Hydrogen is the future, not BEVs?
Discussion
Big clear out of the various eco scams, propaganda projects and mad hedges is underway as they've become too costly to perpetrate in terms of debt and VC financing.
Vast amounts of the H bulls
t that was being spewed out by the German regional powers to 'support' the funnelling of taxpayer funds into private projects that generated high fee streams has declined significantly as it has done among the regional powers in the U.K. where the provincial minds are beginning to wake up to a reality that they've just been sending all the money they were supposed to be using to feed and house their poor to paying the school fees of people in Frankfurt and London.
Money returning to have a value means that those with the coBreil of it have to suddenly start being careful as to where they put it. The days of just hurling £millions at any old tat with a good story and it's value increasing or the investors not caring if it goes pop because they've got lots of cash coming in the other side is over. We are finally seeing some healthy natural selection and lots of total tripe is going to get quietly put down.
Fisker is a perma loser who you'd only back at the height of a mad spending frenzy. If you're seriously looking for the next Musk then it's not ever Fisker. His enterprise is very likely to follow his traditional model or talking about great things and then revealing some kind of Aldi, middle aisle tat that falls apart in a few days before going begging for more free money and being told to FO as joker time is over.
Most of the SNP's hydrogen investments that were seemingly all done out of Glasgow and appear to possibly involve a lot of connected parties are all burning cash still but are very unlikely to get any more taxpayer money and won't get any private money as they were mostly just schemes to convert grant money into fee income via random 'investments' that happed to fit the grant requirements at the time.
The same is happening in the EU as the transport schemes mostly all had cash burns that guaranteed the consuming of all the grant funds inside of 5 years and the bulk of that burn has been professional fees and payments to other entities.
I get the feeling entities like Ripple Energy is on the list. Their model is quite clever in that they found a way to sell unregulated, over priced investments to pensioners and naive white collar workers needing to impress work colleagues about how much more they care about things that need to be seen being cared about. It's a genius wheeze as unlike flogging penny shares there's next to no regulatory requirements and during a free money era and endless supply of absolute idiots who will willingly convert real actual money into a vague assurance of getting bits of it back over the next 20 years and maybe it'll be this sort of value but maybe it won't, who really knows, but hey, saving the planet while being clearly smarter than the you despise down at the bowls clubs or at the desk next to you in accounts. Cash burn looks big with what looks like 5 big mouths to feed and the number of mugs wanting to throw away real money has been contracting since rates began rising.
Tepeo the zero emission boiler company is another. I actually believe in thermal energy storage as a real potential solution to part of the UK's need to heat homes with renewables. But you can't build a good business around self co sunroom of the koolaid and trying to flog a seriously ugly, Soviet era object for £10k. Too many people with £10k to spend have nice homes and working eyes so don't want their £10k object to firstly look hideous but secondly look like a £500 turd some schmuck picked up from the Range. They're very well funded having done a good fund raising recently but their cash burn is huge and their idea of sales is to sit on social media whinging about how it's all the fault of the gubberment. They're dead in the water unless they can get the next Labour govt to quickly funnel them a load of cash and subsidies.
Daddy Bamford is still trying to talk about hydrogen to help his son's bus company out but it's beginning to look like filling half a bus with gas canisters so it can only work as a bus at 50% customer capacity and then needing a massive local grant to procure and store the hydrogen in an urban environment where if Gary were to flick his fag in the wrong direction that city is going to loose half a dozen streets, is not a smart, commercially viable solution versus simply migrating all diesel buses slowly to EV via hybrid.
Even the holy grail of grant hoovering and PR for folks who did O Levels in needlecraft and how to open a door, magically sucking CO2 out of the air is falling under more scrutiny as more and more people are beginning to suspect its a two part scam and that as there is almost no CO2 in the air the cost of powering fans to suck in the volume of air needed will blackout nations when the fans aren't clogged by birds getting sucked in from the other side of the planet. And the second part being run by the likes of VW is also beginning to fall apart as more people are beginning to work out that when they say 'direct air capture' many firms mean specifically burning coal to create a carbon dense gaseous stream, most of which they then try to capture before it all escapes into the atmosphere. There's no escaping the reality that the actual atmosphere does not hold enough carbon to synthesise non fossil fuel long chain hydrocarbons in industrial quantities. But coal does so it's the ideal base ingredient for making a synthetic, fossil fuel free hydrocarbon.
Hopefully, the next few years will be the essential clearout of all the deadwood and scams without doing too much damage to the true businesses of the future and deliver a far less toxic and more solid foundation for progressing on.
