Hydrogen as fuel

the model rocket show
Shop deals on ebay
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
jderimig said:
Below is analysis of what it required to get to net zero by 2050.
Click to expand...
I don't know how long it takes to plan and build a wind farm but I would guess that it takes 20 years to plan and build a nuclear powerplant so it will be some time before those start to take away from hydrocarbon use.
I think in some areas solar can be implemented. My sister's house has solar panels on the roof and on a sunny day even with their air conditioners running they still sell energy back to the utility company. My house unfortunately is surrounded by very large trees so our roof doesn't see any direct sunlight. If you look for our house on google satellite images you can't tell that there is even a house there.
I think energy conservation will have to improve and this will be difficult. Converting to electric cars might eventually improve the carbon footprint but it doesn't do much to reduce energy consumption. I don't know offhand but I've seen charts that show how much energy is consumed by cars vs. houses vs. other transportation vs. industry, and cars only use a small percentage. We would have to look for ways to reduce consumption in every area.
 
bjphoenix said:
I don't know how long it takes to plan and build a wind farm but I would guess that it takes 20 years to plan and build a nuclear powerplant so it will be some time before those start to take away from hydrocarbon use.
I think in some areas solar can be implemented. My sister's house has solar panels on the roof and on a sunny day even with their air conditioners running they still sell energy back to the utility company. My house unfortunately is surrounded by very large trees so our roof doesn't see any direct sunlight. If you look for our house on google satellite images you can't tell that there is even a house there.
I think energy conservation will have to improve and this will be difficult. Converting to electric cars might eventually improve the carbon footprint but it doesn't do much to reduce energy consumption. I don't know offhand but I've seen charts that show how much energy is consumed by cars vs. houses vs. other transportation vs. industry, and cars only use a small percentage. We would have to look for ways to reduce consumption in every area.
Click to expand...
Research the Kaya Identify...(below). Its elegantly simple.

Lowering GDP/person is politically impossible. The are about 2 billion people in the world who have little to no electricity. They will want it or get it.
Lowering population is not easy. Population is growing most rapidily in areas where electrification is happening most rapidly (term #1)
Energy/GDP is conservation. It happening in developed countries but is largely cancelled out by developing countries.
Fuel mix is the green stuff. Its happening but not at a fast enough rate to offset the first 3 terms.


1662789164665.png
1662789626853.png
 
bjphoenix said:
So you young people are screwed.
Click to expand...
No what I saying is nut zero is a pipe dream. That will only happen if we run out of fossil fuels before we wake up and do a Marshall plan on building nukes starting now. If we run out of fossil fuels before we built out nuclear power THEN young people will be screwed. Humankind will be able to adapt to a 1.5C in global temperatures over 80 years just fine.
 
cls said:
You didn't account for damage from carbon emissions. Lose.
Click to expand...
All time high in wealth per capita, record food production, world high in life expectancy. CO2 damage is hyperbole.

But lets stay on topic, hydrogen as a fuel. Many apologies for me taking this thread off track.
 
Last edited:
cls said:
But yeah, back to why H2 fuel is a terrible idea in general.
Click to expand...
I've read a lot of things that sound like technical difficulties. If we're looking for something other than carbon based fuels, can we find something that doesn't have technical difficulties? IOW what can we find that has the least amount of difficulties.

I had been thinking about Hydrogen for a long time because of what I thought were positive attributes, I wasn't focused on the difficulties. I'm an engineer- my whole life has been about overcoming difficulties.
 
Technical difficulties can be overcome but the thermodynamics of electrolysis and refrigeration and compression cannot.

That's it. Entirely.

H2 total cycle efficiency is a net loss compared to any other source.

That said, I think it is appropriate for certain narrow circumstances.
 
bjphoenix said:
I've read a lot of things that sound like technical difficulties. If we're looking for something other than carbon based fuels, can we find something that doesn't have technical difficulties? IOW what can we find that has the least amount of difficulties.

I had been thinking about Hydrogen for a long time because of what I thought were positive attributes, I wasn't focused on the difficulties. I'm an engineer- my whole life has been about overcoming difficulties.
Click to expand...
Remember hydrogen is not an energy source but an energy conversion/storage concept. H2 starts with a primary energy choice where most of it gets lost in producing the H2. If the primary energy source is green then its going to be awhile before there is enough abundance of it to displace fossil fuel much less to generate H2 at a net 15% efficiency. H2 cycle is technological dead end in the sense there is not alot of physics or engineering left that is going to provide potential breakthroughs. Unlike battery technology which at least has theories of potential great leaps.
 
