Hydrogen is EVEN WORSE than Lithium Batteries in EVs! | MGUY Australia
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 май 2024
- Send tips or stories to email: simon@mguy.tv or / mguytv - thanks!
Sign up for MGUY email newsletters here: zcu.nz/MhEZ
* MUST READ * Robert Bryce article: m-g.uy/y1o
NYT 🌈🦄: m-g.uy/m05
Follow MGUY on Twitter/X: / mguytv
Follow MGUY on Instagram: / mguy.tv
Follow MGUY on Facebook: / mguytv
MGUY Website: mguy.tv
Contact MGUY: simon@mguy.tv 
Авто/Мото
The Northern hemisphere is about to experience notable climate change; It's called Summer.
Really? 😂
Another “hottest summer ever” again, and again…
Unless you live in the UK...there's no guarantee.
😅 I know weather is not climate. But seasons… also not climate.
@@LoremIpsum1970 We've had our summer, it was last Saturday & Sunday. 🤣😂🤣
I don't give a shit about CO2 emissions, At all.
Climate change is a global HOAX
Same, it's a huge scam.
And the methane, from your shit too !
I do… I wanna make more… 👍🤣
WELL SAID, SIR
Carbon is fertilizer not poison. Carbon is life.
They know that, but we are the carbon they want gone
So true james, it is not a pollutant,
but if the convince us that it is,
the can tax it, and penalize it.
@@lesliewelch6551 not gone ... controlled.
Zero carbon based lifeforms.
Too much fertilizer is bad too, runs into rivers, streams and lakes and upsets the whole ecosystem. That is a fact. Too much carbon dioxide causes the oceans (which absorb) to turn acidic, which is killing ecosystems. Sure global warming is hard to prove as many factors are part of that but acidification of the oceans is definitely us. It is fact.
add more co2 to the atmosphere reap more food,more food,prices go down,not what the WEF and their greedy stooges want!
You will also get more converted to oxygen via the plant life, so increase Co2 you will increase oxygen levels!
@@wideyxyz2271 If you want 1 more ton CO2 in the air, you will need 50 tons, because the ocean will grab 98% of the excess CO2 in the air, to maintain the chemical equilibrium between the sea and the air. In the long term, the ocean will convert the excess CO2 you injected into the system to other substances and store it on the seabed.
It theory it would lower the co2 production by a shitload. As Iron smelting from Ore is where you are forced to use blast furnaces. First you need to remove oxygen from air, by combining carbon with oxygen into carbon monoxide at "low" temperatures. Then you reduce oxidized iron to pure iron by combining carbon monoxide with iron oxide. The theory is that it should be possible to make an electric furnace that replaces carbon monoxide with hydrogen.
The numbers look great, it's like 70-80% reduction in CO2 emissions from steel smelting using methane processes hydrogen and current electric grids.
Here is a bit of numbers from some papers:
"New electricity additions would represent up to ∼400 TWhe of renewable electricity generation annually by 2050 in the EU according to EUROFER’s 2050 net zero projections (representing seven times current consumption by the EU steel sector) including 234 TWhe for 5.5 Mt green H2 production annually". Globally, these additions would scale to 5,700-6,700 TWhe/year globally for net-zero electrified steel making by 2050, including 3,000-4,300 TWhe to produce 52-75 MtH2/year. In parallel, over 600 times the current electrolysis capacity would be required to produce ∼52 Mt green H2/year to achieve a net-zero iron and steel sector by 2050.
Yeah, let me translate that from numbers game. Not happening.
@@daznis They dont understand, you cant magically create a source of energy greater than the energy required to produce
Yes you can.
Take a politician, 2500 calories of food in, unlimited hot air out. 🤣
More CO2 please. Green the planet.
Unfortunately, we cant change the concentration we have in the air. It is the chemistry in the ocean who determines what we should have in the air. The air is only the outer shell of the ocean. 98% of the CO2 in the loop lives in the ocean. We cant change much at al, no matter how hard we try.
@@elbuggo 280ppm -> 421 ppm of co2 in the atmosphere. Would you look at that we did change it!
@@elbuggoWell we have done ok so far. We have managed to pump up the CO2 levels in the ocean AND the atmosphere 😊
And the dissolved CO2 will increase ocean acidification to levels that may cause collapse of ecosystems.
But the oceans and planet will survive and bounce back
Civilisation however has relied on a stable climate and ecosystems for a few thousand years now
So we may be fkd🤷🏼♀️
@@Stepbystep74 How do we really know those numbers are right? You have to believe in them.
In any case, the ocean is determining chemically what we should have in the air. If there is chemically too much CO2 in the ocean, the ocean will convert the excess CO2 to other substances. And if there is too little CO2 in the system, the ocean will convert other substances to CO2.
If the chemistry in the ocean changes, the composition of the atmosphere will also change. Cant do anything about this things.
@@elbuggo the co2 in the atmosphere can be measured directly and has been done so continuously for more than a century.
It is right that the ocean is by far the largest emitter and absorber of co2 in the world but it’s not smart. It’s not like it knows what the ammount should be. When it gets hotter it can store less co2 when it’s colder it can store more. Bacteria can fix co2 in the ocean, die and end up burying it in the sea bed. This has happened to a lot of the co2 man has emitted.
When people talk about net zero they are assuming the sea will absorb the co2 made by people. Currently we emitting an amount of co2 ABOVE net zero. The sea can’t keep up. The co2 in the atmosphere continues to rise.
Ever get the feeling you’re living in a real life Monty Python episode!!
H stands for Hedgehog.
More like a twighlight zone episode where lunatics run everything.
I fart in your general direction...
No because Monty Python was funny.
Actually they don't burn completely clean and only produce "water". That's only when burned in pure oxygen. When burned in our atmosphere they can still produce "oxides of nitrogen" A small point that is probably irrelevant.
isnt nitrous oxide 'laughing gas'?