Vast amounts of the H bulls
t that was being spewed out by the German regional powers to 'support' the funnelling of taxpayer funds into private projects that generated high fee streams has declined significantly as it has done among the regional powers in the U.K. where the provincial minds are beginning to wake up to a reality that they've just been sending all the money they were supposed to be using to feed and house their poor to paying the school fees of people in Frankfurt and London. Money returning to have a value means that those with the coBreil of it have to suddenly start being careful as to where they put it. The days of just hurling £millions at any old tat with a good story and it's value increasing or the investors not caring if it goes pop because they've got lots of cash coming in the other side is over. We are finally seeing some healthy natural selection and lots of total tripe is going to get quietly put down.
Fisker is a perma loser who you'd only back at the height of a mad spending frenzy. If you're seriously looking for the next Musk then it's not ever Fisker. His enterprise is very likely to follow his traditional model or talking about great things and then revealing some kind of Aldi, middle aisle tat that falls apart in a few days before going begging for more free money and being told to FO as joker time is over.
Most of the SNP's hydrogen investments that were seemingly all done out of Glasgow and appear to possibly involve a lot of connected parties are all burning cash still but are very unlikely to get any more taxpayer money and won't get any private money as they were mostly just schemes to convert grant money into fee income via random 'investments' that happed to fit the grant requirements at the time.
The same is happening in the EU as the transport schemes mostly all had cash burns that guaranteed the consuming of all the grant funds inside of 5 years and the bulk of that burn has been professional fees and payments to other entities.
I get the feeling entities like Ripple Energy is on the list. Their model is quite clever in that they found a way to sell unregulated, over priced investments to pensioners and naive white collar workers needing to impress work colleagues about how much more they care about things that need to be seen being cared about. It's a genius wheeze as unlike flogging penny shares there's next to no regulatory requirements and during a free money era and endless supply of absolute idiots who will willingly convert real actual money into a vague assurance of getting bits of it back over the next 20 years and maybe it'll be this sort of value but maybe it won't, who really knows, but hey, saving the planet while being clearly smarter than the
you despise down at the bowls clubs or at the desk next to you in accounts. Cash burn looks big with what looks like 5 big mouths to feed and the number of mugs wanting to throw away real money has been contracting since rates began rising. Tepeo the zero emission boiler company is another. I actually believe in thermal energy storage as a real potential solution to part of the UK's need to heat homes with renewables. But you can't build a good business around self co sunroom of the koolaid and trying to flog a seriously ugly, Soviet era object for £10k. Too many people with £10k to spend have nice homes and working eyes so don't want their £10k object to firstly look hideous but secondly look like a £500 turd some schmuck picked up from the Range. They're very well funded having done a good fund raising recently but their cash burn is huge and their idea of sales is to sit on social media whinging about how it's all the fault of the gubberment. They're dead in the water unless they can get the next Labour govt to quickly funnel them a load of cash and subsidies.
Daddy Bamford is still trying to talk about hydrogen to help his son's bus company out but it's beginning to look like filling half a bus with gas canisters so it can only work as a bus at 50% customer capacity and then needing a massive local grant to procure and store the hydrogen in an urban environment where if Gary were to flick his fag in the wrong direction that city is going to loose half a dozen streets, is not a smart, commercially viable solution versus simply migrating all diesel buses slowly to EV via hybrid.
Even the holy grail of grant hoovering and PR for folks who did O Levels in needlecraft and how to open a door, magically sucking CO2 out of the air is falling under more scrutiny as more and more people are beginning to suspect its a two part scam and that as there is almost no CO2 in the air the cost of powering fans to suck in the volume of air needed will blackout nations when the fans aren't clogged by birds getting sucked in from the other side of the planet. And the second part being run by the likes of VW is also beginning to fall apart as more people are beginning to work out that when they say 'direct air capture' many firms mean specifically burning coal to create a carbon dense gaseous stream, most of which they then try to capture before it all escapes into the atmosphere. There's no escaping the reality that the actual atmosphere does not hold enough carbon to synthesise non fossil fuel long chain hydrocarbons in industrial quantities. But coal does so it's the ideal base ingredient for making a synthetic, fossil fuel free hydrocarbon.
Hopefully, the next few years will be the essential clearout of all the deadwood and scams without doing too much damage to the true businesses of the future and deliver a far less toxic and more solid foundation for progressing on.
