graphene hematene water powered batteries using nanotechnology and the electrokinetic streaming effect. now made by strategic elements in australia, taipei university in taiwan, and IIT-guwahati in india!
Dude I love that you guys are promoting STEM topics but please get your facts right. NASA is *NOT* just experimenting with hydrogen fuel cells it was what they used in the Apollo program to go to the moon. NASA picked the hydrogen/oxygen fuel cells so that the Astronauts had water supply. If they had done as the Russians proposed with Soyuz, which used solar panels to generate electricity then they would have had to carry all the water that the astronauts needed. *It was one of the Oxygen tanks in that Apollo system that exploded on Apollo 13.*
sory my dude H2 is not hard to produce, you only need water electrolisys. May be hard to store has a liquid, no more then any other fossil gas we already use. Synce electric and fossil energy/fuel idiots won't give up on it, and because the least expensive solution is to continue to use combustion, the next logical step is to make hybrid less polutive fuel with hydrogen and fossil fuel, obviously using catalyzers for the emissions we can reduce a lot the mess we'r in. H2 can be cooled and pressurized, obviously it has a cost, but so does any other power systems we know. The question is can things complement each other, obviously through countries legislation and enforcement.
"one cassette would offer roughly the same amount of storage as a 5000 psi hydrogen tank..." Yeah but what SIZE 5000 psi tank?! That statement is unfortunate.
Use your brain, densest form of a gas is liquid, let's suppose that you could liquify hydrogen at room temperature, the most you're going to get on a CD sized disc would be a couple of mls, that might get you to the end of your drive if it's a short one. This concept is totally bogus, and it's shocking how many people are being duped.
I think you might have been trolled with this one? There's rather important bits of data missing, and by their own admission metal hydride is significantly better for energy density, and that's not revolutionising anything.
Metal hydride is heavy compared to the amount of hydrogen it can store. Atm it is about 6%wt I think. So the energy density of metal hydrides is not that high. I dont know enough about this solid state hydrogen storage, if its more or less dense than metal hydride. What data are you reffering? I realy do want to learn more about this!
@@paprika1716 It's been a while... but I think they have a pdf on their website. Its full of words without saying much, but didn't paint their product in a terribly flattering light.
The only informations i found is on their website, the mentioned pdf, and three interviews on youtube. Nothing more... I even cralewd through science databases to find anything reffering this kind of tech. Yeah there are articles about Mg as a metal-hydride storage, but nothing as thin films or that you need light to release the hydrogen.
@@paprika1716 I was wondering if the power to drive the laser was equal to the power being released in the process and how it could be over unity,i guess we will just have to wait and find out if it becomes available.
The Type 4 composite vessel used in the Toyota mirai has an energy density of 2247Wh/kg, although this is technically as heat energy. You would also have to account for a 50-60% fuel cell efficiency and the weight of the fuel cell and subsystems but the stats for lithium ion you used are for cell level density and in reality with bus bars, cooling systems, etc they are more like 167Wh/kg. For Liquid hydrogen vessels are more like 2956Wh/kg.
Orkney in Scotland has wind farms that, when they need to be disconnected for grid balancing, are switched over to producing hydrogen instead. Can't get much cleaner than that.
I wonder if you could put a plot of farmland near a hydrogen plant and burn it, would it rain on the farmland? I mean if you put it downwind of said plant.
There are various ways of temporarily storing excess power from solar or wind farms. In Finland, there is a company that is storing it as heat in underground sand. There are also plants that compress air. This is especially useful when you don't have a ready supply of fresh water to split into hydrogen and oxygen.
@@rimc8783 If you try to use electrolysis to split sea water to make hydrogen, you will also split the salt and make chlorine gas. And that's some nasty stuff.
One data point that would really help to evaluate this as a potential replacement is the weight to power ratio of a hydrogen based cartridge system vs. a Tesla EV battery pack. If there are significant weight savings using a tape based hydrogen system vs. how heavy lithium ion battery packs are, then hydrogen tape power to weight ratio per kw/h becomes a real game changer in automotive, space, and flight based industries.
How about the Specific Energy (KWh/Kg) for this scheme? Any substrate holding any kind of fuel will reduce both Specific Energy and Energy Density (KWh/m3) WRT pure molecular H2. It must have (potentially) better parameters than electrochemical batteries to be worthy of implementation.
kW/kg is not specific energy. kW is power. The video gives Wh/kg, which is energy density. You get power by using energy. The faster you use the energy (as in by driving faster or up hill), the more power you are extracting.
Do you even fact check the claims of these inventors? Hint: You've been conned. This technology is impossible on so many levels, which you would have known if you actually had bothered to fact check their claims even a little bit. So how many of your other videos have not been fact checked?
Wow! just wow! A channel with 236K subscribers and a verified status can be this scientifically illiterate !! It just boggles the mind as to how much garbage is out there on youtube!
Nickel Metal Hydride or Nickel Hydrogen batteries NiMH already use Hydrogen ions like this, with a lanthanum nickel alloy electrode & potassium hydroxide electrolyte. There are even LSD or low self discharge NiMH called Sanyo Eneloop that hold their charge state in storage with very low losses for over 1 year // there are also super charge SCIB variants of NiMH with much better peak current performance like LIPO used in some electric bicycles made by Sanyo // noteworthy that 2.4v cells of Lithium Titanate last 23+ years in solar powered wrist watches made by Casio & Citizen of Japan & could be use in phones or other consumer off the shelf mobile or portable electronics // Sony for example also invented & commercialized Lithium Cobalt Oxide Carbon or common Li-Ion batteries back in 1991-93 for the Sony Walkman //
@@comment8767 you're correct except inside stars and in space where it's still called hydrogen....but then astrophysicist call everything heavier than helium a metal so maybe they shouldn't be trusted with naming particles 🤣
How much light energy does it require to liberate the hydrogen from the tape compared to the amount of energy you get back from that hydrogen via a fuel cell or combustion?
@@paprika1716, fuel cells and hydrogen combustion are already not-very-efficient, so it seems iffy that the total “well-to-wheel” efficiency would be very impressive.
@@mr88cet Yeah Combustion has a efficiency of ~30% no matter the fuel. I'm talking from fuel to wheel right now. But there are also engine designs with an efficiency of 50%, but this is not my point here. A fuel cell can have 70% and more. Sure its less then battery, but at least we dont have to manufacture a battery (thats the point here). The fact that you have to store hydrogen seperatly worsens the "well-to-wheel" efficiency again. But for hydrogen storage we have a variety of different technologies, some require more or less energy for storage and release. If we find a cheap way to store hydrogen, the fuel cell gets more competitive to the pure battery (car).
@@paprika1716, there are indeed engine designs that can get 50% efficiency, and in fact quite a bit more than that, but not of the sort that can be put into a car. Those in electric power plants can get around 70%ish, but only because they are *huge* - loosely speaking, because they produce energy “in bulk” .
It also means the max speed of hydrogen produce will be limited by the power of the laser used. So now this system needs the cartridge. A hydrogen gas tight deck to run the tape reel to reel, a kilowatt laser and it's cooling system and a pump system to collect the hydrogen and pressurize it to a usable pressure for the fuel cell. Oh and it had to be designed so swapping a cartridge can't contaminate the fuel system or require a purging of the system. Plus all this has to have similar reliability, convenience, form factor, weight and cost of current ICE or battery power trains. A issue simpler hydrogen systems have yet to overcome and is still a drag on battery based cars
I like the storage method that doesn't require high pressure or really cold temperatures. The round trip efficiency going from electricity to green hydrogen and back is less than 40%, slightly better than today's gas engines, and on par with light diesel, Batteries are better than 90%.
Do you think it’s possible to convert hydrogen gas on demand for a electric system for a resident? So use solar panels to convert the gas and pump into a generator and battery storage unit and inverter, would that be a viable option?. Thanks
@@michigannative2951 Yes, but you would need a larger solar array because the inefficiency during electrolysis and running an engine (maybe 35%). Lets assume you use 10KWH a day. Half of that use occurs when you are getting power from the solar panels. Half from storage. With direct to battery storage, you would need to generate 5.55KWH to account for the losses in the battery charger and inverter. You would need an array that produces 10.55KWH per day. With hydrogen direct to electricity (no battery or inverter), you would need to generate 14.3KWH to account for the losses during electrolysis and in the engine. You would need an array that produces 19.3KWH. Add the battery an inverter, you would need 15.9KWH for storage, so a 20.9KWH solar array.
@@christophorus9235 Lead-acid batteries- yes. Lithium ion batteries aren't that bad. And large packs allow to regenerate energy when braking efficiently. Small batteries wouldn't be able to do that efficiently... and this tape wouldn't be able to recuperate energy at all. Breakthroughs in energy density allow to store more energy in lighter package. We are already attacking 300Wh/kg with lithium ion batteries. Lithium sulfur stabilized by sugar, which is recent development have theoretical energy densities 5 times higher than lithium ion batteries.
Pie in the sky I would say, the logistics of shipping the tape will massively impact its efficiency, then there's weight of the equipment and housings in the car and the fuel cell overall it will likely add up to more weight than today's batteries
The storage medium is a metal hydride. The temperatures needed to release the hydrogen are somewhere around 350°C, I believe. Seems like an overall net loss of energy.
