Here is my long-winded take. EVs - well you can build them up to a point, then you need to 2x your copper mining, 10x your lithium, etc. We are nearing the point where the EVs batteries will become wildly expensive due to raw material supply. Expanding mining is slow, complex, expensive... Green Grids - running a grid with no buffers is wildly expensive. When the demand is high the price of power goes through the roof. IF we OVER build the green production and use any extra electricity for hydrogen production you have both cheap green grid power and green hydrogen. Electrolysers can handle variable power inputs, they are perfect for absorbing and using extra power Battery grid storage - batteries are highly sensitive to commodity prices so the cost could get wild. They can hold about 4 hrs of power, it works for daily swings but will not carry you through a period where the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining. Hydrogen as a fuel - Here is the question, would you rather have a 10,000 PSI hydrogen tank or a tank of ammonia at the same pressure as a pop can? The Toyota vehicle has a 10,000 PSI tank, that is the same pressure at 4.5 miles under the ocean, that's a bomb. Ammonia is safer to handle than high-pressure tanks. It has much more energy per L than hydrogen or batteries Hydrogen as a store of energy - Compressing and cooling hydrogen down to a liquid takes about 30% of the energy. Making ammonia from hydrogen uses a couple percent of the energy in the fuel. Ammonia is far more energy efficient to ship hydrogen than liquid hydrogen. Don't take my word for it, look to Japan. Japan has huge deals to import green ammonia. They are building ships that run on green ammonia to carry green ammonia. They are building the ports and handling infrastructure. Toyota is developing car motors. Power companies are retrofitting gas and coal plants to run on ammonia. Globally we consume 100M barrels of oil a day. We need solutions that are massively scalable and cost-effective at that scale. Often I hear ammonia projects targeting costs around $500-550/ton, that is the green power inputs, electrolysis and then combining with nitrogen to create ammonia. Doing the energy math those costs are well under the cost of diesel. The green power is massively scalable. In the production the only exotic stuff is the electrolysers. The fuel is easy to carry in simple tanks.
ruclips.net/video/0tOrJwSkj2w/видео.html vs. ruclips.net/video/EHrYQelLcjU/видео.html, by using weight or volume as an energy content comparison flips the order of the best vs worst. what is the truth
Very useful - Thank you - One comment the audio was a bit too low volume
Here is my long-winded take.
EVs - well you can build them up to a point, then you need to 2x your copper mining, 10x your lithium, etc. We are nearing the point where the EVs batteries will become wildly expensive due to raw material supply. Expanding mining is slow, complex, expensive...
Green Grids - running a grid with no buffers is wildly expensive. When the demand is high the price of power goes through the roof. IF we OVER build the green production and use any extra electricity for hydrogen production you have both cheap green grid power and green hydrogen. Electrolysers can handle variable power inputs, they are perfect for absorbing and using extra power
Battery grid storage - batteries are highly sensitive to commodity prices so the cost could get wild. They can hold about 4 hrs of power, it works for daily swings but will not carry you through a period where the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining.
Hydrogen as a fuel - Here is the question, would you rather have a 10,000 PSI hydrogen tank or a tank of ammonia at the same pressure as a pop can? The Toyota vehicle has a 10,000 PSI tank, that is the same pressure at 4.5 miles under the ocean, that's a bomb.
Ammonia is safer to handle than high-pressure tanks. It has much more energy per L than hydrogen or batteries
Hydrogen as a store of energy - Compressing and cooling hydrogen down to a liquid takes about 30% of the energy. Making ammonia from hydrogen uses a couple percent of the energy in the fuel. Ammonia is far more energy efficient to ship hydrogen than liquid hydrogen.
Don't take my word for it, look to Japan. Japan has huge deals to import green ammonia. They are building ships that run on green ammonia to carry green ammonia. They are building the ports and handling infrastructure. Toyota is developing car motors. Power companies are retrofitting gas and coal plants to run on ammonia.
Globally we consume 100M barrels of oil a day. We need solutions that are massively scalable and cost-effective at that scale.
Often I hear ammonia projects targeting costs around $500-550/ton, that is the green power inputs, electrolysis and then combining with nitrogen to create ammonia. Doing the energy math those costs are well under the cost of diesel. The green power is massively scalable. In the production the only exotic stuff is the electrolysers. The fuel is easy to carry in simple tanks.
ruclips.net/video/0tOrJwSkj2w/видео.html vs. ruclips.net/video/EHrYQelLcjU/видео.html, by using weight or volume as an energy content comparison flips the order of the best vs worst. what is the truth