DonkeyApple said:
Daddy Bamford is still trying to talk about hydrogen to help his son's bus company out but it's beginning to look like filling half a bus with gas canisters so it can only work as a bus at 50% customer capacity and then needing a massive local grant to procure and store the hydrogen in an urban environment where if Gary were to flick his fag in the wrong direction that city is going to loose half a dozen streets, is not a smart, commercially viable solution versus simply migrating all diesel buses slowly to EV via hybrid.
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US. I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
Edited by Gone fishing on Friday 19th April 10:22
Gone fishing said:
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US. I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, but there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.
Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
but to get anywhere near that, you need massive amounts of excess renewable power to make the hydrogen. i just can't see the scale needed.Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
Gone fishing said:
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US. I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, but there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.
Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
Horses for courses is the precise logic in this regard. Beyond extreme niche there is zero merit to using hydrogen to propel cars, the argument just falls down on multiple aspects and some of those will never be resolved. Conversely, there are genuine industrial and heavy transport cases where hydrogen could be a means to assist in decarbonising whether as a raw fuel or a building block to a fuel. For transport there is the primary hurdle of supply in that it'll take decades for there to be a genuine commercial supply that exceeds the primary use of replacing existing fossil fuel hydrogen which messes with any business case trying to secure funding to compete against alternative energy stores. Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
Gone fishing said:
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US.
Is that Still happening? Quite a few hydrogen trains have already been withdrawn from service.Gone fishing said:
I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.
In appears the hydrogen power system takes up the entire central portion of the FLIRT H2.https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/03/stadler-sets-...
tamore said:
Gone fishing said:
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US. I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, but there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.
Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
but to get anywhere near that, you need massive amounts of excess renewable power to make the hydrogen. i just can't see the scale needed.Cars I can't see it, at the other end of the transportation size spectrum, trains I can (especially where electrificiation is a challenge), and in the middle I'd have thought buses and HGVs make suitable candidates.
It's horses for courses for me, its just applying it where it makes sense. And if bitcoin miners can claim green credentials because they use hyroelectic power that they say would otherwise go to waste, then so can hydrogen producers. Hydrogen production could be a very convenient way to balance the grid which has a real value
Evanivitch said:
Gone fishing said:
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US.
Is that Still happening? Quite a few hydrogen trains have already been withdrawn from service.Gone fishing said:
I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.
In appears the hydrogen power system takes up the entire central portion of the FLIRT H2.https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/03/stadler-sets-...
rscott said:
Evanivitch said:
Gone fishing said:
I'll take your word on most of that post but have you seen the Hydrogen trains, often in the US.
Is that Still happening? Quite a few hydrogen trains have already been withdrawn from service.Gone fishing said:
I'm struggling to see why Trains don't seem to lose the fraction of the space as a bus does if your point is true, there are an increasing number of trains that cover long distances and look just like your regular commuter train in a fancy wrap. Stadler has recently set a record of nearly 3k km on one tank of hydrogen and Alstom has just completed a 3 month trial.
In appears the hydrogen power system takes up the entire central portion of the FLIRT H2.https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/03/stadler-sets-...
It makes me wonder what the f
k that hydrogen train is for. It's entirely pointless. If you can get electrical power to any train, anywhere on the network, why the hell would you want a train you have to fuel with anything 
the obsession with finding a replacement fuel, instead of just using electricity start to finish, is bizarre.100% electrification of all train lines is of course the ideal end goal, but is incredibly expensive to retrofit as you need to raise all the bridges, tunnels, deal with nimby’s etc.
This is where battery trains are the smart choice as it massively reduces the cost to electrify a line as only the easy bits need to be electrified. The hard parts, such as under bridges, through tunnels, difficult terrain, areas of natural beauty, etc. can be skipped as the train can simply run through those on battery power. And then it can pickup the catenary where available and run in electric whilst also charging itself back up.
I would argue that such a solution would end up being way cheaper than an H2 system through energy savings alone. Given H2 powertrains are only about 1/3 the efficiency of a direct electric/battery drivetrain.
This is where battery trains are the smart choice as it massively reduces the cost to electrify a line as only the easy bits need to be electrified. The hard parts, such as under bridges, through tunnels, difficult terrain, areas of natural beauty, etc. can be skipped as the train can simply run through those on battery power. And then it can pickup the catenary where available and run in electric whilst also charging itself back up.
I would argue that such a solution would end up being way cheaper than an H2 system through energy savings alone. Given H2 powertrains are only about 1/3 the efficiency of a direct electric/battery drivetrain.
dvs_dave said:
100% electrification of all train lines is of course the ideal end goal, but is incredibly expensive to retrofit as you need to raise all the bridges, tunnels, deal with nimby’s etc.