@@mikedee8876 one form of "nitrogen oxides" is, yes. there is NO, NO2, and N2O. Laughing gas iirc is N2O - Nitrous Oxide, while I think NO2 - Nitrogen Dioxide, is the main pollutant after fertalizers break down
It depends on how hot the burn is as to what "oxides" are eventually produced. Same thing happens in a normal petrol car.
If hydrogen and air is used in a car, it still produces carbon monoxide too.
Alcohol burns cleaner
I was nuclear plant operator in the US Navy in the late 70s/early 80s. Hydrogen in the reactor was a problem because, due to it being the smallest atom, it tended to pass thru the fancy steel piping.
and it makes metals brittle and more prone to cracking. it's a serious issue in nuclear applications, and would be in vehicles if run on H2
Yes .I would imagine if they plated the piping with platinum or gold it would not be eaten away.making it more expensive
I heard the same thing with Sterling engines, you're correct.
@@peetsnort Why plate it with the most expensive metals? Even silver would be way cheaper, but I'm sure there are others that would work as well at a lower cost.
Then we should use large molecules. For example, deuterium or even tritium. Lol)
Tell you what, I have an idea! It might be a bit left field.......why don't we just keep using fossil fuels?
We do have to find an alternative. We will run out. But the battery technology isn't there yet.
@@Bryan-Hensley Battery technology never will be - natural gas while constructing nuclear and developing small modular reactors!
We don't even know that it comes from fossils.
🤔 what's that you say?
Hay you could just be onto something!
Fossil Fuel is only Coal , Oil is made in the Mantle NOT A FOSSIL FUEL JUST COAL !!!!
Well, compared to lithium battery fires, the Hindenburg was ultrasafe.
I’m itching to fly on Hindenburg 2 right after my voyage on a lithium battery powered Titanic 2
Hydrogen burns off quickly in one hit, it does not produce toxic fumes and keep re-igniting itself for weeks.
Not many people know that the Hindenbergh not everyone burnt.the flames all went upwards.
The biggest drawback is aerodynamics. The wind will help down wind but not upwind
Yes.its not too bad.but very expensive. It would require a little submarine size nuclear power to make enough hydrogen station for each forecourt to dispense. @@chrissmith2114
Actually no, it wasn't as serious as a battery fire. It burned quickly and extinguished itself. Didn't spit jets of lit chemicals and left no mess. The hydrogen fireball was gone very quickly, and what you see burning by the time it's crashing down is the doped skin of the envelope - Not the gas.
I'm no scientist and don't profess to know anything about the intricacies of hydrogen powered engines or EV's. All I know is that I'm happy with my petrol fuelled ICE ute and I have no intention of changing it for a hydrogen powered vehicle or an EV anytime in the foreseeable future.
Unless you'll be forced by the government to replace your trustworthy ute with an unwanted electric one.
The goverment will lose so much money from fuel excess so will b really broken then
@@zdzislawmeglicki2262
Wise choice
So you use 100% of one energy source to make roughly 66% of a different energy source which is volatile AF and call it green and efficient!
Sounds fine to me.........
Cant' sleep: Clown'll eat me.
And then you use it in a special internal combustion engine made for hydrogen. At best, an ICE vehicle is maybe 40% efficient. That means another 60% or more loss.
EV's are over 85% efficient. That means 15% or less loss.
At least 4-5 times more energy loss in ICE than EV.
Add to this the fact that you can charge an EV from your home electrical source. You can't create hydrogen in your garage, and even if you could, they would outlaw it.
Natural gas also burns perfectly clean, it only produces water and much needed CO2.
Also there is plenty of it.
Much needed CO2 ? Humanity is dealing with excess of the stuff, that is why we're here (EV for all nonsense consequence).
Yeah, I agree the present CO2 level is at the low end for plants on the planet, the extra CO2 is needed to green up the deserts ( plants need a fraction of the water they normally use when CO2 level is raised in greenhouses ).
@@stanmarks3950We do not have an excess of the stuff! It is literally only just above historic lows and plants are only just above asphyxiation levels. No plants, no food and no oxygen.
@@stanmarks3950 Look where all the caring billionaires like Al Gore and Gates are buying property, on the beachfront. In UK they are building a new nuclear power station not far from the sea...... Follow the money not the propaganda..
CO2 is the problem! So no.Solar to produce the hydrogen for commercial use battery weight and limited range and slow charge down time ,it also has kick started other fuels ,ammonia and methanol,which use adapted ice engineering so keeping jobs and tec working.
Colon gas? Oh, sorry.. COAL and GAS. My mistake.
I cought that too.
AOC dat you ?!
Only if you produce a lot 😂
Clucking genius
I thought the same too, but he is right, it will be colon gas that powers all the wind and solar generation
I worked for a company supplying specialist stainless steel tubing for hydrogen applications. Hydrogen is the smallest molecule and can escape through microscopic holes in the tubes. Even testing with helium could show the pipe to be leakproof, but it would later when in use with hydrogen be found to have minute leaks. For a small number of hi tech applications this could be dealt with. For large scale manufacturing such as cars it would be impossible to manufacture cheap mass produced tubing, especially with the high pressures needed to power a car. If you got into your car and found the hydrogen had escaped it would be impossible to find the leak.
Not microscopic holes. It integrates between the molecules of the steel itself. It doesn't need no 'holes'.
Lining containers with copper I believe is the state of the art to prevent hydrogen leakage.
Related: the path length of a threaded fitting required to achieve "explosion proof" boxes for wiring in explosive atmospheres is determined from hydrogen. In that case, it is the hydrogen flame propagation that is being limited.
You are trying to explain permeation where the molecules pass through the material. This true but the leak rate is so small it wouldn’t be a factor for safety. 1.0E-9 ccs leak rate would take 32 years to fill 3 dimes stacked together.
If you got into your car and turned the key there would be a loud bang and half the neighborhood would disappear.