Last edited:
There is a marine project going right now that uses methanol as the storage medium for hydrogen. The methanol is then decomposed into hydrogen and CO/CO2, and the hydrogen goes through some fuel cells to generate electricity. More details here:

https://www.ebdg.com/projects/hydrogen-tug/
Personally, I would slightly prefer ammonia to hydrogen as a carrier stock since it doesn't emit CO2 when decomposed. Ammonia has some challenges in storage, but it's well understood from the refrigeration industry. While it's unpleasant if it gets out into the environment it's not going to kill you unless a valve blows up in your face. You'll be long gone before ammonia builds up to toxic levels.
 
cls said:
Technical difficulties can be overcome but the thermodynamics of electrolysis and refrigeration and compression cannot.
Click to expand...
I don't think those involved ever disputed that.

cls said:
H2 total cycle efficiency is a net loss compared to any other source.
Click to expand...
If the goal is to have something renewable and sustainable, even a 99% loss (from the sun or wind) means having that much more than nothing. I think getting the remaining 1% to power something useful is the point.

RocketT.Coyote said:
Hydrogen obtained during Project Apollo was actually made from natural gas IIRC.
Click to expand...
Sustainable sources seem to be getting momentum lately, but I'm not sure what's the share or how much it's changed since Apollo.

💦 💧🌧️💧💦🌊🌧️💧🌧️🌊💦🌧️💧🌊🌧️💧🌊💦🌧️

Here's the kind of thing I'm looking for myself. Nikola makes large electric semis, and here they're considering hydrogen cells for some longer range applications. So they're not a one trick pony, but they're going after the emissions/sustainable/renewable issues from two fronts. If Nikola sees applications for hydrogen, it suggests fuel cells have a good future.

"The coexistence of BEV and FCEV in the commercial vehicle sector is a realistic scenario."

https://nikolamotor.com/energy
https://nikolamotor.com/press_relea...effort-to-decarbonize-heavy-duty-trucking-197
 
Last edited:
In a fossil fueless world, H2 is the only feasible fuel for long haul trucking and transoceanic shipping. Yes there is energy loss in the production which just requires that much more renewable capacity being built. Theoretically you can burn NH3 in an ICE but haven't looked at that energy cycle yet. Although its not clean, it puts NOx in the air.
 
jderimig said:
In a fossil fueless world, H2 is the only feasible fuel for long haul trucking and transoceanic shipping. Yes there is energy loss in the production which just requires that much more renewable capacity being built. Theoretically you can burn NH3 in an ICE but haven't looked at that energy cycle yet. Although its not clean, it puts NOx in the air.
Click to expand...
I think there's an argument for renewable methane as a fuel for long-haul shipping that would be easier than hydrogen. I'm not sure if there's enough capacity to generate renewable methane from livestock manure, landfills, sewage treatment, etc. There are a few small-scale dairy farms locally that are generating methane from on-site manure digesters, but I assume that they're a relative drop in the bucket.

While NOx is a moderately nasty pollutant at scale, the process for taking it out of the exhaust gas stream is relatively well understood. It might be enough easier than storing hydrogen to be worth it.
 
This article is from last June:

"This month has seen a flurry of big news about hydrogen. BP Plc is taking the lead in the $36 billion Asian Renewable Energy Hub, a project that aims to install 26 gigawatts of solar and wind farms over a vast 6,500-square-kilometer (2,500 square-mile) stretch of Western Australia’s Pilbara region, and use the electricity generated to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. Once fully developed, each year it would produce about 1.6 million tons of green hydrogen or 9 million tons of ammonia, which can be used to make fertilizer.

TotalEnergies SE has joined Indian billionaire Gautam Adani’s conglomerate in a venture that has the ambition to invest as much as $50 billion over the next 10 years in green hydrogen. An initial investment of $5 billion will develop 4 gigawatts of wind and solar capacity, about half of which will feed electrolyzers producing hydrogen used to manufacture of ammonia. The venture could expand to 1 million tons of annual green hydrogen production by 2030, driven by 30 gigawatts of clean power.