And it requires a laser, remember the light mentioned to release. And the substrate the hydrate is placed on has to be thin, flexible, strong, high heat resistant, cheap oh and light weight. Polymers can't handle the heat, price eliminates exotic tech, metals fail on weight and remaining flexible after hundreds of cycles. Then you have to be able to bond the hydrate to it in a way the flexing and friction of winding and unwinding won't let it fall off. But anything added to bond it has to meet the same criteria as the substrate and is more dead weight as far as holding hydrogen.
Many things need to be known before it can be used in cars, how big are the tapes? How fast is it at discharging? If the only way to effectively recharge them is by swapping out and putting a fresh set in, how exactly will that happen? It sounds like the tapes are gonna be huge…
in the video there it is mentioned the kg or weight comparison, in other videos the weight is far less that current fuel tanks and far less than ev battery packs. the release of Hyd gas is instant when the lazer emits. although I am concerned with the tape being stable enough while driving. there is a video, E for Electric where the company owner explains all these sceptical questions
Its certainly interesting. The one thing that I know is that the conversion from hydrogen to electricity is an expensive piece of kit, at the moment. If this can be resolved then it would really help.
there are still a lot of issues to work out with hydrogen as a fuel but this is a step in the right direction, they are using platinum in fuel cell which is expensive but there may be alternatives.
What is the expected efficiency in conversion to mechanical energy? Gas has ridiculously high energy density, but its coversion efficiency is very low - hence the rise of BEV's.
Battery capacity will likely double in the next 15-20 years and require very little flammable chemicals and uses electricity which is found everywhere. Vs Hydrogen who's definition of storage probably includes the word "leaky", is highly flammable, highly explosive, might give you 2x more driving range, and you hope the next refill station has one available.
The same could be said about hydrogen availability and storage on the next 15-20 years and thats not so different than other kind of gas used nowadays Like propane tanks acceptance when first introduced 50+ yrs ago
@@jacquesdobatien3927 Hydrogen is much more difficult than propane. They almost completely stopped using hydrogen for space launches because its higher thrust benefit wasn't a good enough reason to deal with its storage problems.
I think I missed something, Hydrogen is not positively charged, as any element it has zero electric charge, of course, it can form ions with positive or negative charges, but those are other chemical species known as hydrogen ion (H+) and hydride (H-)
Did you get any specifications from them that can let us evaluate it? This seems like metal hydride hydrogen storage in a slightly different form. So how does it differ from traditional metal-hydrid storage? Still sounds like a really complex battery to me, is the "pack level" density or power comparable to lithium?
Why hasn't Hydrogen taken off? Two reasons, as the technology gets better, cheaper and more accessible. The person in the street will be able to access it and that means the main source of "ingredients" falls from the sky! They cannot regulate that, or tax it and that's the reason why no government will ever allow it, to ever become the source of fuel for the masses. Big business currently has its sticky fingers in the pie of petrochemicals and deriving petrol/gasoline from crude oil.
Sounds good. I expect Hydrogen systems to be more used in shipping and air transport, so a weight/volume comparison to the diesel engines in freighter would be mice.
Since the technology is so good in this so called absorbing freely available hydrogen, I am sure they can easily and simply tweak the amazing micro thin film to absorb deuterium and even some tritium that are also available freely in open air and then ouput some fusion energy as a side dish. /sarc I wish the creaters do some homework before dumping scam tech on youtube viewers. This so called hydrogen capture from air is so wrong on so many levels.
The inventor of these cassetes said that the cassetes can be used multiple cycles without degradation, but the the deuterium builds up because can't released by the light, so once in a while they need to empty it, but there is no problem because the price they get of the deuterium pays off that operaction and the recycling too. That is why the can claim 100% recyclable
You would need somewhere around half or more of the volume of a Tesla battery pack in cassette tapes in your car to have an equivalent amount of energy. That’s an awful lot of cassettes of the size that were shown. I think you’d have to have a mega cassette that could be pulled out and replaced quickly. And the rate at which hydrogen was removed from the tape would have to be really fast, the tape would have to be flying past the lasers shining on it.
Please make this the norm for all vehicles. EV's are not well thought out and draining our resources. They are helping us bridge the gap between fossil fuel and sustainable hydrogen production but they're already causing massive problems because of all the batteries that need to be produced
This is a very interesting technology. The video kind of glossed over the actual production of the hydrogen that is put on the tape. Perhaps an answer would be something like the "solar dome" France and Saudi Arabia are designing. My understanding is that it is supposed to use sunlight to convert salty sea water into hydrogen and fresh water. Perhaps an idea for a future video? I've heard about a couple of additional issues with this system that might have to be addressed: * I understand that currently the hydrogen leaks off the tape quickly. This means that they could not be stored for a long time and would have to be used shortly after installation. * I've heard that these tapes are a couple of hundred kilograms each. Clearly, this is not something a normal driver would want to swap out themselves.
Use solar energy to boil water to create the steam necessary for the process. Use fresnel lenses in sunny, hot locations to boil the water. Could also use the same plant for ocean water desalination
So the short version seems to be that they figured out how to use magnesium instead of palladium to store hydrogen and are using a tape form factor to maximize surface area so loading the materialworks faster. Which is pretty cool. If this works, it sounds similar to the battery swapping method of recharging EVs from a consumer perspective. Though from a logistical perspective you obviously can't just connect to the electric grid but instead have to physically ship cartridges. I mean if you look at all the charging stations popping up everywhere it's pretty obvious why EVs are the future and hydrogen is going to mostly be a dead end. But this could be useful for niches like long-haul commercial vehicles and aircraft where the infrastructure can be planned around specific routes instead of needing to be available everywhere.
This is a very good question! Since it’s not under pressure and enclosed in a housing… I’m thinking it could be fairly safe. But something I’ll ask about and cover in the future. Man you guys ask amazing questions!
A hydrogen filled film? Really? Yet another scam, being pushed on investors. I'm glad I'm not one of 'em, but screw them, they deserve to lose their money. Why do people fall for this kind of crap? Ahh... stupidity. Gotcha. 🤣🤣🤣
I just saw the creator of the sweet hydrogen tape deck say that when it is recycled it gives one of the special hydrogens that you said before is used to make the amazing material for batteries.( light doesn't dislodge the special hydrogen from the tape, which builds up,reducing efficiency, till it has to be recycled.
This solve some issues of storage, but not all. There is continuously the issue with the extremely low efficiency. Forget that tech apart from industry...
In your opening remarks you claim that hydrogen, when used as fuel, "...emits nothing but water". Is this really true ? If you burn hydrogen in "air" you could easily produce nitrous oxide which seems to be the polluter of greatest concern at present.
"extremely flammable' is *really* underselling it. It burns at ~7000 feet per second. When I was a kid I tried making a hydrogen candle. Let's just say it didn't go well considering it explodes at an insanely wide ratio of hydrogen/oxygen. Hydrogen as energy storage is a terrible idea if efficiency is something you care about and even worse if you want long term storage. Personally the way I'd prefer to keep my hydrogen around is as methanol. I wish we focused more on fuel cells that use it vs hydrogen since you can store it using methods we've had for thousands of years, the bottle.
I would be interested to see how long they can store them "charged." If they can't maintain the hydrogen for long term storage it might be problematic. Otherwise it seems like really cool tech. If it helps to remove some of the harmful stuff from the exhaust gasses then that is a Win Win I think. You might even be able to incentivize companies to install the capture devices in their smoke stacks. I think it. I hope they succeed.
The vid from e for energy channel i watched when i 1st heard about this tech n then i watched some interviews with the creator N thats one o the beauties of this tech if its as claimed Being solid state it IS stable n makes a better alternative for energy storage not just a fuel source One application could be to stabilise renewable based grid When theres surplus, create the solid state hydro. Thered be no infrastructure costs such as a new type of petrol station These tapes would operate in real world much like swapping out a superser gas cannister in the 80s n can b stored in shipment containers.
I wonder if this concept couldn’t be used for co2 extraction from smoke stack? But only one big permanent loop passing amongst exhaust then eventually out a gland to the lower pressure area where CO2 would be lasered off and removed (compressed for injection I suppose) for sequestration.
I heard that Plasma Knetics is working on a device that includes a spinning disk made of lead. When they point a laser at the disk, it turns to gold. It’s still in early development and investors are needed.
Long storage life potentially too, so if your mothball a vehicle with the tape function, it would still be able to power up many years latter with a fresh starting battery to power the tape light laser etc
What I like is that there’s no compression/decompression of the H2 required, nor freezing/vaporization of the liquified H2. This saves a ton of energy, money, and materials in the infrastructure and equipment normally used for these purposes. All these savings help negate the disadvantage of the low energy density of H2 stored on tape. Yea, you would have to haul swappable tape canisters to the refueling stations, but today you have to haul the compressed or liquefied H2 to refueling stations. Alternatively, to deliver compressed or liquefied H2, a very expensive and elaborate piping infrastructure could be built out to deliver the H2 to refueling stations. This is what they’re proposing in Europe. But the swappable canisters could be refueled at the refueling stations regardless of how the H2 is delivered there, e.g., trucked, piped, or produced on site from electrolyzer’s. But if the refueling site can’t have raw H2 sourced at the site, there can be a network of swappable H2 tape canister sites built out. The canister weighs 800 pounds I was told, therefore it would need a machine to swap it into/out the vehicle. (This would be analogous to BEVs swapping the battery, like NIO proposes.) But the 800 pound canister would take a passenger car 1500 miles, I was told. Still not sure if the laser uses more than a nominal amount of energy to release the H2 from tape. But I suppose we, who are rooting for this technology, (and who pray we’re not getting scammed yet again by some cockamamie claim 😄), need to see a working prototype to validate all the excitement.
The government was actually stealing the patents and found out they could not do it without this company. The company refused and the gov took away their ability to do anything with this product. Glad they are back.
All sounds good, really good, specially the sizes of these things, you could have a LOT of "cassetes" (if those are up to scale), just imagine you could have a bunch of those on the floor of your trunk. Depending on how much they allow you to drive for each one, you could simply change them once a month or something, or just replace the ones that are fully depleted. Because H2 in the current form isn't neither cheap or clean (except green H2), you even have to change the H2 tanks every 15 years... BUT, its all about economics, lets see if this solution is financially viabel vs battery EVs.
Very interesting indeed. The prospect of having a few dozen discs or tape cassettes, purchasable everywhere, enabling drivers picking up fuel in less than 5 min unless there is a line, sounds great
To be clear, this technology can pick up hydrogen wherever it is. There's hydrogen in fossil fule emissions, so it can pickup hydrogen there, but it could just as easily be charged by electrolysis, or at a dairy farm.
That doesn't really clear things up. Gas or fossil fuel emissions covers a lot of chemicals. Is it talking about methane? Hydrocarbons? Water? Does it need to be heated? Does it require energy input? Even the web site just brushes over that part.
It does not need to be heated, does not require energy input, and once again, it pickups elemental hydrogen. Whether that elemental hydrogen was made by burning hydrocarbons, electrolysis, or by a cow's intestines is irrelevant.
@@jef_3006 Do you mean it can pick up hydrogen from hydrogen gas (H2), or do you mean it also can pick up hydrogen bonded to oxygen in H2O? Have you got knowledge about this purported technology from elsewhere than this video? Fossil fuel exhaust gases do not normally contain hydrogen gas. If the fuel is natural gas, which is mostly methane, the reaction is: CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O
@@anderslvolljohansen1556 It picks up H2, gaseous Hydrogen. And yes, in a perfect world there isn't any Hydrogen in the exhaust of something which burns Methane. But we live in the real world, and here there is always a trace amount of gaseous Hydrogen in any Hydrocarbon emissions.
Good info on hydrogen we still have issues with fossil fuel companies wanting to control as well since they cannot control renewable energy. The inventor of thin film solar Unisolar, Stan Ovshinsky, invented a solid storage system for hydrogen so not under pressure a while back before he died. There was a demonstration car he put it in and it worked. This tech sounds familiar with his. I am sure the government has stifled inovations like this before.
I think this is actually why this technology could be successful. Private companies would love to have you as a customer giving recurring income which is why they would be incentivised to push the technology. And it would generate jobs too. Solar panels on your own property generating your own electricity charging your own car is a nightmare for the capitalists because they can't get recurring money from you.
@@Mnkmnkmnk generating jobs is pointless if the system/product is inefficient. E.G we could all give ourselves jobs gathering and cutting fire wood to cook dinner, but why would we when the electricity costs 11 cents. It would be inefficient.
Especially if the hydrogen used in a fusion drive system to make Helium as a waste product that saved for additional uses as a lubricant // in very low loss high pressure bearings & as a refridgerant & coolant in small solid sate fission reactors & Stirling engine generators like the Kilopower from NASA // & other classified MMR or micro module nuclear reactors made by the Pentagon contractors for remote military bases "shipping container units" that make hot air, hot water & electricity 24/7 automatically, sealed with no maintenance of the core for 10+ years other than inspections
Stanley Meyer's on-board electrolysis technology, Daniel Dingel's, Denny Kline's also John Kanzius' electrolysis through radio waves, all ways to propel internal combustion engines that are already in existence which are in most vehicles. Much simpler solution it seems to me.. The problem is most of these inventors end up dead before they can bring this concepts to the mainstream.
Reguarding hydrogen as a fuel with just water as its exhaust and the statement "No greenhouse gasses"... technically water vapor released, as the exhaust, is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. Granted, water vapor doesn't have as long of an atmospheric half life.
@@rogerstarkey5390 Yup, but All fuels are a form of energy storage. And here, fuels are substances oxidized, efficent or inefficient for the energy released douring oxidation. Be it In a fuel cell or a internal combustion engine or rocket engine 2(H2) fuel is oxidized by the oxidizer 1(O2) resulting in (H2O) as the waste product.
sources of steam that are renewable energy are nuclear, wood and biomass. All producing power and steam that is wasted after passing through turbine generators. Before condensing this process could extract hydrogen. Even current carbon based resources like natural gas turbines, coal plants and refineries could supply huge amounts of hydrogen with this technology. It is a huge step in clean and unlimited power.
H2 storage improvements are great, but the main knocks on h2 are production cost and environmental problems associated with producing it (which you note.) When h2 production issues are solved, that's when this storage tech can take off. Niche until then.
Concrete products are a massive proportion of greenhouse exhaust gasses along with steel production, this could be used to offset to 90% of its emissions thus creating almost net zero . Let's not forget windfarms need massive amounts of Concrete in there sites.
EV's distributed, home charging infrastructure IS the holy grail for sustainable energy solution as far as the automobile is concerned. Only gas company and their infrastructure (i.e. gas station) want to promote centrally refined, station dispensed model to keep their investment relevant. In terms of the source of energy, only "IF" hydrogen fuel cell / storage can be created / distributed in environmentally sustainable and cost efficient manner, it can be used in some commercial / industrial cases as a power source.
3:27 Storing hydrogen under high pressure in itself is not as big of an issue, and is much less of a safety risk than you suggest. To assess the safety issue for compression of gas, you look at the release of the compression energy when the pressure suddenly drops from high pressure to 1 bar. From basic thermodynamics E = p dV, you can easily derive that the compression energy of any gas, including hydrogen, is logarithmic, which implies that the compression energy in a gas is mostly stored at low pressures. The compression energy going from 1 bar to 30 bar is about the same as going from 30 bar to 700 bar. Then, the compression energy at 700 bar is still less than 10% of the combustion energy. So an explosion of a tank with 5 kg H2 at 2 bar or 700 bar (a typical amount of H2 on a vehicle) barely makes a difference, the damage will be caused by the chemical energy stored in the hydrogen, and not the very much lower compression energy you have at 700 bar. That said, storing at 700 bar definitely has issues, but these are more related to materials that can be, or rather, cannot be used for such technology. So the real safety issue with H2 is the fact that you have stored an amount of 5 kg of H2 on a vehicle. Driving around with these 5 kg of H2 is dangerous, irrespective of the pressure you have stored it at. By the way, the combustion energy of 5 kg of H2 is still quite a bit lower than that of 50 L diesel, but on the other hand, it is easier to release that energy from H2 as compared to diesel. These are the safety considerations to be made.
In a fuel cell there is no pollution when it is burned in an internal combustion engine temperature gets hot enough to form nitrogen oxides. So it depends on how you use it but the biggest problem store enough to go 400 miles
Storage is the main problem for hydrogen. But other problems have to be handled too. Magnesium is a fuel that is hard to fire extinct. If hydrogen is released, explosions can occur. But this technology can be important for many things, because hydrogen is very useful and abundant.
The original title/thumb kept me from tuning in. The new title "Forget tanks...." and the less busy thumb (with the cybrtrk) is much better. And the hydrogen mix tape sounds pretty cool too
Yes, but using methane reformation to create hydrogen is energy intensive, you need energy to liberate the hydrogen. Then there's transfer and storage costs. The problem isn't how efficient or energy dense hydrogen itself is, it's the cost of creating hydrogen that needs to be addressed on a massive scale. Cheaper just dumping the energy directly into a battery, fewer conversion losses.
Stan Meyers built a water fuelled hydrogen powered dune buggy 30 years ago made on board using voltages and frequencies tuned to the covalent bonds of the water molecule. Using an internal combustion engine! Too cheap clean and simple for mainstream use then and now. He thought he was saving the world from the oil embargo but fuel industry said no.
This would be an absolute game changer. The "cassettes" could all be produced with green energy and shipped throughout the US with green energy. Think about if your EV had a hydrogen fuel cell, could your car then power your house? That would be the quickest way to 100% renewable energy. Can't the ford f150 already power your house? Then why couldn't your fuel cell EV power your house?
I think the guy that was a whistle blower on area 51 has a corvette that runs on hydrogen and is stored in a similar manner. Apparently it's illegal to sell the manufacturing instrument but it is legal if you build it yourself.
Could it not harvest the H2 off gassing of nuclear reactors that would mean that we are using one of the byproducts of the reactors (superheated steam) that’s what makes them explode when they go critical
@@TwoBitDaVinci thank you for the like and I’m a firm believer I. The future being powered by nuclear and hydrogen technology working together to make a greener world and a far more efficient one at that love the videos keep up the great work
High pressure hydrogen is not particularly dangerous - similar to other high pressure gasses with flammability concerns. It's safer than petrol really. If a hydrogen tank is punctured, the hydrogen may ignite, but will get colder as the pressure drops. It will likely not explode as the very light gas quickly dissipates & it will not pool for the same reason. This has been tested, look for hydrogen gas tank tests, or hydrogen gar crash tests.
Many decades ago we used town gas instead of natural gas. Town gas was 50% H2. It worked fine as a heating, cooking fuel, why don't we start mixing H2 with our nat gas supplies?