Everyone is going to discover just how good we've had it with gas-fueled ICE tech
Especially the people on the island in the Pacific who have the leave because of raising water levels.
@@gerbre1 "Climate change" = socialist Big Lie campaign designed to deprive the global free-market economy of the energy it requires to function
@@gerbre1 "Climate change" = socialist Big Lie campaign designed to deprive the global free-market economy of the energy it requires to function
@@gerbre1 Meh
From memory, it was either Sweden or Norway where a man was filling his Hydrogen vehicle with that 2 part of water and suddenly the whole refuelling station, car and building disappeared, All that was left was a few pipes sticking out of the ground. Authorities are still looking for the owner, he went off in ALL DIRECTIONS AT ONCE and took his car with him. AMAZING.
😂😂😂
Hydrogen bomb explosion?
No, a guy wasn't filling his car.
It was a leak from a tank at a fueling station in Norway in 2019; 3 people were injured when the pressure wave set off air bags in nearby vehicles.
Hydrogen is just EV SCAM part DEUX
It has to be MANUFACTURED because it does not exist in NATURE
Its like a ONE USE BATTERY that is just charged off site
TOTAL SCAM
COAL CAR
AND its output is WATER VAPOR
What do you thnik the REAL number one global warming gas is - WATER VAPOR
Look at VENUS-TOTAL CLOUDS - temp is 800 degrees
DUHHH!
@@MarlinWilliams-ts5ul just a regular hydrogen explosion… you can tell because no one dropped a nuclear bomb to get the hydrogen hot enough
There are people who have never even heard of the laws of thermodynamics, let alone understand them.
Politicians?
A company i work for in Central Qld is working on one of the plants going in.
The size of the pipelines are massive, they wanna shutdown the coal fired plant that will feed it & only use wind & solar, and only 10% of the gas produced will be utilised; the rest will get flared off.
The pipeline is running from Rookwood weir to the plants (mind you- they not long finished rebuilding the weir, and it is already cracking & failing, leaking water).
There is next to no infrastructure at the Aldoga solar farm.
The whole thing is a farce
That's crazy! It's all a money grab for a problem that isn't even a real problem.
it's a scam.
On the plus side, someone is making truckloads of money out of it. "There's one born every minute."
People simply dont understand how difficult it is to extract hydrogen and the large amounts of electricity it required to extract it. Its just another stupid sales gimmick.
Not to mention that Hydrogen is notoriously difficult to store and transport and it leaks out of basically anything you put it in.
It takes around twenty times the energy to produce as it then can produce! It is just an exercise in mass hypnosis, while they continue their power poverty agenda!
The problem is not extraction, that is easy as, even just using solar PV.
The issue is storage, and not due to the temp/pressure as implied in the video.
The issue is the size of the H2 molecule. It tends to leach through every container we have.
Yes and it's very dangerous.Booooom!!!💣
@robertolensi7240 not any more dangerous than a lot of things the public uses.
They all have a tendency to go boom under the right conditions.
Take milk powder for example, it makes a very nice boom....
I did the maths when studying a science degree if all hydrocarbons were replaced with hydrogen. Two things became apparent, there would be huge amounts of water vapour in the air, a greenhouse gas itself and what would that do to the local environment, also the amount of hydrogen needing to be produced each year, if that was all released into the atmosphere instead of being consumed, it would make the atmosphere explosive. I am sticking with my clean and fertilizing hydrocarbons.
" clean fertilizing hydrocarbons" that should be a slogan. The left always uses slogans and it's effective in getting their propaganda stuck in people's heads. You just coined a good one and it's true we should all use it.
Uh, no.
It would NOT make the atmosphere explosive.
I'm guessing you never got "a science degree" because your math is clearly bunk.
Hydrogen dumped into the atmosphere would not make it explosive.
This H2 fuel nonsense is bullshit for a lot of reasons, chiefly, it takes energy to MAKE IT, and a lot of it. Storing H2 is also a monumental task, and chucking it into a car is just plain stupid. We physically couldn't evaporate enough water into the atmosphere to cause any substantial warming. Too many factors would make it totally irrelevant. Like the hundreds of millions of tons of CO2 we'd need to dump into the atmosphere just to get to step 1.
You saying "Oh clean and fertilizing" shows how ignorant you are regarding how the climate actually works. Congratulations, you're on par with the people you're making fun of. Maybe learn some science from someone NOT working at BBC for once?
Imagine all the O2 that is being released, be interesting to see what effect that would have.
@@Stormcrow_1 Giant dragonflies might roam the skies again. Cool. Oh wait, I wonder if cockroaches will get bigger? 🤔
@@markusgorelli5278 That would make the WEF happy, bigger bugs for the plebs to eat.
I remember dad telling me around 25 years ago that making hydrogen requires extreme amounts of electricity. That’s why I was surprised when it was getting talked about in recent years.
Cost is not a problem today, say all the dozy politicians who want to tax us to death . . .
EVs are failing, so they're moving on to the next boondoggle.
In Germany we already have huge amounts of electricity at certain sunny windy times and need to shutdown thousands of windmills and solar fields to stabilize the grid.
There are different ways to get hydrogen. Japan is leaning towards red hydrogen which is made by nuclear power. The color in front of hydrogen tells you how it’s made.
I'm a Chemical Engineer with lots of H2 experience. H2 is the answer if you have infinite $$$ and use it to fix the unreliability problem of wind and solar. To do so you build a thermodynamically inefficient electrolysis unit, some high pressure storage, and some very expensive fuel cells. When the wind and solar go dark electricity is generated using the H2 in the fuel cells. None of this is new technology - it's all been around forever, but if you need a crutch to make wind and solar work then this will work - at an enormous cost. Fun fact - An 80,000 pound truck load of H2 contains 800 pounds of H2 (1% of the total weight). That's a rough way to state the mass of the thick walled tanks used to contain H2. I imagine the on board H2 capacity of an H2 power car would be about 1% of the vehicle weight - maybe 40 pounds. A 20 gallon fill up of gasoline contains more BTUs and the gasoline car weighs much less. We burn gasoline in cars because all these factors make it the right choice. Everything else is an expensive lab scale novelty.
No use trying to tell that to the brainwashed (brain dead) masses. They have the ring in their noses, blindly, and voluntarily, being led the by the WEF elite criminals.
Lol, if you are a chemical engineer with lots of H2 experience i`m the president of Russia.Almost all your issues can be solved by the use of conversion to Ammonia or metal hydrides...An actual chemical engineer would be all over such basic applications of their trade..which is why i don`t think you are one at all.
Everything except battery electric vehicles
What’s Putin doing here?
@@poiujnbvcxdswq Lol, you know nothing. FFS, Sure, you can easily convert to Ammonia or other compounds (due to it's affinity to combine in a more stable molecule), but then when you want to burn it, you have to then spend a tremendous amount of energy to separate it again to pure hydrogen, equaling a net loss of energy. Go back to elementary chemistry class.
Solar + Wind = Hot Air With Spin
Politicians?
I'm keeping this.
People need to reacquaint themselves with bond enthalpies, and the second law of thermodynamics. When you reap far less energy from your fuel than you input to create your fuel, you wont last long. It is insanity. If it ever gets to the point where it costs a gallon of gasoline to pull a gallon of gasoline out of the ground, we will cease doing so. Strange that people cannot understand this concept.
Fun fact. The Brisbane City Council buses are (or used to be) CNG powered and they had several blow up. As we were in NDT and pressure testing, we inquired into getting into the certification of these. Turns out they were composite tanks made in Germany. The testing and certification was complex in the extreme so we walked away. These were 5000 psi. Hydrogen embrittlement of steel starts at about 10% H2 in natural gas but they are still rabbiting on about blending h2 into natural gas pipelines. Fun times.
Composite tanks? Oh, dear. NASA played around with composite tanks back in the 90s. I believe it was Boeing under NASA contract if memory serves. Anyway, turns out liquid hydrogen composite tanks are not so reusable so they gave up.
@@phprofYT I don't believe that liquid h2 storage for transport applications is economically and engineering science wise practical. Most likely tanks would compressed gas. It's a step up from LNG in terms of difficulty.
Yonks ago Australia spruiked and used LPG ( Low Pressure Gas ) for vehicles like Taxis..
At the same time NZ spruiked and used CNG ( Compressed Natural Gas ) for vehicles like Taxis...
The differences were Phenomenal.. Don quote me but something like LPG = 2MPa pressure, whereas CNG = 20-25 MPa high pressure. LNG is getting rarer for Cars in Aussie ( most Servos stopped stocking / selling it ) and CNG as of Year 2000 no Longer exists in NZ... Bombs Away ! yet now Hydrogen is contemplated ?? SMH..
From a SKY reporter."hydrogen is not natural,you have to make it from electricity and water", well,half right,but it is a natural element.
🤣🤣most abundant element in universe 74%
no its not stupiid. Hydrogen does NOT exist in nature
Hydrogen is just EV SCAM part DEUX
It has to be MANUFACTURED because it does not exist in NATURE
Its like a ONE USE BATTERY that is just charged off site
TOTAL SCAM
COAL CAR
AND its output is WATER VAPOR
What do you thnik the REAL number one global warming gas is - WATER VAPOR
Look at VENUS-TOTAL CLOUDS - temp is 800 degrees
DUHHH!
That's the problem in a nutshell, all these sky reporters, other media reporters, politicians, when it comes to science, they are totally thick.
Theoretically it’s made from electricity and water but pretty sure the majority is still steam reformed from methane.
Most Hydrogen is indeed made through a steam reforming process, for electrolysis using wind or solar, water is split into the 2 elements using an electricity supply to an electroliser, essentially it works in principle a bit like a large version of an ICE car starter battery. However, a huge amount of water is needed, and it must be of high purity. An electrolyser uses 9000kg of purified water to make 1000kg of hydrogen. To make the 9000kg of purified water you need 23000kg of raw water. Water scarcity is a big issue, especially next to solar farms, which are ideally situated where it is dry and sunny!
Then there is the power required to purify water by desalination and compressors to get hydrogen up to a high pressure for storage or for pipeline transportation, the sums involved make it rather uneconomcal.
Anyone that has ever seen a hydrogen explosion will not drive one.
Another problem with hydrogen is the haven’t worked out how to add an odourant to the gas so you can smell if there is a leak
Fwiw, while hydrogen fuel cells technically "burn" hydrogen as fuel, the hydrogen is not actually ignited; it is used in a chemical reaction to create electricity.
The earth has 20% more green space today than 20 years ago. This increases crop yields, the ability to grow food, raise animals for our purposes and Infact increases food for wildlife too.
As CO2 rises plants open up releasing moisture into the air. Plants need less water and thus increase areas where they can grow.
We are near a CO2 drought. History tells us the earth through most of its life had an average of 1000-1500 ppm of CO2. At a bit over 400 ppm we are at, is closer to global CO2 drought than too much.
Green house farming used CO2 inside at levels of 1000+ ppm to aid in growing of plants.
Obtw even if the temperature rises negligibly we will see milder temps in our mountains thus more moisture and as a result more snow, increasing snow pack which helps preserve fresh water for global use over the course of a year.
It's almost as if hmmmm God the intelligent designer he is got it right with our environment and ecosystem.
Does any believer in God think he would design earth to be susceptible to man's vagaries and as such destroy Earth? Come on folks. God is infinitely more plugged into it all than our collective brain power and even sinful ways can destroy.
The earth is in great shape compared to where it was 100-200-300-500 years ago. God gave man a critical thinking mind and purpose to make life better even as we moved from a global population of about 2 billion people 100 years ago, to 8 billion today.🤔
Are you saying CO2 is plant food?
@@geraldfrost4710
It's part of how plants work using photosynthesis.
Canada for one is a massive CO2 sink compared to how much CO2 we produce.
The world climate is just fine. The elitists who want to return of the global aristocracy and love control through modernization of Marxist Communist ideals, along with the climate grifters and media want you and me to be scared enough to submit to their abusive control.
You see none of them giving up anything to save the planet. They own what they want, ocean front property ( Obama and many more) 300 foot yahts ( Zuckerberg) passenger jets, travel where they want, eat what they want, food you and I have trouble affording. They live like the hypocrites they are, all to excess while they endeavour to brow beat, control and steal from you and me. They can all get bent.🖕😠
@@geraldfrost4710He sais nothing but bs.
I’ve added solar cells & windmills to my car, I’m now an off-grid motorist!
Lmao
Yep, enough power to charge your phone
Don't need to do that with the cybercrap and it can run your home or provide for all your power needs when you go camping like all cybercrap drivers do on the weekend.😉
Just use the hydrogen cells to drill for oil,you know it makes sense.
@@anthonyberry9132 Why not use lithium batteries.
Sorry, didn't bother reading. The energy required to produce this is immense.
Acutally no it is not unless you are unaware of the latetst patents registered in Europe.
And as Simon said more carbon intensive than what it is trying to save
I hate when stupid people call Carbon Dioxide a pollutant. We need far more CO2 in our atmosphere, not less.
People are the carbon that the elites no longer want to tolerate
This whole climate issue is all nonsense with idiots talking out of their asses in ignorance. It's all money driven...
Where did you come up with that heretical conclusion? Don’t tell me,an understanding of the actual contribution of Co2 to the “greenhouse effect “ as described by Planck and Schwarzchild in their work on black body radiation and the relative contribution of various molecules to warming? There you go again,physics and logic how ridiculous to resort to facts and logic when you face hype and idiocy by your opponents.
Agreed. My daughter receives a kid's version of 'The Week' and one article about the atmosphere it said, and I quote: "CO2, a harmful gas, blah blah blah...". It didn't even give any context or reasoning for that statement whatsoever. I was astounded and told my daughter that not everything that is printed is true, including things in this magazine. I've since noticed many ancient historical 'facts' too. Highly dubious stuff!
We are the carbon they eventually wish to reduce to zero. Now there's a fact.
They don‘t call it a pollutant, they call it a greenhouse gas. Higher concentration in the atmosphere means higher temperatures. We reached +1.2 degrees celsius globally and +2.0 degrees celsius on land in the last 150 years by a 50% CO2 increase and that‘s not the end even if you stop CO2 emissions now.
The most cost efficient method of producing hydrogen nowadays is natural gas reforming, which produces CO2 and CO as byproducts.
I worked at an Air Separation plant that produced oxygen, nitrogen, and argon. On our site was a 13000 gallon liquid hydrogen tank that supplied hydrogen for purifying argon and annealing steel at the neighboring steel mill. At the debriefing following a plant-wide safety inspection, the inspector noted that we did not have a fire extinguisher located near the hydrogen tank. My reaction was a laugh followed by, “Who is going to use it, you? If that tank catches fire I’ll report it on my way out the gate.” He did not appreciate my answer as you may well imagine. Needless to say the lack of a fire extinguisher near the hydrogen tank was listed as a deficiency. I wound up installing a twenty pound fire extinguisher next to the 13000 gallon liquid hydrogen tank. You cannot fight city hall or corporate bureaucrats… Darlington, South Carolina USA
What if a car is burning next to the tank?
Being a particularly volatile element, parking is not permitted near the hydrogen tank.
Hi Simon, EV's and Hydrogen put naivety at a new level!
Shell has just got rid of its major Hydrogen trial in California. Shetland runs successfully mostly on hydrogen and has done for several years now.
What people tend to lack understanding in is that OIL IS REQUIRED for making plastics, for much of the lubrication we constantly need (yes even in EV's), jet aircraft require kerosene fuel and ships and much large machinery needs diesel which is part of the refining process of petrol and diesel and lubricating oils which will still be produced as part of the process, so, what will be done with all these fossil fuels that are no longer required? Perhaps we can dump them somewhere like old solar panels and wind generator parts as we do now.
@@deeza3384 In a word: Synthetics.
Mechanics are quitting in droves if they are forced to fix electric cars.Stand up for your mechanics they are for you.
I'm old enough to remember what happened in the early 1970s when hydrogen was "the next big thing" in fuel for cars. After a few rear end collisions resulted in ruptured hydrogen tanks and associated explosions the already low demand fell to nothing. Who wants to drive around in a disaster just waiting to happen?
If only there was a form of hydrogen that is energy dense and safe to store...
Perhaps if the hydrogen has attached to a carbon chain...
'Scientific illiteracy'- love how you say it as it is- thankyou Mguy
1 H2 tank, 2 parts hydrogen, 1 part oxygen and a boom.
It’s like we’re stuck in the early 1900’s. Battery cars that didn’t work and now hydrogen. Hindenburg anyone?
EVs work. There are millions running in the streets today.
They are desperately looking for something that people can consume and refill/buy. Real progress is impossible to achieve because customers are to be produced instead of real progress.
There was a man who was able to make a vehicle that ran on water (hydrogen and oxygen). His solution created the hydrogen and oxygen on the fly just before injection to run the motor. He used electricity and his own converter to split the water. He successfully drove across the country on 27 gallons of water. He was going to patent and create conversion kits for gasoline cars that would cost about $1500. Apparently the Arabs offered him one billion for his invention but he refused. His inventions never came to be used as he was murdered not much later.
Yeah, sadly it was a con.
The hydrogen engine is not new. I was test running them as a kid back in the 70s. But it takes more energy to create the hydrogen than what you can get out so you run out of battery power for the electrolysis quite quickly. I was getting some good value out of sulfuric acid and zinc but the same it still takes a lot of energy to create the S acid and refine the zinc in the first place :)
Stanley Myer.
Look like people think they can violate the law of thermodynamic like violating a stop sign on the road.🤣
ever hear the one " you can fool ALL of the people SOME of the time or SOME of the people ALL of the time , but you CANT fool all of the people, all of the time" unless you are in WASHINGTON #FJB ;-)
Not a thought given to the volume of hydrogen required to make the slightest difference or the production costs of such a venture.
It’s the law of diminishing returns. The more you put in the less you get out.
Really though it's the more WE put in the more THEY get out.
@@infiad1275 Ah, yes, the second law of bogodynamics.
Can't wait for the Batmobile, that's atomic powered.
the simple problem with hydrogen that it needs 60% more energy to make than what it contains. at that loss we could make alcohol from air and fuel the current ice vehicles with almost no change. no need for new fuel and engines for hydrogen vehicles or the fun of storing hydrogen.
I worked 5 years as an engineer for a fuel cell company working on automotive PEM fuel cells. The company had made all the fuel cells for the space shuttle program and the entire earlier space capsule program. The whole company was set up as a skunkworks for alternative energy and Department of Energy projects. The only fuel cells that we made that made any commercial sense were phosphoric acid fuel cells for stationary power that used natural gas and reformed it into hydrogen on-site. The whole system was smaller than a cargo container and made 200kW.
“It’s not a particularly silly walk is it?”
“No, but if I can get a Govt Grant I’m sure I can make it even more silly”
I've been arguing for years that the only way wind power makes any sense is to use it to make hydrogen. Trying to sync wind turbines to the grid means they all have to produce 60 (or 50) cycle power precisely matched to the grid wave-form which is difficult and greatly limits the conditions where the wind turbines can operate. If you use them instead to generate DC power to make hydrogen...then no voltage or waveform matching is needed and whatever they make within their structural limits can be used. You of course still have the storage, transportation and use problems with the hydrogen, but at least it would be more practical than burning other fuels to make it.
0:20 Let's not forget that most hydrogen today is produced from ... fossil fuels. Specifically natural gas. In the case of the US, 95% of hydrogen is made from natural gas. Green hydrogen, made by splitting water, only accounts for a tiny fraction.
Apparently hydrogen advocates have the object permanence of toddlers and believe if they don't see the fossil fuel getting burned, it does not get burned.
... and the splitting/cracking of water for green hrydrogen uses electricity which is most likely generated by coal burning power stations. I have played around with Brown's gas generators, they use more energy to produce gas than they provide. There is a cost to everything.
Carbon footprint of hydrogen worse than raw fossil.
Spot on as usual. Played around with that as a kid and nothing has changed or advanced.
Just wait until I launch my "perpetual motion machine" !!!
Lisa! In _this_ house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
I would run with ya, but the market place for perpetual motion machines with overture appear a bit $$ saturated at the moment :(
Hydrogen doesnt want to be contained. Hydrogen embrittlement is a issue you dont really run into with other fuels either.
50 million dollar grant? More money laundering. Company turns around and donates a portion to the granting party.
Hydrogen is not a source of energy. It’s only a storage medium. A hydrogen based economy is a pre-industrial economy.
Therefore the high gas and electricity prices are subsidising these battery and hydrogen ideas.
Indeed, besides invented fees that only punish the consumer pointlessly for daring to use electricity (How DARE you! 👧), the rest of the huge increase in your bill is going towards lab grants working on pointless energy tech that will never happen. For decades scientists have been trying to tell people hydrogen is utterly useless, negative energy output that is insanely dangerous.
There are many highly impractical and expensive solutions to a problem that does not exist!
Perfect way to put it.
At one of the R&D labs that I was inspecting 40 years ago, they told me that if there was a hydrogen fire the flame burned almost invisible. So they had some brooms that they could use to put out in front of them to see if they caught fire - then they knew that was the wrong way to exit.
And Yes I did the same lab tests 50 years ago in college to make hydrogen.
OMD ! (oh my dog!). Regardless of the difficulties of obtaining the required amount of Hydrogen, as a now retired Industrial Chemist, I used Hydrogen in a laboratory piped from a storage bottle outside into a room and connected to a Gas Chromatograph. The tiny amount of Hydrogen used required extremely secure plumbing to avoid any leakage, because Hydrogen is such a small molecule it can get through the tiniest of cracks or spaces. So? How's that going to stand up when being used in cars that are frequently poorly maintained? No, I'd prefer to walk !!!
Yet the zeppelins used basically fabric bags to contain the hydrogen for long journeys .
@@Philip-hv2kc...at low pressure.
@@Philip-hv2kc Correct, but the fabric was lined with essentially impermeable membranes to reduce the loss of Hydrogen. If you read up on the design of the zeppelins you’ll get more information on the details. Cheers!
I had a hydrogen generator in my car feeding into the air intake, but it was running off the battery that was charging from the petrol motor......
Same. Might burn, and might improve mileage marginally, but still requires more energy to crack the water than it provides.
@@davidkennedy4845 yeah, my dad explained that to me... but eventually when I pulled the engine down the cycles and head where all shiny.
I'm still laughing from yesterday's video about the EV comedy show, Simon! Then you hit me again! Lol 🤣
The Inflation Reduction Act is a prime example of why you should never judge government policies by their name. The bill introduces even more overspending and money printing by the government. Same for the Affordable Care Act (which made healthcare in the US almost 3x as costly) and the Patriot Act.
Hold up, they highly criticise the German steel industry and say the solution to the “pollution” is to make even more steel to generate hydrogen.
Do love the fact I always seem to get an EV ad before every one of your videos.
Only a fool surfs without protection.
Install something, bruh. fr.
Cant store it
Go from an electriying experience to an explosive one.
Sadly a lot of petrol heads also fell for this too.
Lovely, we're going to have millions of hindenbergs running around.
Smh
The Hindenburg was at atmospheric pressure, these "tanks" have to be thousands of psi greater. The difference between a black powder explosion, and nitroglycerin, in effect.
I used to be a climate change denier, but now I'm convinced. If there's a group of people who have a history of caring for the planet and their fellow man, it's the billionaires. So if the billionaires are on board, so am I!
I always trust billionaires with my planet and health needs! 😃👍👍
Become a soros minion will you
@@nickmalone3143 i think he was using this thing that used be called irony there mate.
Imagine the rain in the big cities.
Your format makes it easier to understand the information in articles better than reading them myself
L'hydrogène est un élément combustible qui présente un certain nombre de risques lorsqu'il est produit, stocké, transporté et utilisé. Le risque le plus important est celui des incendies et des explosions. L'hydrogène est extrêmement inflammable et peut s'enflammer facilement en présence d'une source d'inflammation. Les explosions d'hydrogène peuvent être très puissantes et causer des dommages importants aux biens et aux personnes.
D'autres risques associés à l'hydrogène comprennent :
Fuites: L'hydrogène est un gaz très petit qui peut s'échapper facilement des conteneurs et des tuyaux. Cela peut entraîner une accumulation d'hydrogène dans des espaces confinés, ce qui crée un risque d'incendie ou d'explosion.
Asphyxie: L'hydrogène peut déplacer l'oxygène de l'air, ce qui peut entraîner une asphyxie si des concentrations élevées sont inhalées.
Cryogénie: L'hydrogène liquide est extrêmement froid et peut causer des engelures et d'autres blessures s'il entre en contact avec la peau.
Il est important de prendre des précautions pour atténuer les risques associés à l'hydrogène. Ces précautions peuvent inclure :
Utilisation de conteneurs et de tuyaux appropriés: Les conteneurs et les tuyaux utilisés pour stocker et transporter l'hydrogène doivent être conçus pour résister aux pressions élevées et empêcher les fuites.
Ventilation adéquate: Les zones où l'hydrogène est produit, stocké ou utilisé doivent être correctement ventilées pour éviter l'accumulation de gaz.
Détection des fuites: Des détecteurs de fuites d'hydrogène doivent être utilisés pour identifier et localiser rapidement les fuites.
Formation des employés: Les employés qui manipulent de l'hydrogène doivent être correctement formés aux risques associés au gaz et aux procédures de sécurité appropriées.
Équipement de protection individuelle: Les employés qui manipulent de l'hydrogène doivent porter un équipement de protection individuelle approprié, tel que des gants, des lunettes de protection et des vêtements ignifuges.
En prenant des précautions appropriées, les risques associés à l'hydrogène peuvent être gérés et l'hydrogène peut être utilisé en toute sécurité comme combustible propre et efficace.
Voici quelques ressources supplémentaires sur les risques de l'hydrogène :
h2tools.org/
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1738573321004848
www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35419-7
La puissance d'explosion de l'hydrogène dépend de plusieurs facteurs, dont :
La quantité d'hydrogène: Plus il y a d'hydrogène, plus l'explosion sera puissante.
La pureté de l'hydrogène: L'hydrogène pur est plus explosif que les mélanges d'hydrogène et d'autres gaz.
Le confinement: L'hydrogène confiné dans un espace clos est plus susceptible d'exploser que l'hydrogène à l'air libre.
La source d'inflammation: La puissance de l'explosion peut être augmentée par la présence d'une source d'inflammation puissante, telle qu'une étincelle électrique ou une flamme.
Il est difficile de donner une valeur précise de la puissance d'explosion de l'hydrogène car elle varie en fonction des facteurs mentionnés ci-dessus. Cependant, on peut dire que l'hydrogène est un gaz extrêmement explosif. Une petite quantité d'hydrogène peut produire une explosion équivalente à la force d'une bombe.
Just the pressure inside a hydrogen tank is more psi than the combustion pressure inside a gasoline engine's cylinder.
@@Bryan-Hensleyyet per volume it still wouldn’t be as practical as gasoline or diesel is
Great review! In industry, many years ago, my factory did "Hydrogen Annealing". The pipe joints leaked regularly. If this was on road transport, the vibration would cause regular leaks. There is also a characteristic called Hydrogen Embrittlement, which causes brittle fracture.
There are some mining trucks running around, powered by H2, although it was an attempt at corporate virtue signalling, and a cost failure. Twiggy Forest was proposing to run a fleet of haul trucks on it in Western Australia. He couldn't get the billions he wanted, from the government,and wasn't prepared to lose that sort of money himself. The billionaires are only in it to milk the taxpayer.
@Benzley722 it's the most pressure ever for a passenger vehicle by 3 or 4 times and the largest pressure vessel ever on a passenger vehicle by at least 3 times.
@Benzley722 also how much energy is consumed compressing that gas.
Sounds like we need more coal fired power stations to provide all that electricity to make the hydrogen.
China building more coal fired power stations. They must not give a toss about globall war-ming.
There is a safe and easy way to work with hydrogen. It can even be used in a liquid form at atmospheric pressure.
When it's used in a chemical bond with carbon, as in a hydrocarbon such as octane. 😉
I was a process engineer for a hydrogen plant in an oil refinery. We needed H2 to add to reactors to change the chemistry of oil. The most common method of creating hydrogen is from natural gas. You take a methane molecule, strip off the H2, and expel what's left (CO2) into the atmosphere. H2 has 1/6 the energy of methane so a lot of energy is lost in the conversion. Plus, the process requires huge furnaces that burn large amounts of methane. This is the only way to make H2 without consuming huge amounts of electricity. But, we would be better off burning the methane in our cars as this would produce less CO2 than making hydrogen in processes that consume large amounts of methane in furnaces, just to convert the methane that could have been burned into H2.
Um Hindenburg.💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥
I love the grounded reality of this channel!!!
