the energy come from?
Would not biologically produced alcohol do well at this?
Bio-alcohol is an ecologically closed system. Plants “collect” co2 from the atmosphere, it’s fermented into alcohol, and conventional engines burn it — like gasoline, but cleaner.
I would think the sheer weight of all the things needed for hydrogen fuel cells would be too heavy for efficient or long-range performance.
—Or, is ONLY 100% PERFECT ZERO CARBON emission the (politically correct) goal here? Is very LOW carbon emission not good enough?
Perfection is the enemy of practicality.
What the hell is 3,500 MLS?
Was this article written by a chatbot?
Where do you get the hydrogen?
15 minutes... Wow!
MLS???
Just a few thoughts on this.
Hydrogen as a fuel has a low BTU per pound value.
Hydrogen as a fuel must be carried in a pressure vessel.
The pressure vessel fuel container weighs much more than a petroleum based aircraft fuel container.
I don’t have any figures to quote but I would guess that the combination of a hydrogen fuel cell and the electric motor used to drive the propeller of this aircraft would weigh more than a typical aircraft engine.
When it come to aircraft extra weight equals slower airspeed and less range.
I don’t see hydrogen as a practical fuel for aircraft.
Natural Gas!
All the other sources require more BTUs of energy to isolate the hydrogen than the hydrogen itself can produce!
“3500 MLS”?
3500 (Miles?)
3500 (Multiple Listing System?)
Is there an Editor in the house? Hello?
To produce hydrogen, one must use a lot of energy. Some, but not all, of that energy is gotten back when the hydrogen is burned.
When they say “zero emissions air travel” they are deliberately lying. {obvious} The energy required to produce hydrogen is not “zero emissions.”
Water vapor is the #1 greenhouse gas.
I’m betting they haven’t thought about this: Hydrogen is stored in tanks under pressure. That’s a big enough problem at sea level. But when you go up to 30,000 feet, the air pressure is lower. The difference in pressure is greater. I don’t have to be a physicist to know that the problem of storing hydrogen in a plane in flight is greater than at sea level.
I know the “scientists” are poo pooing what I just said. I hope I don’t witness the first explosion and crash.
And how much will a plane ticket cost?
Disadvantages of hydrogen energy
Hydrogen is volatile
Because of its high energy content, hydrogen gas is a highly flammable and volatile substance which makes it a risky fuel to work with.
Hydrogen energy is expensive to produce
Both steam-methane reforming and electrolysis are expensive processes which prevents a lot of countries from committing to mass production. Research and trials are in process to try and discover a cheap and sustainable way to produce enough hydrogen without contributing more carbon into the atmosphere.
Hydrogen energy is difficult to store
Hydrogen is a much lighter gas than gasoline which makes it difficult to store and transport. To be able to store it we need to compress it into a liquid and store it at a low temperature. The high amounts of pressure needed to store hydrogen makes it a difficult fuel to transport in large quantities.
Hydrogen can be dangerous
Hydrogen is incredibly flammable which makes it a dangerous fuel if not handled correctly. There is also no smell to hydrogen so sensors are required to detect leaks.
Making hydrogen can produce carbon
There are many ways of making hydrogen. And some of the produce carbon.
Good deal but I would nix the name of it Lightning McClean
*********
Moses Lake / Grant County Airport was site of first electric-powered commuter aircraft flight also.
Should be named The Hindenburg II.
"MLS"??? The ignorance of "reporters" is boundless.