This is where battery trains are the smart choice as it massively reduces the cost to electrify a line as only the easy bits need to be electrified. The hard parts, such as under bridges, through tunnels, difficult terrain, areas of natural beauty, etc. can be skipped as the train can simply run through those on battery power. And then it can pickup the catenary where available and run in electric whilst also charging itself back up.
I would argue that such a solution would end up being way cheaper than an H2 system through energy savings alone. Given H2 powertrains are only about 1/3 the efficiency of a direct electric/battery drivetrain.
I think the solution being tested demonstrates that only a fraction of the length of each line needs to be electrified in the future - either by a few miles of overhead power at intervals or very powerful chargers at stations.This is where battery trains are the smart choice as it massively reduces the cost to electrify a line as only the easy bits need to be electrified. The hard parts, such as under bridges, through tunnels, difficult terrain, areas of natural beauty, etc. can be skipped as the train can simply run through those on battery power. And then it can pickup the catenary where available and run in electric whilst also charging itself back up.
I would argue that such a solution would end up being way cheaper than an H2 system through energy savings alone. Given H2 powertrains are only about 1/3 the efficiency of a direct electric/battery drivetrain.
95% of all existing overhead power infrastructure could probably be got rid of once the battery solutions are further developed.
TheDeuce said:
I think the solution being tested demonstrates that only a fraction of the length of each line needs to be electrified in the future - either by a few miles of overhead power at intervals or very powerful chargers at stations.
95% of all existing overhead power infrastructure could probably be got rid of once the battery solutions are further developed.
Yes, that’ll work for short range regular start/stop commuter trains. For longer range intercity/freight though, more strategically located catenary would be needed. But it’ll still only be necessary in the areas where it’s easy to install with no changes to other rail infrastructure needed to allow it.95% of all existing overhead power infrastructure could probably be got rid of once the battery solutions are further developed.
tamore said:
TheDeuce said:
the obsession with finding a replacement fuel, instead of just using electricity start to finish, is bizarre.
the whole energy transition debate in a nutshell.Don't get me wrong, I totally understand why those soaking up the R&D grants are happy to make a hydrogen powered train and talk about a hydrogen future... But what is motivating the general public to take the nonsense seriously..?? Why are people so desperate to keep fuel? Fuel is annoying, it's expensive, messy, and inefficient.
rscott said:
Far more sensible to install battery packs on the trains and have fast charging at stations. GWR are currently trialling a system now which can recharge the train in 3.5 minutes - https://news.gwr.com/news/great-western-railways-i... .
And implement overhead power (or perhaps even return to third rail?) where it is safe and economic to do so, and avoid it in Victorian tunnels under rivers, renowned for their constant water ingress...TheDeuce said:
tamore said:
TheDeuce said:
the obsession with finding a replacement fuel, instead of just using electricity start to finish, is bizarre.
the whole energy transition debate in a nutshell.Don't get me wrong, I totally understand why those soaking up the R&D grants are happy to make a hydrogen powered train and talk about a hydrogen future... But what is motivating the general public to take the nonsense seriously..?? Why are people so desperate to keep fuel? Fuel is annoying, it's expensive, messy, and inefficient.
Obviously it’s a ridiculous stance to have for anyone not stupid enough to be radicalized by the retarded right wing media, but there you go. There’s way more stupid people in the world than not.
tamore said:
yep. absolutely laughable though. i'm conservative in my politics all day long, but the transition to an electrically dominated world where renewables supply the vast majority of it is just a no brainer. it makes sense on every level.
Similar here.My long-standing observation is the psychology of the word 'battery' and what it subconsciously triggers in the minds of, generally speaking, older people and particularly men.
There is a deep-seated fear of them, possibly because the word itself triggers some sort of fight of flight response.
There are two things I've jokingly suggested a couple of times in this sub-forum, a couple of tricks the EV industry missed at the get-go that I sometimes wonder how things might have panned out differently.
EV batteries should have been called 'macho packs' and their capacity measured in Megajoules.
Or just capped finance secured against a vehicle at £40k for ICE and wound it down each year. No need for any subsidies eco waffle, politics or terrorising of the less affluent, no bans etc. Consumers wanting to spend more on a car would have just had to opt for an EV, meanwhile the ICE fleet would have just become steadily more economical. The whole car market is controlled by credit so credit was the blatantly obvious tool to use to drive the shift.
tr3a said:
dvs_dave said:
There’s way more stupid people in the world than not.
But at least they're happy
You can tell stupid a mile off because they need everything to stay the same in order to function. Otherwise, it all becomes a stress and an upset... Oh bother.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff