An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Fissile nuclear and carbon capture are the technologies that are viable from an engineering perspective.
Wave and tidal technology always sounds great until you realise that moving something backwards and forwards causes engineering stress that causes the structure to fail. All the structures tend to shake themselves to bits.
-- the new Toyota Corolla hybrid (not the prius), if I remember right, gets around 60 miles to the gallon.
-- and also, Toyota is developing a hydrogen combustion engine with almost nil (using that word instead of "negligible" because Neil from the UK is here: Go Celtic FC.) harmful emissions. From one of the Toyota lead engineers: {quote}For this hydrogen-powered engine, the engine itself remains the same as before. Our concept for this project was to create a hydrogen engine by using as much of the existing internal combustion technology as possible. We thought that achieving this would enable the conversion of existing car engines to hydrogen, providing a powerful weapon in the quest for carbon neutrality.{end quote}
on a sour note,
-- the U.S. military is the single, biggest carbon emissions polluter, and we know that won't be changing anytime soon :(
on a chemistry note,
-- The burning of fat is a chemical combustion reaction: CxHxOx + O2 ---> CO2 + H2O. So when you fatsos out there are burning fat (literally), you are mostly exhaling this fat as Carbon Dioxide and also some water (in your pee or sweat or whatever).
The biggest problem with hydrogen is that it is dirty - produced from hydrocarbons. Better than sooty engines, but not carbon free as yet. A better approach, but not the best until we have clean hydrogen production at scale.
The reason why hydrogen is inefficient is because the energy must move from wire to gas to wire in order to power a car. This is sometimes called the energy vector transition.
Let’s take 100 watts of electricity produced by a renewable source such as a wind turbine. To power an FCEV, that energy has to be converted into hydrogen, possibly by passing it through water (the electrolysis process). This is around 75% energy-efficient, so around one-quarter of the electricity is automatically lost.
The hydrogen produced has to be compressed, chilled and transported to the hydrogen station, a process that is around 90% efficient. Once inside the vehicle, the hydrogen needs converted into electricity, which is 60% efficient. Finally the electricity used in the motor to move the vehicle is is around 95% efficient. Put together, only 38% of the original electricity – 38 watts out of 100 – are used.
Hydrogen and fuel cells have some niche applications. So what? If we only needed fossil fuels to run niche applications, we wouldn't be in this dilemma.
AF, indeed, there are enormous obstacles ahead for engineers. The YouTuber (Engineering Explained) who uploaded the video, and from where I got the quote above, clearly described the obstacles. But, you know, these are Toyota engineers, the same engineers who developed an ICE that easily gets, with minimum maintenance, around 500,000 Km. So, I keep an open mind. Of course if these were GM or Ford engineers…
7 comments:
These are niche applications of renewables. They require fossil fuel infrastructure to build and maintain. They are not scalable.
All that is missing, is Nero and a fiddle.
Fissile nuclear and carbon capture are the technologies that are viable from an engineering perspective.
Wave and tidal technology always sounds great until you realise that moving something backwards and forwards causes engineering stress that causes the structure to fail. All the structures tend to shake themselves to bits.
on a sweet note:
-- the new Toyota Corolla hybrid (not the prius), if I remember right, gets around 60 miles to the gallon.
-- and also, Toyota is developing a hydrogen combustion engine with almost nil (using that word instead of "negligible" because Neil from the UK is here: Go Celtic FC.) harmful emissions. From one of the Toyota lead engineers:
{quote}For this hydrogen-powered engine, the engine itself remains the same as before. Our concept for this project was to create a hydrogen engine by using as much of the existing internal combustion technology as possible. We thought that achieving this would enable the conversion of existing car engines to hydrogen, providing a powerful weapon in the quest for carbon neutrality.{end quote}
on a sour note,
-- the U.S. military is the single, biggest carbon emissions polluter, and we know that won't be changing anytime soon :(
on a chemistry note,
-- The burning of fat is a chemical combustion reaction: CxHxOx + O2 ---> CO2 + H2O. So when you fatsos out there are burning fat (literally), you are mostly exhaling this fat as Carbon Dioxide and also some water (in your pee or sweat or whatever).
JCB has developed fuel cell technology to drive heavy machinery, definitely something that can't be done with batteries.
https://www.jcb.com/en-gb/news/2020/07/jcb-leads-the-way-with-first-hydrogen-fuelled-excavator
The biggest problem with hydrogen is that it is dirty - produced from hydrocarbons. Better than sooty engines, but not carbon free as yet. A better approach, but not the best until we have clean hydrogen production at scale.
re: hydrogen-powered engines
Hydrogen’s efficiency problem
The reason why hydrogen is inefficient is because the energy must move from wire to gas to wire in order to power a car. This is sometimes called the energy vector transition.
Let’s take 100 watts of electricity produced by a renewable source such as a wind turbine. To power an FCEV, that energy has to be converted into hydrogen, possibly by passing it through water (the electrolysis process). This is around 75% energy-efficient, so around one-quarter of the electricity is automatically lost.
The hydrogen produced has to be compressed, chilled and transported to the hydrogen station, a process that is around 90% efficient. Once inside the vehicle, the hydrogen needs converted into electricity, which is 60% efficient. Finally the electricity used in the motor to move the vehicle is is around 95% efficient. Put together, only 38% of the original electricity – 38 watts out of 100 – are used.
source: Hydrogen cars won’t overtake electric vehicles because they’re hampered by the laws of science
The Truth about Hydrogen
Hydrogen and fuel cells have some niche applications. So what?
If we only needed fossil fuels to run niche applications, we wouldn't be in this dilemma.
AF, indeed, there are enormous obstacles ahead for engineers. The YouTuber (Engineering Explained) who uploaded the video, and from where I got the quote above, clearly described the obstacles. But, you know, these are Toyota engineers, the same engineers who developed an ICE that easily gets, with minimum maintenance, around 500,000 Km. So, I keep an open mind. Of course if these were GM or Ford engineers…
Post a Comment