Energy will need to be spend for both hydration and dehydration of the "tape" , how much is the big unknown. As far as I've read on the Plasma Kinetics site the intend is not to "charge" the tapes with exhaust flu gases (including waste incineration) since in any way those would be pretty much be almost devoid of free Hydrogen instead the mentioned use is with gas emissions from garbage dumps, ...etc. however there it will highly depend on the state of decomposition where free Hydrogen gas is present and that is a very narrow time frame (initial anaerobic phase ) that coincides with the highest CO2 content in the decomposition gas as well so meh.... To me a lot of claims especially when looking at "less cost, better than competing tech" while trying to underscore with "government suppressed" sensationalism, the latter of which IMO would not be necessary if the tech is as good as they claim.
This sounds like a solution for special applications such as aircraft, military vehicles, and heavy equipment (eg. Mining, construction, long distance trains, agricultural tractors ect.) And other applications where recharging batteries is impractical. Honestly if this technology is to have a good future I think the company should be looking into how it can fit into the world of energy storage far more than trying to run vehicles especially light duty ones.
It can produce a small amt of hydrogen to act as a catalyst for improving combustion in engines (30 to 100 percent milage improvement). It can be recharged using electrolysis of water.
I would suspect that just using more gas in an ICE would be far cheaper. Also changing the amount of explosive force in a cylinder might reduce its life or destroy it (a friend once ran his lawnmower on home made alcohol and blew the piston out of the block). Overall I suspect EV's will still be far cheaper over their life time.
Not properly explained: 4:49 "When exposed to greenhouse gases like exhaust from say a smokestack, the film can capture metric tons of pure hydrogen from the steam [...]" Exhaust does not in general contain pure hydrogen gas (H2). Exhaust sometimes contains water vapour which is H2O. Magnesium can be made to react with steam: Mg + 2H2O → Mg(OH)2 + H2 I guess that if you add at lease twice as much magnesium, you might in theory combine Mg + H2 → MgH2 with the above and get 2Mg + 2H2O → Mg(OH)2 + MgH2, but my web searches so far haven't confirmed this combination. I imagine it would be hard to catch all the hydrogen gas from the first reaction, and hydrogen gas released into the atmosphere could work as an indirect greenhouse gas by increasing the life time of methane. Hydrogen reacts with the hydroxyl radical (OH), which would otherwise react with and eliminate methane, to form H2O. Exhaust often contains greenhouse gases, but isn't identical with such, and typically contains nitrogen from the air used in the combustion. You can't get any hydrogen out of an exhaust that contains the greenhouse gas CO2 but no water vapour.
I talked to plasma kinetics last week, and the plan is to roll out their technology in stationary power stations and backup generation first in order to stabilize the H2 grid in 2023. Once that is established, PK will enter the vehicle market. Exciting news for our Zero emissions mission.
has he? this is a technology that is being worked on. Thuderf00t isn't a PHD scientist ... we talk about emerging and interesting tech... we don't have a horse in the race.
@@TwoBitDaVinci Yes he has, indirectly... It's more about the rubbish Plasma Kinetics is claiming with the Hydrogen 'film storage' and this video gets included in the bust. And FYI, he actually has a PhD, in chemistry, which is quite relevant here...
0:25 Because right now most hydrogen production comes from fossil fuels. What we need is a space tower or tether that can suck hydrogen from the upper atmosphere to the surface for processing. Better yet - use the low pressure aloft to suck CO2 from the surface at points of exhaust. Use a turbine to capture the energy of the flowing CO2 to compress the hydrogen which pushes itself back to the surface. Less energy to move products, the only downside is you have a turbine/compressor with a lot of moving parts 60 miles high in the atmosphere, so maintenance is going to be a real PITA.
@@Michel-7.7.7I suggest you not say stuff like that unless you're willing to point out the errors of reasoning by solid state hydrogen storage researchers. Can you do that?
A lot of break thru tech has been discovered but the U.S. government has classified the patents so they can not be utilized by the public .. In 2017 there were over 5,700 classified patents
Tape may solve the storage issue, still got to do something about the platinum and other extremely expensive metals needed by currently known efficient electric fuel cell technologies.
As with all the new "game changing" technologies like Solid State batteries and ultra-capacitors. We should believe it once we see it in production. it doesn't affect what we already have in the here and now. If it's really that game changing it would naturally find its way into our every-day devices - unless it's killed in the cradle by vested interests.
Ever see the flamethrower blasting the creepy crawlies out of the wheel well compartment scene, in the movie; 5th Element? Once the crew clears the critters, they take a fuel cell and swap it for a new fresh one. Bam, new cassette cell on demand to power your rent-a-gravi-ship, or the next gen 'hover-byrd' razor scooter sports model
This is a very nice technology breakthrough. If it's in the lab now, then we can estimate it will always be about five years from public consumption. My main problem is availability. One nice advantage Plug-in electric vehicles have over gasoline, for example; is that you don' have to go somewhere and pump fuel. Electricity is everywhere, and in some cases, it's FREE. Even when it's not free, it's cheap on a per-mile basis. Cheaper than anything you can pump. Trust me on that. Even if you're pumping hydrogen. Even if you're getting your hydrogen on a cartridge, like you have here, it's going to cost more than electricity. There will be other use-cases where cost is not a factor, like military vehicles on remote bases, for example. Or spacecraft probes all over the solar system and beyond. I.E. places where you don't necessarily have a Conoco station every 3 miles. I like this tech, but let's be realistic: It won't replace electric charging stations. It won't even supplement them. All good wishes.
sandy munro says been around more than a few years in fact the company started making it in the 1900s and ceased in 2000 and put it into the too hard file and brought out again as covid silenced the world and gave them time to play with it again
Nothing about electricity is cheap, much less free. You can get a car-mile with a cup of fossil fuel. Or, you can convert each cup of fuel to steam/generation/conversion/distribution/conversion/storage to maybe 1/8th mile. This, given the sum of every single efficiency-loss in the process. All of this concealed for the cause, but it will dawn on you one day. And I'll add to this thinking, so you know, taxes are never free!
@@mikecr4916 fine, let's follow this line of thinking. You connect the solar panel you own to the electric car you own. The sun is shining on the electric panel, and the car is charging; who are you actively paying for that electricity?
Thank you For Supporing the Show! Checkout Truebill today by heading to www.truebill.com/TwoBitdaVinci
graphene hematene water powered batteries using nanotechnology and the electrokinetic streaming effect. now made by strategic elements in australia, taipei university in taiwan, and IIT-guwahati in india!
Dude I love that you guys are promoting STEM topics but please get your facts right.
NASA is *NOT* just experimenting with hydrogen fuel cells it was what they used in the Apollo program to go to the moon. NASA picked the hydrogen/oxygen fuel cells so that the Astronauts had water supply. If they had done as the Russians proposed with Soyuz, which used solar panels to generate electricity then they would have had to carry all the water that the astronauts needed.
*It was one of the Oxygen tanks in that Apollo system that exploded on Apollo 13.*
sory my dude H2 is not hard to produce, you only need water electrolisys. May be hard to store has a liquid, no more then any other fossil gas we already use.
Synce electric and fossil energy/fuel idiots won't give up on it, and because the least expensive solution is to continue to use combustion, the next logical step is to make hybrid less polutive fuel with hydrogen and fossil fuel, obviously using catalyzers for the emissions we can reduce a lot the mess we'r in.
H2 can be cooled and pressurized, obviously it has a cost, but so does any other power systems we know. The question is can things complement each other, obviously through countries legislation and enforcement.
@Hexagram 32nd Good point keep pushing it.
thanks for showing this. even if its more expensive the ups are so much better than oil or batteries.
"one cassette would offer roughly the same amount of storage as a 5000 psi hydrogen tank..."
Yeah but what SIZE 5000 psi tank?! That statement is unfortunate.
Hah! While fair, I assume it was a reference to storage density, not volume. It does sound rather dumb though 😁
he gives capacity at 8;41
Use your brain, densest form of a gas is liquid, let's suppose that you could liquify hydrogen at room temperature, the most you're going to get on a CD sized disc would be a couple of mls, that might get you to the end of your drive if it's a short one. This concept is totally bogus, and it's shocking how many people are being duped.
@@oktc68 hurr durr
@@walk-with-Walz
Okay, and?
I think you might have been trolled with this one?
There's rather important bits of data missing, and by their own admission metal hydride is significantly better for energy density, and that's not revolutionising anything.
Metal hydride is heavy compared to the amount of hydrogen it can store. Atm it is about 6%wt I think. So the energy density of metal hydrides is not that high. I dont know enough about this solid state hydrogen storage, if its more or less dense than metal hydride. What data are you reffering? I realy do want to learn more about this!
@@paprika1716 It's been a while... but I think they have a pdf on their website. Its full of words without saying much, but didn't paint their product in a terribly flattering light.
@@anticarrrot I already read this pdf. I can confirm that they dont provide any usefull information. I realy want to find out if this tech is real.
The only informations i found is on their website, the mentioned pdf, and three interviews on youtube. Nothing more... I even cralewd through science databases to find anything reffering this kind of tech. Yeah there are articles about Mg as a metal-hydride storage, but nothing as thin films or that you need light to release the hydrogen.
@@paprika1716 I was wondering if the power to drive the laser was equal to the power being released in the process and how it could be over unity,i guess we will just have to wait and find out if it becomes available.
If the tape gets jammed, we’ll need to bring back another “old” technology: a #2 PENCIL!
No, we need not. No one ever used a #2 pencil to rewind cassette tapes, it was always a pen which is a bit larger.
Please stop perpetuating this myth.
We could have a blind person on every street corner selling such devices?
@@lesliefranklin1870 there aren't enough blind people, should we start blinding some?
@@TheAllMightyGodofCod there are a lot, blinded my Musk ;)
“I once saw John wind three tapes in a bar with a pencil. A f-king pencil “
The Type 4 composite vessel used in the Toyota mirai has an energy density of 2247Wh/kg, although this is technically as heat energy. You would also have to account for a 50-60% fuel cell efficiency and the weight of the fuel cell and subsystems but the stats for lithium ion you used are for cell level density and in reality with bus bars, cooling systems, etc they are more like 167Wh/kg. For Liquid hydrogen vessels are more like 2956Wh/kg.
Orkney in Scotland has wind farms that, when they need to be disconnected for grid balancing, are switched over to producing hydrogen instead. Can't get much cleaner than that.
This is the way I was thinking! Wind Turbine turning ocean water into Hydrogen
I wonder if you could put a plot of farmland near a hydrogen plant and burn it, would it rain on the farmland? I mean if you put it downwind of said plant.
@@backseatpolitician Long term it would be cheaper to devirt water to the farm from a river. As you can never predict the wind
There are various ways of temporarily storing excess power from solar or wind farms. In Finland, there is a company that is storing it as heat in underground sand. There are also plants that compress air. This is especially useful when you don't have a ready supply of fresh water to split into hydrogen and oxygen.
@@rimc8783 If you try to use electrolysis to split sea water to make hydrogen, you will also split the salt and make chlorine gas. And that's some nasty stuff.
Hydrogen is for 1% of cases where batteries are not usable (airplanes, ships).
Artificial methane is what you want for those, not hydrogen. Hydrogen sucks for anything that doesn't produce it "fresh".
One data point that would really help to evaluate this as a potential replacement is the weight to power ratio of a hydrogen based cartridge system vs. a Tesla EV battery pack.
If there are significant weight savings using a tape based hydrogen system vs. how heavy lithium ion battery packs are, then hydrogen tape power to weight ratio per kw/h becomes a real game changer in automotive, space, and flight based industries.
Energy on tape? Get reel!
How about the Specific Energy (KWh/Kg) for this scheme?
Any substrate holding any kind of fuel will reduce both Specific Energy and Energy Density (KWh/m3) WRT pure molecular H2.
It must have (potentially) better parameters than electrochemical batteries to be worthy of implementation.
Word. And it just won't; it ain't possible.
600-700kwh/kg
@@screwsnat5041
LOL
kW/kg is not specific energy. kW is power. The video gives Wh/kg, which is energy density. You get power by using energy. The faster you use the energy (as in by driving faster or up hill), the more power you are extracting.
Would you like your answer in African elephants or Olympic swimming pools?
the fact that all "negative" comments are deleted whenever it states the truth of how this isn't real 🤦
Thank You Ricky for listening to people like me blow my horn about this Scottsdale company.
Do you even fact check the claims of these inventors? Hint: You've been conned. This technology is impossible on so many levels, which you would have known if you actually had bothered to fact check their claims even a little bit. So how many of your other videos have not been fact checked?
Wow! just wow! A channel with 236K subscribers and a verified status can be this scientifically illiterate !! It just boggles the mind as to how much garbage is out there on youtube!
4:50 hydrogen isn't positively charged. It has one proton and one electron = neutral
When hydrogen loses its election it's still called hydrogen (H+) even though it's just a proton.
Nickel Metal Hydride or Nickel Hydrogen batteries NiMH already use Hydrogen ions like this, with a lanthanum nickel alloy electrode & potassium hydroxide electrolyte. There are even LSD or low self discharge NiMH called Sanyo Eneloop that hold their charge state in storage with very low losses for over 1 year // there are also super charge SCIB variants of NiMH with much better peak current performance like LIPO used in some electric bicycles made by Sanyo // noteworthy that 2.4v cells of Lithium Titanate last 23+ years in solar powered wrist watches made by Casio & Citizen of Japan & could be use in phones or other consumer off the shelf mobile or portable electronics // Sony for example also invented & commercialized Lithium Cobalt Oxide Carbon or common Li-Ion batteries back in 1991-93 for the Sony Walkman //
@@amalieemmynoether992 No ... it is called a "hydrogen ion".
@@comment8767 you're correct except inside stars and in space where it's still called hydrogen....but then astrophysicist call everything heavier than helium a metal so maybe they shouldn't be trusted with naming particles 🤣
Try electrolysis of water and allow the gases to collect. Where does the hydrogen collect? Same principle here!
the scientific illiteracy in this video is horrific!
Sharing scam fakenews should be punished.
How much light energy does it require to liberate the hydrogen from the tape compared to the amount of energy you get back from that hydrogen via a fuel cell or combustion?
Ty thats a good question! I tried to find an answer but I failed.
@@paprika1716, fuel cells and hydrogen combustion are already not-very-efficient, so it seems iffy that the total “well-to-wheel” efficiency would be very impressive.
@@mr88cet Yeah Combustion has a efficiency of ~30% no matter the fuel. I'm talking from fuel to wheel right now. But there are also engine designs with an efficiency of 50%, but this is not my point here. A fuel cell can have 70% and more. Sure its less then battery, but at least we dont have to manufacture a battery (thats the point here). The fact that you have to store hydrogen seperatly worsens the "well-to-wheel" efficiency again. But for hydrogen storage we have a variety of different technologies, some require more or less energy for storage and release. If we find a cheap way to store hydrogen, the fuel cell gets more competitive to the pure battery (car).
@@paprika1716, there are indeed engine designs that can get 50% efficiency, and in fact quite a bit more than that, but not of the sort that can be put into a car. Those in electric power plants can get around 70%ish, but only because they are *huge* - loosely speaking, because they produce energy “in bulk” .
It also means the max speed of hydrogen produce will be limited by the power of the laser used. So now this system needs the cartridge. A hydrogen gas tight deck to run the tape reel to reel, a kilowatt laser and it's cooling system and a pump system to collect the hydrogen and pressurize it to a usable pressure for the fuel cell. Oh and it had to be designed so swapping a cartridge can't contaminate the fuel system or require a purging of the system. Plus all this has to have similar reliability, convenience, form factor, weight and cost of current ICE or battery power trains. A issue simpler hydrogen systems have yet to overcome and is still a drag on battery based cars
I like the storage method that doesn't require high pressure or really cold temperatures.
The round trip efficiency going from electricity to green hydrogen and back is less than 40%, slightly better than today's gas engines, and on par with light diesel, Batteries are better than 90%.
Do you think it’s possible to convert hydrogen gas on demand for a electric system for a resident? So use solar panels to convert the gas and pump into a generator and battery storage unit and inverter, would that be a viable option?. Thanks
@@michigannative2951 Yes, but you would need a larger solar array because the inefficiency during electrolysis and running an engine (maybe 35%).
Lets assume you use 10KWH a day. Half of that use occurs when you are getting power from the solar panels. Half from storage.
With direct to battery storage, you would need to generate 5.55KWH to account for the losses in the battery charger and inverter. You would need an array that produces 10.55KWH per day.
With hydrogen direct to electricity (no battery or inverter), you would need to generate 14.3KWH to account for the losses during electrolysis and in the engine. You would need an array that produces 19.3KWH.
Add the battery an inverter, you would need 15.9KWH for storage, so a 20.9KWH solar array.
Way below 40%
Batteries have shit density though, you spend all your energy moving your battery around.
@@christophorus9235 Lead-acid batteries- yes.
Lithium ion batteries aren't that bad. And large packs allow to regenerate energy when braking efficiently. Small batteries wouldn't be able to do that efficiently... and this tape wouldn't be able to recuperate energy at all.
Breakthroughs in energy density allow to store more energy in lighter package. We are already attacking 300Wh/kg with lithium ion batteries. Lithium sulfur stabilized by sugar, which is recent development have theoretical energy densities 5 times higher than lithium ion batteries.
Pie in the sky I would say, the logistics of shipping the tape will massively impact its efficiency, then there's weight of the equipment and housings in the car and the fuel cell overall it will likely add up to more weight than today's batteries
The storage medium is a metal hydride.
The temperatures needed to release the hydrogen are somewhere around 350°C, I believe.
Seems like an overall net loss of energy.
And it requires a laser, remember the light mentioned to release. And the substrate the hydrate is placed on has to be thin, flexible, strong, high heat resistant, cheap oh and light weight. Polymers can't handle the heat, price eliminates exotic tech, metals fail on weight and remaining flexible after hundreds of cycles. Then you have to be able to bond the hydrate to it in a way the flexing and friction of winding and unwinding won't let it fall off. But anything added to bond it has to meet the same criteria as the substrate and is more dead weight as far as holding hydrogen.
There is this technology but this company is obvious scam.
Many things need to be known before it can be used in cars, how big are the tapes? How fast is it at discharging? If the only way to effectively recharge them is by swapping out and putting a fresh set in, how exactly will that happen? It sounds like the tapes are gonna be huge…
About the diameter of an old record for cars n 1 to 2 inches deep
They can b made at diff sizes n uses.
in the video there it is mentioned the kg or weight comparison, in other videos the weight is far less that current fuel tanks and far less than ev battery packs. the release of Hyd gas is instant when the lazer emits. although I am concerned with the tape being stable enough while driving. there is a video, E for Electric where the company owner explains all these sceptical questions
Its certainly interesting. The one thing that I know is that the conversion from hydrogen to electricity is an expensive piece of kit, at the moment. If this can be resolved then it would really help.
there are still a lot of issues to work out with hydrogen as a fuel but this is a step in the right direction, they are using platinum in fuel cell which is expensive but there may be alternatives.
What is the expected efficiency in conversion to mechanical energy? Gas has ridiculously high energy density, but its coversion efficiency is very low - hence the rise of BEV's.
yeah 2 % of the market with heavy govt subsidiation. Not really a rise.
You are famous now. Let the Thunderfoot deluge commence. Pick your topics more carefully next time.
Battery capacity will likely double in the next 15-20 years and require very little flammable chemicals and uses electricity which is found everywhere. Vs Hydrogen who's definition of storage probably includes the word "leaky", is highly flammable, highly explosive, might give you 2x more driving range, and you hope the next refill station has one available.
The same could be said about hydrogen availability and storage on the next 15-20 years and thats not so different than other kind of gas used nowadays
Like propane tanks acceptance when first introduced 50+ yrs ago
Were do you get that ?
@@jacquesdobatien3927 Hydrogen is much more difficult than propane. They almost completely stopped using hydrogen for space launches because its higher thrust benefit wasn't a good enough reason to deal with its storage problems.
I think I missed something, Hydrogen is not positively charged, as any element it has zero electric charge, of course, it can form ions with positive or negative charges, but those are other chemical species known as hydrogen ion (H+) and hydride (H-)
Did you get any specifications from them that can let us evaluate it?
This seems like metal hydride hydrogen storage in a slightly different form. So how does it differ from traditional metal-hydrid storage?
Still sounds like a really complex battery to me, is the "pack level" density or power comparable to lithium?
This is a real technology but may not be a real company, there is notes of it from ou national labs but the company shows nothing.
Sandy Monroe says it is real. But yes there are many huddles/ questions to solve in a new energy economy
Why hasn't Hydrogen taken off? Two reasons, as the technology gets better, cheaper and more accessible. The person in the street will be able to access it and that means the main source of "ingredients" falls from the sky! They cannot regulate that, or tax it and that's the reason why no government will ever allow it, to ever become the source of fuel for the masses. Big business currently has its sticky fingers in the pie of petrochemicals and deriving petrol/gasoline from crude oil.
At 7:20 there is a false statement: no energy to extract the solid H2 into a gas. Are you telling us that high-powered lasers consume no energy?
Sounds good. I expect Hydrogen systems to be more used in shipping and air transport, so a weight/volume comparison to the diesel engines in freighter would be mice.
This tech might be ideal for work sites. Useful for smaller types of vehicles like forklifts or the like.
Since the technology is so good in this so called absorbing freely available hydrogen, I am sure they can easily and simply tweak the amazing micro thin film to absorb deuterium and even some tritium that are also available freely in open air and then ouput some fusion energy as a side dish. /sarc I wish the creaters do some homework before dumping scam tech on youtube viewers. This so called hydrogen capture from air is so wrong on so many levels.
The inventor of these cassetes said that the cassetes can be used multiple cycles without degradation, but the the deuterium builds up because can't released by the light, so once in a while they need to empty it, but there is no problem because the price they get of the deuterium pays off that operaction and the recycling too. That is why the can claim 100% recyclable
You would need somewhere around half or more of the volume of a Tesla battery pack in cassette tapes in your car to have an equivalent amount of energy. That’s an awful lot of cassettes of the size that were shown. I think you’d have to have a mega cassette that could be pulled out and replaced quickly. And the rate at which hydrogen was removed from the tape would have to be really fast, the tape would have to be flying past the lasers shining on it.
Please make this the norm for all vehicles. EV's are not well thought out and draining our resources. They are helping us bridge the gap between fossil fuel and sustainable hydrogen production but they're already causing massive problems because of all the batteries that need to be produced
Unsubbed. You clearly have no business discussing anything scientific with this level of understanding of basic physics.
This is a very interesting technology. The video kind of glossed over the actual production of the hydrogen that is put on the tape. Perhaps an answer would be something like the "solar dome" France and Saudi Arabia are designing. My understanding is that it is supposed to use sunlight to convert salty sea water into hydrogen and fresh water. Perhaps an idea for a future video?
I've heard about a couple of additional issues with this system that might have to be addressed:
* I understand that currently the hydrogen leaks off the tape quickly. This means that they could not be stored for a long time and would have to be used shortly after installation.
* I've heard that these tapes are a couple of hundred kilograms each. Clearly, this is not something a normal driver would want to swap out themselves.
Please check ThunderF00t video
Use solar energy to boil water to create the steam necessary for the process. Use fresnel lenses in sunny, hot locations to boil the water. Could also use the same plant for ocean water desalination
I agree
I have done it !
Was their Stanley Myers car running on hydrogen 25years ago????
So the short version seems to be that they figured out how to use magnesium instead of palladium to store hydrogen and are using a tape form factor to maximize surface area so loading the materialworks faster. Which is pretty cool. If this works, it sounds similar to the battery swapping method of recharging EVs from a consumer perspective. Though from a logistical perspective you obviously can't just connect to the electric grid but instead have to physically ship cartridges. I mean if you look at all the charging stations popping up everywhere it's pretty obvious why EVs are the future and hydrogen is going to mostly be a dead end. But this could be useful for niches like long-haul commercial vehicles and aircraft where the infrastructure can be planned around specific routes instead of needing to be available everywhere.
Hi Rick
How does this tape react to a naked flame?
In the case of a collision with a chevvy bolt for example
Causing a fire
How volatile would it be?
This is a very good question! Since it’s not under pressure and enclosed in a housing… I’m thinking it could be fairly safe. But something I’ll ask about and cover in the future. Man you guys ask amazing questions!
@@TwoBitDaVinci thank you you give great information
That's just cruel!!!
😂
A hydrogen filled film? Really? Yet another scam, being pushed on investors. I'm glad I'm not one of 'em, but screw them, they deserve to lose their money. Why do people fall for this kind of crap? Ahh... stupidity. Gotcha. 🤣🤣🤣
I just saw the creator of the sweet hydrogen tape deck say that when it is recycled it gives one of the special hydrogens that you said before is used to make the amazing material for batteries.( light doesn't dislodge the special hydrogen from the tape, which builds up,reducing efficiency, till it has to be recycled.
This solve some issues of storage, but not all. There is continuously the issue with the extremely low efficiency. Forget that tech apart from industry...
In your opening remarks you claim that hydrogen, when used as fuel, "...emits nothing but water". Is this really true ? If you burn hydrogen in "air" you could easily produce nitrous oxide which seems to be the polluter of greatest concern at present.
Depends on the combustion temperature and pressure. 1300C will definitely causes NOX evolution
"extremely flammable' is *really* underselling it. It burns at ~7000 feet per second. When I was a kid I tried making a hydrogen candle. Let's just say it didn't go well considering it explodes at an insanely wide ratio of hydrogen/oxygen. Hydrogen as energy storage is a terrible idea if efficiency is something you care about and even worse if you want long term storage. Personally the way I'd prefer to keep my hydrogen around is as methanol. I wish we focused more on fuel cells that use it vs hydrogen since you can store it using methods we've had for thousands of years, the bottle.
Yes, absolutely agree. Gumpert has started producing his methanol cars
I would be interested to see how long they can store them "charged." If they can't maintain the hydrogen for long term storage it might be problematic. Otherwise it seems like really cool tech. If it helps to remove some of the harmful stuff from the exhaust gasses then that is a Win Win I think. You might even be able to incentivize companies to install the capture devices in their smoke stacks. I think it. I hope they succeed.
The vid from e for energy channel i watched when i 1st heard about this tech n then i watched some interviews with the creator
N thats one o the beauties of this tech if its as claimed
Being solid state it IS stable n makes a better alternative for energy storage not just a fuel source
One application could be to stabilise renewable based grid
When theres surplus, create the solid state hydro.
Thered be no infrastructure costs such as a new type of petrol station
These tapes would operate in real world much like swapping out a superser gas cannister in the 80s n can b stored in shipment containers.
I wonder if this concept couldn’t be used for co2 extraction from smoke stack? But only one big permanent loop passing amongst exhaust then eventually out a gland to the lower pressure area where CO2 would be lasered off and removed (compressed for injection I suppose) for sequestration.
I heard that Plasma Knetics is working on a device that includes a spinning disk made of lead. When they point a laser at the disk, it turns to gold. It’s still in early development and investors are needed.
Ok as the numbers show, the energy density isn’t great… but easy to store a few more in the trunk or refuel with a quick pit stop at the tape store.
Long storage life potentially too, so if your mothball a vehicle with the tape function, it would still be able to power up many years latter with a fresh starting battery to power the tape light laser etc
What I like is that there’s no compression/decompression of the H2 required, nor freezing/vaporization of the liquified H2. This saves a ton of energy, money, and materials in the infrastructure and equipment normally used for these purposes.
All these savings help negate the disadvantage of the low energy density of H2 stored on tape.
Yea, you would have to haul swappable tape canisters to the refueling stations, but today you have to haul the compressed or liquefied H2 to refueling stations. Alternatively, to deliver compressed or liquefied H2, a very expensive and elaborate piping infrastructure could be built out to deliver the H2 to refueling stations. This is what they’re proposing in Europe. But the swappable canisters could be refueled at the refueling stations regardless of how the H2 is delivered there, e.g., trucked, piped, or produced on site from electrolyzer’s.
But if the refueling site can’t have raw H2 sourced at the site, there can be a network of swappable H2 tape canister sites built out. The canister weighs 800 pounds I was told, therefore it would need a machine to swap it into/out the vehicle. (This would be analogous to BEVs swapping the battery, like NIO proposes.)
But the 800 pound canister would take a passenger car 1500 miles, I was told.
Still not sure if the laser uses more than a nominal amount of energy to release the H2 from tape.
But I suppose we, who are rooting for this technology, (and who pray we’re not getting scammed yet again by some cockamamie claim 😄), need to see a working prototype to validate all the excitement.
The government was actually stealing the patents and found out they could not do it without this company. The company refused and the gov took away their ability to do anything with this product. Glad they are back.
It is a complete scam.
Thanks for showing us alternative energy sources. It's sounds interesting but still a long way off.
All sounds good, really good, specially the sizes of these things, you could have a LOT of "cassetes" (if those are up to scale), just imagine you could have a bunch of those on the floor of your trunk. Depending on how much they allow you to drive for each one, you could simply change them once a month or something, or just replace the ones that are fully depleted.
Because H2 in the current form isn't neither cheap or clean (except green H2), you even have to change the H2 tanks every 15 years...
BUT, its all about economics, lets see if this solution is financially viabel vs battery EVs.
H2 isn't literally the most common element in the observable universe. It IS the most abundant. There is NOTHING literal about it.
If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
Very interesting indeed. The prospect of having a few dozen discs or tape cassettes, purchasable everywhere, enabling drivers picking up fuel in less than 5 min unless there is a line, sounds great
Or being able to have extra decks, for when driving for more range, like a gas can!
To be clear, this technology can pick up hydrogen wherever it is. There's hydrogen in fossil fule emissions, so it can pickup hydrogen there, but it could just as easily be charged by electrolysis, or at a dairy farm.
That doesn't really clear things up. Gas or fossil fuel emissions covers a lot of chemicals. Is it talking about methane? Hydrocarbons? Water? Does it need to be heated? Does it require energy input? Even the web site just brushes over that part.
It does not need to be heated, does not require energy input, and once again, it pickups elemental hydrogen. Whether that elemental hydrogen was made by burning hydrocarbons, electrolysis, or by a cow's intestines is irrelevant.
@@jef_3006 Do you mean it can pick up hydrogen from hydrogen gas (H2), or do you mean it also can pick up hydrogen bonded to oxygen in H2O? Have you got knowledge about this purported technology from elsewhere than this video?
Fossil fuel exhaust gases do not normally contain hydrogen gas. If the fuel is natural gas, which is mostly methane, the reaction is:
CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O
@@anderslvolljohansen1556 It picks up H2, gaseous Hydrogen. And yes, in a perfect world there isn't any Hydrogen in the exhaust of something which burns Methane. But we live in the real world, and here there is always a trace amount of gaseous Hydrogen in any Hydrocarbon emissions.
@@jef_3006 If there are trace amounts of H2 in a fossil fuel exhaust stream, would you find enough of the H2 molecules to serve a practical purpose?
Good info on hydrogen we still have issues with fossil fuel companies wanting to control as well since they cannot control renewable energy. The inventor of thin film solar Unisolar, Stan Ovshinsky, invented a solid storage system for hydrogen so not under pressure a while back before he died. There was a demonstration car he put it in and it worked. This tech sounds familiar with his. I am sure the government has stifled inovations like this before.
And this will be sold to you at a significant mark up at stations located everywhere, I think not!
I think this is actually why this technology could be successful. Private companies would love to have you as a customer giving recurring income which is why they would be incentivised to push the technology. And it would generate jobs too.
Solar panels on your own property generating your own electricity charging your own car is a nightmare for the capitalists because they can't get recurring money from you.
@@Mnkmnkmnk generating jobs is pointless if the system/product is inefficient. E.G we could all give ourselves jobs gathering and cutting fire wood to cook dinner, but why would we when the electricity costs 11 cents. It would be inefficient.
You can recharge spaceships with hydrogen out in space so we can build bigger and go further in our solar system.
Especially if the hydrogen used in a fusion drive system to make Helium as a waste product that saved for additional uses as a lubricant // in very low loss high pressure bearings & as a refridgerant & coolant in small solid sate fission reactors & Stirling engine generators like the Kilopower from NASA // & other classified MMR or micro module nuclear reactors made by the Pentagon contractors for remote military bases "shipping container units" that make hot air, hot water & electricity 24/7 automatically, sealed with no maintenance of the core for 10+ years other than inspections
Stanley Meyer's on-board electrolysis technology, Daniel Dingel's, Denny Kline's also John Kanzius' electrolysis through radio waves, all ways to propel internal combustion engines that are already in existence which are in most vehicles. Much simpler solution it seems to me..
The problem is most of these inventors end up dead before they can bring this concepts to the mainstream.
Reguarding hydrogen as a fuel with just water as its exhaust and the statement "No greenhouse gasses"... technically water vapor released, as the exhaust, is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. Granted, water vapor doesn't have as long of an atmospheric half life.
it also create a cloud cover that reflect sunlight
There's that....
Plus, it's not a "fuel", but a "storage medium" ! an inefficient one.
@@rogerstarkey5390 Yup, but All fuels are a form of energy storage. And here, fuels are substances oxidized, efficent or inefficient for the energy released douring oxidation.
Be it In a fuel cell or a internal combustion engine or rocket engine 2(H2) fuel is oxidized by the oxidizer 1(O2) resulting in (H2O) as the waste product.
sources of steam that are renewable energy are nuclear, wood and biomass. All producing power and steam that is wasted after passing through turbine generators. Before condensing this process could extract hydrogen. Even current carbon based resources like natural gas turbines, coal plants and refineries could supply huge amounts of hydrogen with this technology. It is a huge step in clean and unlimited power.
H2 storage improvements are great, but the main knocks on h2 are production cost and environmental problems associated with producing it (which you note.) When h2 production issues are solved, that's when this storage tech can take off. Niche until then.
Concrete products are a massive proportion of greenhouse exhaust gasses along with steel production, this could be used to offset to 90% of its emissions thus creating almost net zero . Let's not forget windfarms need massive amounts of Concrete in there sites.
EV's distributed, home charging infrastructure IS the holy grail for sustainable energy solution as far as the automobile is concerned. Only gas company and their infrastructure (i.e. gas station) want to promote centrally refined, station dispensed model to keep their investment relevant. In terms of the source of energy, only "IF" hydrogen fuel cell / storage can be created / distributed in environmentally sustainable and cost efficient manner, it can be used in some commercial / industrial cases as a power source.
Thanks Ricky for covering this. You are the best!!!
My pleasure!! 🙏
3:27 Storing hydrogen under high pressure in itself is not as big of an issue, and is much less of a safety risk than you suggest. To assess the safety issue for compression of gas, you look at the release of the compression energy when the pressure suddenly drops from high pressure to 1 bar. From basic thermodynamics E = p dV, you can easily derive that the compression energy of any gas, including hydrogen, is logarithmic, which implies that the compression energy in a gas is mostly stored at low pressures. The compression energy going from 1 bar to 30 bar is about the same as going from 30 bar to 700 bar. Then, the compression energy at 700 bar is still less than 10% of the combustion energy. So an explosion of a tank with 5 kg H2 at 2 bar or 700 bar (a typical amount of H2 on a vehicle) barely makes a difference, the damage will be caused by the chemical energy stored in the hydrogen, and not the very much lower compression energy you have at 700 bar. That said, storing at 700 bar definitely has issues, but these are more related to materials that can be, or rather, cannot be used for such technology. So the real safety issue with H2 is the fact that you have stored an amount of 5 kg of H2 on a vehicle. Driving around with these 5 kg of H2 is dangerous, irrespective of the pressure you have stored it at. By the way, the combustion energy of 5 kg of H2 is still quite a bit lower than that of 50 L diesel, but on the other hand, it is easier to release that energy from H2 as compared to diesel. These are the safety considerations to be made.
One bullet makes a Tesla explode, but does nothing to the tank in a Mirai.
I’m pretty sure that means we already have hydrogen tape powered weapons
Almost certainly
In a fuel cell there is no pollution when it is burned in an internal combustion engine temperature gets hot enough to form nitrogen oxides. So it depends on how you use it but the biggest problem store enough to go 400 miles
Storage is the main problem for hydrogen. But other problems have to be handled too. Magnesium is a fuel that is hard to fire extinct. If hydrogen is released, explosions can occur. But this technology can be important for many things, because hydrogen is very useful and abundant.
The original title/thumb kept me from tuning in. The new title "Forget tanks...." and the less busy thumb (with the cybrtrk) is much better. And the hydrogen mix tape sounds pretty cool too
Use depleted uranium encapsulated in a aluminum + beryllium coat canisters immersed in water would percolate Hydrogen
Yes, but using methane reformation to create hydrogen is energy intensive, you need energy to liberate the hydrogen. Then there's transfer and storage costs. The problem isn't how efficient or energy dense hydrogen itself is, it's the cost of creating hydrogen that needs to be addressed on a massive scale. Cheaper just dumping the energy directly into a battery, fewer conversion losses.
Stan Meyers built a water fuelled hydrogen powered dune buggy 30 years ago made on board using voltages and frequencies tuned to the covalent bonds of the water molecule. Using an internal combustion engine! Too cheap clean and simple for mainstream use then and now. He thought he was saving the world from the oil embargo but fuel industry said no.
This would be an absolute game changer. The "cassettes" could all be produced with green energy and shipped throughout the US with green energy. Think about if your EV had a hydrogen fuel cell, could your car then power your house? That would be the quickest way to 100% renewable energy. Can't the ford f150 already power your house? Then why couldn't your fuel cell EV power your house?
I think the guy that was a whistle blower on area 51 has a corvette that runs on hydrogen and is stored in a similar manner. Apparently it's illegal to sell the manufacturing instrument but it is legal if you build it yourself.
Sounds a lot better way forward than batteries that take time to recharge. However oil will still be needed for lubricants and manufacturing.
Could it not harvest the H2 off gassing of nuclear reactors that would mean that we are using one of the byproducts of the reactors (superheated steam) that’s what makes them explode when they go critical
Yes this tech would be harnessed waste gases from other processes
@@TwoBitDaVinci thank you for the like and I’m a firm believer I. The future being powered by nuclear and hydrogen technology working together to make a greener world and a far more efficient one at that love the videos keep up the great work
An interesting idea that is "still under development". Maybe they can find a way to make it work. But I doubt we will see this in the near future.
"as we mentioned above" wtf, bizarre skeumorphism.
High pressure hydrogen is not particularly dangerous - similar to other high pressure gasses with flammability concerns. It's safer than petrol really.
If a hydrogen tank is punctured, the hydrogen may ignite, but will get colder as the pressure drops. It will likely not explode as the very light gas quickly dissipates & it will not pool for the same reason.
This has been tested, look for hydrogen gas tank tests, or hydrogen gar crash tests.
Many decades ago we used town gas instead of natural gas. Town gas was 50% H2. It worked fine as a heating, cooking fuel, why don't we start mixing H2 with our nat gas supplies?
Energy will need to be spend for both hydration and dehydration of the "tape" , how much is the big unknown.
As far as I've read on the Plasma Kinetics site the intend is not to "charge" the tapes with exhaust flu gases (including waste incineration) since in any way those would be pretty much be almost devoid of free Hydrogen instead the mentioned use is with gas emissions from garbage dumps, ...etc. however there it will highly depend on the state of decomposition where free Hydrogen gas is present and that is a very narrow time frame (initial anaerobic phase ) that coincides with the highest CO2 content in the decomposition gas as well so meh....
To me a lot of claims especially when looking at "less cost, better than competing tech" while trying to underscore with "government suppressed" sensationalism, the latter of which IMO would not be necessary if the tech is as good as they claim.
This sounds like a solution for special applications such as aircraft, military vehicles, and heavy equipment (eg. Mining, construction, long distance trains, agricultural tractors ect.) And other applications where recharging batteries is impractical. Honestly if this technology is to have a good future I think the company should be looking into how it can fit into the world of energy storage far more than trying to run vehicles especially light duty ones.
You'd need some form of heat engine producing steam.
Not practical.
Two Bit da Vinci... Two Bit da Vinci... indeed
It can produce a small amt of hydrogen to act as a catalyst for improving combustion in engines (30 to 100 percent milage improvement). It can be recharged using electrolysis of water.
I would suspect that just using more gas in an ICE would be far cheaper. Also changing the amount of explosive force in a cylinder might reduce its life or destroy it (a friend once ran his lawnmower on home made alcohol and blew the piston out of the block). Overall I suspect EV's will still be far cheaper over their life time.
Not properly explained: 4:49 "When exposed to greenhouse gases like exhaust from say a smokestack, the film can capture metric tons of pure hydrogen from the steam [...]"
Exhaust does not in general contain pure hydrogen gas (H2). Exhaust sometimes contains water vapour which is H2O.
Magnesium can be made to react with steam:
Mg + 2H2O → Mg(OH)2 + H2
I guess that if you add at lease twice as much magnesium, you might in theory combine
Mg + H2 → MgH2
with the above and get
2Mg + 2H2O → Mg(OH)2 + MgH2,
but my web searches so far haven't confirmed this combination.
I imagine it would be hard to catch all the hydrogen gas from the first reaction, and hydrogen gas released into the atmosphere could work as an indirect greenhouse gas by increasing the life time of methane. Hydrogen reacts with the hydroxyl radical (OH), which would otherwise react with and eliminate methane, to form H2O.
Exhaust often contains greenhouse gases, but isn't identical with such, and typically contains nitrogen from the air used in the combustion. You can't get any hydrogen out of an exhaust that contains the greenhouse gas CO2 but no water vapour.
Solar-powered electrolysis plant for supply, there you have all green :D
I talked to plasma kinetics last week, and the plan is to roll out their technology in stationary power stations and backup generation first in order to stabilize the H2 grid in 2023.
Once that is established, PK will enter the vehicle market.
Exciting news for our Zero emissions mission.
So this was completely busted. Embarrassing for a "science channel" like this. This is like solar freaking roadways
Well, Thunderf00t tore this one apart...
has he? this is a technology that is being worked on. Thuderf00t isn't a PHD scientist ... we talk about emerging and interesting tech... we don't have a horse in the race.
@@TwoBitDaVinci Yes he has, indirectly... It's more about the rubbish Plasma Kinetics is claiming with the Hydrogen 'film storage' and this video gets included in the bust.
And FYI, he actually has a PhD, in chemistry, which is quite relevant here...
@@TwoBitDaVinci lol not that it matters but he literally is a PhD in chemistry. He completely busted this nonesense
0:25 Because right now most hydrogen production comes from fossil fuels. What we need is a space tower or tether that can suck hydrogen from the upper atmosphere to the surface for processing. Better yet - use the low pressure aloft to suck CO2 from the surface at points of exhaust. Use a turbine to capture the energy of the flowing CO2 to compress the hydrogen which pushes itself back to the surface. Less energy to move products, the only downside is you have a turbine/compressor with a lot of moving parts 60 miles high in the atmosphere, so maintenance is going to be a real PITA.
I'm excited enough by your presentation that I'd like to learn the best ways to invest directly or indirectly in this form of energy storage.
I guess you're a part of the scam. Try harder
@@Michel-7.7.7I suggest you not say stuff like that unless you're willing to point out the errors of reasoning by solid state hydrogen storage researchers. Can you do that?
@@markkoons7488 Go watch Thunderf00ts video .. he's a REAL scientist.
@@markkoons7488 yes, but somebody else did already. Have you seen it yet?
A lot of break thru tech has been discovered but the U.S. government has classified the patents so they can not be utilized by the public .. In 2017 there were over 5,700 classified patents
If the cassette tape needs to be 5,000 mile long, I hope we don’t need to be kind and rewind before returning.
Tape may solve the storage issue, still got to do something about the platinum and other extremely expensive metals needed by currently known efficient electric fuel cell technologies.
Yeah I remember the exact same breakthrough "lets store hydrogen in a solid matrix" 20 fucking years ago.,
As with all the new "game changing" technologies like Solid State batteries and ultra-capacitors. We should believe it once we see it in production.
it doesn't affect what we already have in the here and now. If it's really that game changing it would naturally find its way into our every-day devices - unless it's killed in the cradle by vested interests.
Ever see the flamethrower blasting the creepy crawlies out of the wheel well compartment scene, in the movie; 5th Element? Once the crew clears the critters, they take a fuel cell and swap it for a new fresh one. Bam, new cassette cell on demand to power your rent-a-gravi-ship, or the next gen 'hover-byrd' razor scooter sports model
This is a very nice technology breakthrough. If it's in the lab now, then we can estimate it will always be about five years from public consumption. My main problem is availability. One nice advantage Plug-in electric vehicles have over gasoline, for example; is that you don' have to go somewhere and pump fuel. Electricity is everywhere, and in some cases, it's FREE. Even when it's not free, it's cheap on a per-mile basis. Cheaper than anything you can pump. Trust me on that. Even if you're pumping hydrogen. Even if you're getting your hydrogen on a cartridge, like you have here, it's going to cost more than electricity. There will be other use-cases where cost is not a factor, like military vehicles on remote bases, for example. Or spacecraft probes all over the solar system and beyond. I.E. places where you don't necessarily have a Conoco station every 3 miles. I like this tech, but let's be realistic: It won't replace electric charging stations. It won't even supplement them. All good wishes.
sandy munro says been around more than a few years in fact the company started making it in the 1900s and ceased in 2000 and put it into the too hard file and brought out again as covid silenced the world and gave them time to play with it again
Nothing about electricity is cheap, much less free.
You can get a car-mile with a cup of fossil fuel.
Or, you can convert each cup of fuel to steam/generation/conversion/distribution/conversion/storage to maybe 1/8th mile. This, given the sum of every single efficiency-loss in the process.
All of this concealed for the cause, but it will dawn on you one day.
And I'll add to this thinking, so you know, taxes are never free!
@@mikecr4916 seemed like an obvious reference to solar charging; you pay for the panel, but the electricity you feed the car is free.
@@giin97 No it isn't NOTHING is free
@@mikecr4916 fine, let's follow this line of thinking. You connect the solar panel you own to the electric car you own. The sun is shining on the electric panel, and the car is charging; who are you actively paying for that electricity?