Interesting solution for ev trucks
Discussion
TheDeuce said:
It'll probably happen but it won't last. As soon as affordable and higher capacity cells are available, and with enough EV's on the road, the problems with grid power input balancing disappear (EV smart charging can absorb the spikes along with cell banks at the generation sites) and that means that nuclear and renewable power generation is all we need - both of which make any other form of power generation look hopeless in terms of environmental impact.
Seriously, in the not to distant future the idea of transporting thousands of tonnes of low to medium energy density fuel around the globe will be laughable. It'll be archaic. We're literally only doing it now, and looking for mildly greener ways of doing it, because we don't quite have the cell tech to make better solutions workable. We're probably not far off though.
Maybe but there's billions going into being able to import cheap electricity from further afield than a wire can handle. H has high energy density and compresses reasonably well. If you aren't allowed to use oil or gas it's got potential to be the next best way to ship power. Seriously, in the not to distant future the idea of transporting thousands of tonnes of low to medium energy density fuel around the globe will be laughable. It'll be archaic. We're literally only doing it now, and looking for mildly greener ways of doing it, because we don't quite have the cell tech to make better solutions workable. We're probably not far off though.
The additional flip is that it may prove that GH is a viable means to store domestic renewables such as wind or solar. We currently rely on Bronze Age water batteries for that, which is a little embarrassing.
DonkeyApple said:
Maybe but there's billions going into being able to import cheap electricity from further afield than a wire can handle. H has high energy density and compresses reasonably well. If you aren't allowed to use oil or gas it's got potential to be the next best way to ship power.
The additional flip is that it may prove that GH is a viable means to store domestic renewables such as wind or solar. We currently rely on Bronze Age water batteries for that, which is a little embarrassing.
There's a real possibility that we'll ship ammonia around the world. It's a reasonable trade between the pressure required of hydrogen transportation and the particular nastiness of ammonia if it leaks. Ammonia is equally useful as hydrogen in industrial and agricultural purposes, and potentially large ship propulsion.The additional flip is that it may prove that GH is a viable means to store domestic renewables such as wind or solar. We currently rely on Bronze Age water batteries for that, which is a little embarrassing.
DonkeyApple said:
TheDeuce said:
It'll probably happen but it won't last. As soon as affordable and higher capacity cells are available, and with enough EV's on the road, the problems with grid power input balancing disappear (EV smart charging can absorb the spikes along with cell banks at the generation sites) and that means that nuclear and renewable power generation is all we need - both of which make any other form of power generation look hopeless in terms of environmental impact.
Seriously, in the not to distant future the idea of transporting thousands of tonnes of low to medium energy density fuel around the globe will be laughable. It'll be archaic. We're literally only doing it now, and looking for mildly greener ways of doing it, because we don't quite have the cell tech to make better solutions workable. We're probably not far off though.
Maybe but there's billions going into being able to import cheap electricity from further afield than a wire can handle. H has high energy density and compresses reasonably well. If you aren't allowed to use oil or gas it's got potential to be the next best way to ship power. Seriously, in the not to distant future the idea of transporting thousands of tonnes of low to medium energy density fuel around the globe will be laughable. It'll be archaic. We're literally only doing it now, and looking for mildly greener ways of doing it, because we don't quite have the cell tech to make better solutions workable. We're probably not far off though.
The additional flip is that it may prove that GH is a viable means to store domestic renewables such as wind or solar. We currently rely on Bronze Age water batteries for that, which is a little embarrassing.
As for water batteries... Well there's not much wrong with them is there? Solid state cells that can be near instantly charged and last for decades would be an improvement but until we get there, I'd say water batteries are no less bonkers than Elon's li-ion based power storage facilities. It's a choice between an age old crude yet effective technology and a current battery tech that can't last a reasonable lifetime. We need a new tech that should easily trump both.
Evanivitch said:
DonkeyApple said:
Maybe but there's billions going into being able to import cheap electricity from further afield than a wire can handle. H has high energy density and compresses reasonably well. If you aren't allowed to use oil or gas it's got potential to be the next best way to ship power.
The additional flip is that it may prove that GH is a viable means to store domestic renewables such as wind or solar. We currently rely on Bronze Age water batteries for that, which is a little embarrassing.
There's a real possibility that we'll ship ammonia around the world. It's a reasonable trade between the pressure required of hydrogen transportation and the particular nastiness of ammonia if it leaks. Ammonia is equally useful as hydrogen in industrial and agricultural purposes, and potentially large ship propulsion.The additional flip is that it may prove that GH is a viable means to store domestic renewables such as wind or solar. We currently rely on Bronze Age water batteries for that, which is a little embarrassing.
You can also blend GH in with natural gas at around 10% before it starts corroding infrastructure or boiler units have to be changed etc.
The real issue is that even if proven viable the volumes predicted by 2035 are no greater than the volume of grey hydrogen currently produced today so bugger all in the grand scheme of things.
DonkeyApple said:
delta0 said:
Buying carbon credits isn’t really going to be financially sustainable in the long term. The price forecasts on credits is a lot higher than now and the price is already rising quickly. The current price already exceed forecasts from a couple of years ago for 2030! Latest forecasts are 3-4x higher. It’s going to be non-starter economically.
Yup. That's why so much money is going into the green hydrogen projects. You've got the likes of VW, Ineos, JCB et al all putting in small sums to have first access to the carbon credits produced when the hydrogen is burnt in EU power stations. Same with the money getting pumped by the carbon credit market into trying to get sequestering projects signed off.
The only way EU industry can come close to the 2050 target is if new markets for credits are set up. Expect lots of bribes and bodges over the next two decades.
That's assuming the end consumer has the means to pay for all those carbon credits anyway!
And we've also got the implosion of the biofuel market yet to happen. Pushing a fuel that financially rewards deforestation and soil destruction all while people starve is an insanity that has a short shelf life.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Sunday 14th August 18:58
This particular story actually seems utterly innocuous in contrast to the reality of decades of lax governance and huge payouts that have massively sped up deforestation.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff