Why Hydrogen DOES Have a Future

How long does a hydrogen generator last? How long does it take before your plates are completely damaged or lose their generative properties?

Doesnt this process also use a ton of Drinking Water! Something in increasingly short supply.

STORING HYDROGEN COST TO HIGH. PSI FROM 5,000–10,000 PSI, TEMPERATURE 252.8°C.

You forgot to mention hydrogen is a potent greenhouse gas 11x worse than CO2 for the climate. What happens when you build out an inevitably leaky hydrogen infrastructure? Hydrogen gas is the hardest molecule to contain because it's so small so it will leak.

In Alberta, Canada there is increasingly stringent GHG emission costs; currently $80 and going to $170/T CO2e by 2030. A lot of hydrogen is used oil and gas to improve product qualities but it's generated using steam-methane reforming and as a result has GHG emissions. Is there a GHG cost per tonne at which the use of these new hydrogen production methods become more attractive than steam-methane reforming? The other option is to add CCS to the hydrogen production facilities but this is again quite expensive. I could do the math myself but I'd be interested to see a video on the topic. At what price of carbon do new hydrogen production methods become attractive vs. steam-methane reforming (with and without CSS). Reply to this post if you want to collaborate on such a video.

As a source of energy for transport, lithium batteries jumped ahead quickly, it was a quick n dirty solution that could be introduced and commercialized easily. However, lithium and its required rare earth components, meaning cobalt, turned out to be finite source elements and there will never be enough to meet the eventual needs, ignoring for now the other less attractive features like no end of life recycling, extreme heavy weight and very slow refueling rates. Hydrogen solves many of those issues but brings other more complex issues which are taking much longer to resolve. That said, time is passing, huge improvements are being realized and eventually hydrogen will surely be the winner, it will just take much longer to complete the strategy. There is no quick fix, no quick n dirty solution, it will take time, the outcome however will be a more durable and like for like solution to oil based fuels. Once in place it will easily take us through the next 150 years just as oil has brought us through the last 130 years.

"It's the money." That's the reason our planet is dying- our despicable addiction to money. But we never talk about that. We talk about money as if it were intrinsic. Guess what? We invented it. For all our intellect, we are fools, for all scientific cleverness, we are cowardly idiots. Just build the plants!

It seems more and more that the answer to fossil fuel isn't going to be one renewable energy source but a combination of many tailored to the needs of the area they are being used in.

It seems the cost is a straw man, circular argument. It’s expensive so we are down on it. But it ignores the fact that it will get cheaper and cheaper, and that it’s the only way we get to carbon neutrality

G'day, Australian here. I was wondering who this "Sisro" was that you mentioned a couple of times, then the CSIRO logo comes up on screen. Sorry to be that guy, but that's not how it's pronounced. The correct way to say it out loud is the way it's spelled, as an initialism. When spoken out loud it's "Cee Ess Eye Arr Oh": Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. There are some heathen who try to pronounce it as a word, and those people in Australia pronounce it "psi-rho" or "sigh-roh" (think of it as a silent C, or even as a C with cedilla instead of CS). I think you got to the pronunciation "sisro" by swapping the I and the S around to make CISRO instead of CSIRO.

Thank you for this video, with your usual high production quality it's not just informative but also enjoyable (except for that truly bizarre pronunciation of CSIRO).

Hydrogen has battery power way beat but no infrastructure in place.

Round trip efficiency of hydrolysis is at most 40%!

Green hydrogen is necessary for concrete and steel production and maybe the only viable solution for lang range aviation. Build solar and wind on a massive scale like china and use all excess electricity for hydrogen production. That is the most viable way.

I'm not impressed with hydrogen storage and power. Especially since hydrogen storage and transport is extraordinarily difficult and energy intensive.

Good video, and it’s exciting to see advances in hydrogen production. As you say, efficiency drives economics, and economics are paramount.

I agree with a particular statement: hydrogen is FAR from the all-singing/all-dancing magic we were promised … but there are definite use cases where it makes the most sense. Aviation, shipping … anything where you need really high energy density. For the average passenger vehicle or grid storage solution, I would submit that regular lithium-/sodium-ion batteries are just too cheap and too efficient.

For those energy-dense applications, as generation and storage technologies mature, I’m excited to see hydrogen make a contribution to the energy mix.

Convert hydrogen to ammonia and sell the fertilizers

a bio reactor seems to be the best way to produce hydrogen.

With such a poor energy efficiency, H2 will NEVER be a viable option...Sum up the poor efficiency and poor efficiency of H2 and think about the loss of energy during these separate process...

Hydrogen also causes global warming and is a dead-end. When escaped to the atmosphere it reduces levels of OH groups. These OH groups help remove methane from the atmosphere. So indirectly hydrogen leads to additional warming. The effect is large enough that it is equivalent to the use of fossil fuels.