It's only a matter of time before Shell Plc follows with a megaproject of its own, said Paul Bogers, vice president for hydrogen at the company. Shell is looking for a place where there are sufficient wind and solar resources for a large-scale project that would play to its strengths, he said in an interview on the sidelines of the Financial Times Hydrogen Summit in London."

https://fivet.com/blogs/news/big-oil-bets-that-green-hydrogen-is-the-future-of-energy
 
Funkworks said:
A good article on hydrogen fuel for aircrafts:

https://www.electrive.com/2022/08/26/hydrogen-fuel-cell-aircraft-what-for-and-when/
And a cool drone with liquid and gas options:

"According to the company, the 25 kg test aircraft can reach a range of up to 900 km with liquid hydrogen or 350 km with compressed hydrogen."

https://www.electrive.com/2022/11/24/h3dynamics-persents-decentralized-h2-aviation-solution/
https://www.h3dynamics.com/
Click to expand...
We are working on 150 passengers 3400 NM range, mach .8 using hydrogen fuel. Not using fuel cells.
 
Last edited:
I have this idea of committing not to fly again unless take-off is powered by batteries or hydrogen. I don't feel any urge to fly as in the past so I think I could commit, but there might be unexpected reasons why I have to. So I'm trying to gauge how soon battery- or hydrogen-powered flights will be available. It's really hard to say.

🌊⚡🚰

Hydrogen supercar:

https://www.hyperion.inc/hydrogen
 
Last edited:
Heavy steel tanks holding pressurized cryogenic liquid hydrogen with volume density 1/4 that of jet fuel requiring 4X fuel storage tank volume creating heavy planes with less room for passengers and cargo. What's not to like about H2 aviation?

What's next, Lead Zeppelins?
 
“Accommodating enough hydrogen for transatlantic range without sacrificing passenger capacity would add 9 meters to the length of a conventional A321 fuselage, still keeping it shorter than the 757-300.”

https://hydrogen.aero/product/
Great news for those who want to reduce their carbon foot print, local and overall emissions, involvement in international conflicts, support long term sustainability, and who just like cool new techs.
 
Last edited:
jderimig said:
Heavy steel tanks holding pressurized cryogenic liquid hydrogen with volume density 1/4 that of jet fuel requiring 4X fuel storage tank volume creating heavy planes with less room for passengers and cargo. What's not to like about H2 aviation?

What's next, Lead Zeppelins?
Click to expand...
Everyone knows it's absolutely impossible to build a liquid hydrogen tank from aluminum. Nothing powered by hydrogen can possibly fly! Fear! Uncertainty! Doubt! :rolleyes:
 
Funkworks said:
“Accommodating enough hydrogen for transatlantic range without sacrificing passenger capacity would add 9 meters to the length of a conventional A321 fuselage, still keeping it shorter than the 757-300.”
Click to expand...
So we do not sacrifice passenger capacity by making the plane bigger? Isn't that the same as not sacrificing range by making the routes shorter?
 
jderimig said:
So we do not sacrifice passenger capacity by making the plane bigger? Isn't that the same as not sacrificing range by making the routes shorter?
Click to expand...
As I already said, this is "... for those who want to reduce their carbon foot print, local and overall emissions, involvement in international conflicts, support long term sustainability, and who just like cool new techs."

And yeah sure, I'd be one of them: investor, builder and buyer if I could. Maybe I will, who knows.
 
Last edited:
Funkworks said:
As I already said, this is ".. for those who want to reduce their carbon foot print, local and overall emissions,
Click to expand...
The hydrogen is not green. Renewable energy diverted from or not sent to the grid to make this H2 had to be made up with fossil fuel generation.
 
The above company is developping the aircraft. Other companies will buy and operate it. If you want any of them to use green hydrogen, then tell them. Here's a start as to where to find green H2:

1. St. Gabriel Green Hydrogen Plant
2. Sauk Valley Green Hydrogen Plant
3. Kingsland Green Hydrogen Plant
4. Casa Grande Green Hydrogen Plant
5. Donaldsonville Green Hydrogen Project

https://www.airswift.com/blog/green-hydrogen-projects-usa
Some people act like they don't understand this, others really don't.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

C
Hydrogen not as fuel
2
Replies
55
Views
2K
Peartree
Peartree
RocketFiles
Estes Mercury-Redstone
Replies
0
Views
132
RocketFiles
RocketFiles
DRAGON64
Hybrids 2024
8 9 10
Replies
296
Views
10K
hybridfreak
hybridfreak
novahobbies
1/100 scale Boyce Mercury Redstone re-released (review pics)
Replies
4
Views
264
Cape Byron
Cape Byron
Ron Soto
4" LOC Nike Zeus Build for L2 Cert.
Replies
23
Views
768
Ron Soto
Ron Soto

Latest posts

Back
Top