*Retirement took a toll on my finances, but with my involvement in the digital market, $15,000 weekly returns has been life changing. AWESOME GOD* ❤️
I feel sympathy and empathy for our country, low income earners are suffering to survive, and I appreciate Wayne. You've helped my family with your advice. imagine investing $30,000 and receiving $95,460 after 28 days of trading.
I'm in a similar situation where should I look to increase income? Do you have any advice? What did you do ? Thank you
Well I engage in nice side hustles like inves'ting, and the good thing is I do it with one one of the best(Michael Wayne), he's really good!
Did someone just mention Mr Wayne!? Damn! You just made my day; what a coincidence.. I've worked with him for over 2years and I can tell how good he is
It's great to see you guys talking about
Michael Wayne, This man changed the game for me. Good Man ❤️
Nothing beats gasoline as an energy carrier. Gasoline is so good we would synthesize it if we couldn't refine it
Most commercial hydrogen comes from cracking methane in the presence of ultra high temperature steam resulting in hydrogen gas and... er...um... carbon dioxide... oh, bugger.
Keep spreading the truth! Tell your friends to tune in !
OMG this is amazing. I'm an economist working for the media and THANKS GOD my father is an engineer like you, He has helped me so much to destroy many media lies together. I'm following you so I'm updated with real information.
I watched someone do it with a 9 volt battery and crystallized drain cleaner it’s all about conductivity in the water. The reaction was immediate and produced a large amount. This was decades ago and he was using it to power about 8 fuel cells for his house and property he got from Germany. He made this work with a number of Prius’s that were used in the rural community. After the article was released the government came and confiscated everything and he disappeared, he did this with a small generator run off a nearby river and lived 100% off grid. He had two hundred pound tanks that stored the hydrogen he made. He was planning to run a town with this method of about 150 ppl. Wish I could remember his name.
thats the trouble with hydrogen , its a vector not a source of energy
Man I’m so sick of politicians raising the cost of living
There would've been no Led Zeppelin without hydrogen.
Oh the humanity!
The only thing that worried me about burning fossil fuels was running out of them.
You didn't mention that once you have the hydrogen, you need to use it.
Fuel cells are typically 50% efficient, this can be higher in large fixed installations that can use waste heat, but not in a vehicle. They also use expensive catalysts such as platinum.
So making the hydrogen from electricity you lose at least 33%, more likely 50%.
After the fuel cell you have now lost 50%, of the energy and have 33% overall efficiency. (0.66 * 0.5).
If used in an ICE engine, the efficiency would be similar to one that of gas or diesel, which is hard to exceed 30%. So, 20% overall efficiency. (0.66 * 0.3)
Next, the fuel cell can't produce instant power so you need batteries or Supercaps/Ultracaps to accelerate or do regenerative braking.
The fuel cells that could fit in a vehicle and be relatively inexpensive have severe operating temperature limits.
The tanks that hold the hydrogen are large and expensive.
A vehicle is highly complex now with tanks, batteries, motors, control systems, etc.
95% of hydrogen gas used now comes from splitting methane because it's cheaper and more efficient that splitting water. However then you are still producing the same amount of CO2 as just burning the methane.
Any honest scientist or engineer would do the math and say this is absurd.
The only way this could even start to make sense at all is if you use heat or electricity from a nuclear reactor to generate the hydrogen.
What's odd is that if the green environmental nuts truly believed that CO2 was an existential threat to the world, the would not be going out of their way to ensure all nuclear power is shut down.
Burning Hydrogen in air produces NOx due to high combustion temperatures.
Oxidation in a fuel cell avoids that but... the fuel cell has inertia and gets very hot indeed. Hydrogen bus trials illustrated those and other problems in Perth, about a decade ago.
thank you for the episode on h2. Hydrogen as a fuel source is dumber than unicorn farts.
Excellent article. Hydrogen from electricity is 66% efficient. Say a fuel cell in a vehicle is also 66% efficient. Then the over efficiency from electricity to the wheels is 44%. How can that compete with an electric vehicle. I agree its a brittle hydrogen pipe dream.
There was a guy who made a car that ran on water, Stanley Meyer. He mysteriously died during a meeting with investors. His last words were "They poisoned me!"
Overlooked is the safety aspect of hydrogen. I worked in an industry that used hydrogen. We had strict safety procedures and had to use special, non-sparking tools when working on hydrogen equipment. I attended training where they showed the aftermath of an industrial hydrogen explosion. Definitely got my attention.
And yet, we expect everyday idiots to safely fuel up their vehicles using high pressure H2 systems and components. Can't wait until a minivan full of kids become crispy critters after a vehicle accident and resulting fire/explosion. What about when there is a hydrogen leak in a garage and the house is leveled when someone flips a light switch.
Oh, and to put that 8 gigawatt figure into perspective: in the United States, they just built two new nuclear reactors with a capacity of 2,300 megawatts, or 2.3 gigawatts. Using 1 megawatt per ten acres of solar, you would need an 80,000 acre solar farm just to get the nameplate capacity (you would have to add four to five times that amount due to capacity factor of solar being so low). (I may be off on my "napkin math". I'm sure someone will let me know...LOL)
Worked in a H2 producing plant. We used that by product to produce some products but most of it just went up a large stack. The biggest problem with it is the molecule is so small it is almost impossible to have leak proof connections of pipe and fittings. The compressors that moved the gas to the additional processes were in a building. After we blew the walls off of the building three times we gave up and just left them off. The company just insulated all of the piping and heat traced it. Static electricity has enough energy to get H2 to light off. That stack I mentioned would light off in wet snow storms from the static electricity. Interesting day when a 4 foot across H2 stack is burning a bright blue. Very hard to put out without blowing the rest of the system up.
I’m still wondering about all these flying cars we are suppose to be introducing in the near future. Goodness knows what will power them, let alone keep them safe to use. They can’t settle for the best power for land based vehicles and they have been around over 100 years. The future is getting more grim as the years go on.