These hospitals are a scaled up version of Hydrogen House. Cool to see it going mainstream. I hope the guy who pioneered this gets some credit.

Cisero.... Haha. Australia's pronounce that as C.S.I.R.O ie. cee, see, eye, are, ow

Now every energy efficient building can have a giant bomb next to them.

Just use batteries

Honestly hearing this I do see hydrogen as a future technology to be invested and researched more.

It's extremely exciting that scientists & engineers are still pursuing HYDROGEN as nearly all fuel sources.
I say give the inevitable progress of HYDROGEN the positive attention
HYDROGEN deserves. 😊😊

Given the poor efficiency, it should be prohibited to produce H2 with electricity for purposes that batteries can do so much better and cheaper. 40-something kWh/kg is still several factors less efficient than storing the electricity in a battery.

I feel dumb 😅

I am sceptical about hydrogren from what I've seen so far, but there's really a need for a relatively space efficient alternative to rather unsustainable lithium-ion batteries.

Weve invested century's of time and the most money in all human history chasing energy and done nothing to explore filtration.
Its time to accept certain things like this as being regional only.
We need to return to nuclear and maintain logistical unification global and regional access.
Self sufficient homesteads where we are our own kings of our castles useing ai tech to overcome our handicaps so that we can live out of dreams through our love of labor goals need to re unstated.

Compartmentalization is a tremendous benefit but we've started to invert where it needs to be used.

Why waste energy converting into hyrdrogen and then back? Why not just batteries?

It may work in the summer when there is an abundance of free energy coming from the sun. But probably not in spring or autumn and definitely not in winter...!!

I know green hydrogen is important for high temperature manufacturing needs, and obviously if you need oxygen (like at a hospital) you may as well get some hydrogen too. But for energy storage, even on-site storage, is there any reasonable path to hydrogen ever being cost-competitive with battery backup? Especially since AFAIK storage vessels for hydrogen so far have shorter lives than batteries (and high replacement costs)?

This is just feeding into the distraction that is hydrogen.

You left out how hydrogen is 'climate change problematic' and is 'indirectly' as bad for climate change as methane - even green hydrogen isn't green. And you also left out how problematic using ammonia as a hydrogen storage substance would be given how toxic it is. Also you left out how the CSIRO (pronounced as letters, not a word) has just released studies saying that Hydrogen and Nuclear are off the table as viable energy sources in Australia due to cost and the social/environmental/climate issues hydrogen brings. And you also left out how all of the hydrogen hype is driven by the fossil fuel industry that wants to use hydrogen as a way to continue to use fossil fuels to maintain it's global hegemony as an energy source. I would love to see a more balanced presentation in your videos in future.

It is perhaps worth noting the combination of hydrogen and ammonia. Made feom green hydrogen, green ammonia makes the transport and storage of energy much cheaper

The future is atomic energy for electricity. Hydrogen internal combustion for transport. Solar panels, wind turbines, hydro electric and EVs in landfill.

Too much hype for hydrogen. It has its place definitely in the future but it will not be THE replacement for oil.

Making it isn't the problem. Its the definition of unstable, it corrodes, leaks, catch fire and explodes even if you do everything right. It will have some industrial applications, but the primary storage and use of it won't be in buildings populated by people.

If hydrogen became the fuel of choice, the current methane (natural gas) delivery system could be converted. Natural gas already runs to every home in urban areas.

Hydrogen is a dead technology. It's so inefficient. So dangerous.

Tethered electric cars can do similar things.

60% self-sufficient energy system for a hospital very good, but not net zero :) Also given the cost of healthcare in America vs public healthcare in the Netherlands and other ethical developed countries where the state provides public healthcare, they probably have a much bigger budget for premium efficiency upgrades like that //

Doctors in America are over booked with patients and make very good incomes, so healthcare has become vastly more expensive, along with the reduction in value of the USD making it even more costly to patients to access healthcare services in America. As a result the public in America trusts big pharma less than the congress or senate with very low public approval ratings in studies that do polls of such information.

It is immoral and evil for the US Federal Government not to provide free basic healthcare to American citizens, and the US states are criminally negligent for not doing it and allowing people to go bankrupt because of injury or illness- thats sick and disgusting and pure evil greed! America has experienced radical increases in income inequality since the 1960's, made even worse by soaring housing, food, vehicle, fuel and energy costs. Add that $USD money inflated or buys even less or has less buying power, or the consumer price index of life basics been increasing far more than wages or real incomes. This is an economic debacle driving the US economy of the proverbial edge of a cliff in the next year or so.

Solar PV modules are eco-toxic and energy intensive to manufacture, silver wires, silicon boule argon furnace high temp + expensive saw to cut the wafers, then bombarding the wafer with N and P ions with particle accelerators in a vacuum / I wonder if there is even a net energetic return on manufacturing inputs, and PV recycling not exactly mature as a commercial technology. The most affordable and common types of solar PV rapidly lose their output during initial solar exposure, but there are N-Type premium mono PV modules and CIGS that have much better output maintenance during the operating life before EOL recycling in the future. Consider what happens to all the wind power turbine blades too, a fiberglass ecological disaster, when only the leading edge eroded. If the idiots designing the turbine blades put thin zirconia ceramic armor plates on the leading edge of the turbine blades they would last 20X longer, and the little screw into place ceramic armor parts could be replaced so the main portion of the blade can continue working, like sharpening a chain saw chain or getting a better chain with silicon carbide edges that hold their edge a lot longer //

H2 or Hydrogen costs $18/gal when made from natural gas by steam reformation the cheapest way
That's retail at the few stations that sell H2 at high pressure in California, in LA, and a few other locals around the world

H2 not an energy itself, the way its used in fuel cell electric vehicles with the battery and motors really a molecular battery that stores a charge, but not a primary energy input to society, like a large wind power turbine, solar thermal power, geothermal power, natural gas power, coal power, gasoline, diesel, thinks that have net energy return on investment, or that return a net energy positive profit compared to the cost of what was required as input.

H2 embrittles metals, highly flammable, hard to cool except with expensive cryogenic cooling equipment that is not electrically efficient. This means that H2 stations have a huge electrical demand or energy consumption and all that energy could have energized battery charging in EV's, not at all to suggest that EV batteries or EV's are eco-friendly, I am just speaking on a business insider analytical basis about the net costs, and hydrogen one of the most difficult and thus most expensive ways of moving energy. In the best case, as cryogenic liquid H2 in very well insulated systems, H2 can be exceptional in rocket engines like the RS25's of the Space Shuttles / but looking into it as a personal hobby I discovered that cryogenic 02 and cryogenic H2 one of the most expensive rocket fueling systems and thats once of the reason that SpaceX used LOX with kerosene and liquid natural gas, since those hydrocarbons are much less costly and far easier to work with than LH2.

Making Green-Hydrogen even more expensive, and makes $9/gal synthetic gasoline and bio-gasoline seems cheap. The energy content of gasoline and diesel so high that paying $15/gal actually a fair deal, the thing that makes paying that much insane is the low thermal efficiency primitive cheapskate greed driven design engines that the worlds boring lazy ignorant automakers keep using. Think about this, helicopters been around with aircraft engines that used gasoline direct injection and exceptional turbine engines since the 1940's, and more widely available since the 1960's, but do you know of any affordable helicopters that someone could realistically use as an alternative to a car? Well flying over the local traffic nearby sounds like a great idea, except where do you land, and helicopters even on the low end of the cost structure have operating costs of $300 per hour, and many quality turbine powered helicopters cost tens of millions and operating costs are $2K-$5k per hour. The least expensive helicopters I am able to find online are over $100K, and still have an extraordinary operating cost structure given the bespoke low volume parts an costly services. Even fuel for helicopters way more expensive, as are batteries, even helicopter tape can cost hundreds per roll. It reminds me of photography bulbs and lamps with high CRI that cost 10X more than commercial examples with similar spectral performance by not as well color matches and slightly lower CRI.

Your channel and life reminds me of the Premium Efficiency Fallacy Paradox
It might sound alluring to make a super energy efficient home but thats not eco-friendly given all the additional materials and emissions associated with mining them and making them into ultra high efficiency HRV all copper or silver heat exchangers, gold wiring, and superlative COP7.1 heat pumps, solar PV roof, whole home battery (Fades with time, cycling)(non-sense where grid power cheap) and so forth. Also similar the concept of diminishing returns where it costs a lot more to get a little bit better. No free lunch in physics, and thats part of why H2 or hydrogen so challenging, its so small it can squeak through the gaps in metal crystals noting that at that scale metals are made of chunks of interlocking crystals with gaps big enough that hydrogen able to move between the gaps, where it reacts to embrittle many kinds of metals used in hydrogen tanks and fueling systems, adding even more costs for novel alloys, coating and electrical H2 rejection systems that prevent hydrogen from migrating through tanks, and to keep it under high pressure, to pressurize it, to cryogenically cool it, to keep it from evaporating in expensive containers, a giant expensive headache, like the home you are building, and being a zealot for technology I actually like what you are doing with it, just don't think for second that many people can emulate you or repeat such a costly build in a world where poverty very common or a very unfair world in terms of income equality or a lack thereof!

Sunlight is hydrogen light.

try looking at "home power solutions" a company based in Berlin which produces hydrogen storage for single family homes

It has a future in my backyard powering my hydrogen cannon 😂

Wouldn't that hospital be better off storing excess energy in batteries, rather than converting it into hydrogen, then back into electricity? There's no way it's as efficient