First hydrogen trains

[Bardal]

Hi all ! ;)

Wow, what Pessimism, Power-To-Gaz is injected directly into the Gas Network: look at Dunkirk!
https://www.qwant.com/?q=GRHYD+Power-To-Gaz+Dunkerque
https://www.google.fr/search?q=GRHYD+Po ... +Dunkerque

Well ... Yes, but that doesn't change my critics; it's even worse, since in a conventional heat engine, the efficiency does not exceed 0,25 (I had counted 0,5 for a fuel cell), which means that the final efficiency is barely 0,12, XNUMX ...

So we throw 4 kWh of electricity on 5 products !!!

Really, degrading a noble energy like electricity into gas, costly to produce elsewhere, does not seem to me a good idea ... Not even if we consider the GHG emissions, barely less significant for the hydrogen produced in these conditions only for natural gas…

I leave aside the more technical aspects which constitute the physico-chemical characteristics of hydrogen which pose all kinds of problems prohibiting a pure and simple substitution of methane by hydrogen: hydrogen easily crosses practically all polymers (very used in the distribution of natural gas) and degrades various materials (metals in particular), which prohibits exceeding a relatively small proportion of this gas. This prohibits, at the same time, its end use in fuel cells (use reserved for pure hydrogen, therefore specifically distributed). Incidentally, hydrogen, at equal volume, contains three times less energy than methane ...

Truly, choosing hydrogen as an energy carrier seems to me above all to make a choice that combines the difficulties and losses and adds to the already significant difficulties of storing electricity.

NB It will be noted that the initiators of this project, in their brochure, do not dwell on these sordid stories of operation performance ...

[geo444]

Hi all ! ;)

me who thought to find here the support for 1 Large Economic Project ...
- in a country where no project has been launched for 44 years -
inevitably, to mix everything you can almost prove your skepticism!

... in a conventional heat engine, the efficiency does not exceed 0,25 ... 0,5 for a fuel cell

in the Modern World where Turbos are 100% Reliable, the thermal rises to 0,3, especially Bus-Camions!
the Honda-Hyundai-Suzuki-Toyota, soon Kia Fuel Cells all have a Performance of 0,6 !

... degrading noble energy like electricity into gas, which is expensive to produce elsewhere, does not seem to me a good idea ...

So, you have not yet noted that Nuclear is not Not Variable instantly!
=> Wind-Solar produces a Max during Low Consumption hours, therefore, Without Power2Gas Electrolysis it is just LOST,
as much Store it in H2... or after Methanation in CH4...
rather than Pay it to Democracies?

... if we consider the GHG emissions, hardly less important for hydrogen produced under these conditions than for Natural Gas ...

Another 1 False Route: Gas-Nat Fossil especially With Fracking is Doubly Dangerous
= it produces a lot of Methane Leaks on Extraction + CO2 in Combustion!
there are Atmo Methane Levels. incredible in some US states at the forefront of shale gas ...
>>> Reminder: the PRG Methane over ~ 12 ~ 13 years is almost 100 !

all kinds of problems prohibiting a pure and simple substitution of methane by hydrogen: hydrogen easily crosses practically all polymers (widely used in the distribution of natural gas) and degrades various materials ...

Thousands of Honda-Hyundai-Suzuki-Toyota Fuel Cells have far fewer Problems than Diesels!
... anyway the " On-board reforming "advance to full pots: Methane or Ethanol in the Tank
see Nissan and its 2020 Vehicle planned to run on Pure or Diluted Ethanol ...
the Energy used to Reform Ethanol-Methane are the 40% lost by the SOFC Battery: Steam at 900 ° C

... Incidentally, hydrogen, at equal volume, contains three times less energy than methane ...

No matter, -> Read above! the Vehicle Type will decide on H2 or CH4 or C2H6O
- CH4 already has ~ 50 Bus-Truck Service Stations = CNG, LNG, CNG
- the C2H6O already has ~ 500 Service Stations = E85

Now if we compare the H2 Power2Gas of Electrolysis = Efficiency of 70% Today - Before Compression ...
-vs-
the Oil of Oil Sands - sorry I have no more Francophone - R = 70% Today - Before Refining!

The Efficiency of Power2Gas Electrolysis will improve up to ~ 90% by 2030 ...
-vs- that of the Oil Sands will fall to ~ 50% ...
Without counting the Very Negative Externalities of this Crude: Site Devastation, Various Pollutions, CO2 emitted ...
No Photo !

PowerToGas Progress

Power2GasEffic.png (19.61 KB) Consulted 4093 times

[Bardal]

But don't get angry Geo, this is just a discussion…

And everything you say only confirms what I said:

- the efficiency of a heat engine is much 2 times lower than that of a fuel cell; afterwards whether it's 0,25 or 0,30 doesn't matter

- nuclear power is variable, but effectively not instantaneously; but don't worry, the electrolysis and anaerobic digestion plants either ...

- of course, methane has many faults, and I do not put it in any way as an alternative; but PV electricity also emits GHGs, and with such a low final yield for the hydrogen sector, we are not very far from methane emissions; It's everything I wanted to say...

- do you prefer "Reforming on-Board"? I wish you lots of fun, on an individual vehicle ... But your final output will drop further; as for CO2 emissions ... and these fuels will always have to be produced ...

- it was you who proposed to use the gas network? Now we need stations with three fuels, including two carbonaceous ... Where are we going?

Finally, for the sands of the tar sands, you must have the wrong door ...

NB Be careful not to confuse laboratory data with actual performance; in industrial production, no more than 0,5 of yield is obtained for the production of hydrogen by hydrolysis; this is also why it is very little used (too expensive) ... tomorrow, we will probably shave for free, but it will be tomorrow ...

[izentrop]

Hello,
Is there a serious alternative to platinum in fuel cells, allowing their generalization? not only promising

The classic values ​​of the potentials of industrial cells are of the order of 1.7 to 2.1 V, which
corresponds to electrolysis yields of 70 to 85% http://www.afhypac.org/documents/tout-s ... %20ThA.pdf

Theoretical, Bardal?

[Bardal]

Hello,
Is there a serious alternative to platinum in fuel cells, allowing their generalization? not only promising

The classic values ​​of the potentials of industrial cells are of the order of 1.7 to 2.1 V, which
corresponds to electrolysis yields of 70 to 85% http://www.afhypac.org/documents/tout-s ... %20ThA.pdf

Theoretical, Bardal?

Yes, theoretical of course, since there is no count of ancillary operations, but compulsory, necessary to implement such a process; that is the difference between laboratory results and practical industrial production results.

In theory, we even arrive at "yields" of 90%, at very high temperatures, but the energy actually harvested is far from covering 90% of the energy actually spent (and I am not talking about cost here). This is not specific to the hydrogen sector ...

And it will remain to compress this hydrogen, to transport it and to transform it back into electricity; fuel cells will find themselves in a problem similar to that of electrolysers, while being perfectly feasible, and even efficient; but with other additional problems to be resolved.

The article that you give us, Izentrop is also very well done and does not evade any question. The establishment ex nihilo of a hydrogen sector seems to me to pose sufficiently formidable problems, and undoubtedly very costly to solve, so that it cannot be presented as the necessary solution ...

[izentrop]

The article that you give us, Izentrop is also very well done and does not evade any question. The establishment ex nihilo of a hydrogen sector seems to me to pose sufficiently formidable problems, and undoubtedly very costly to solve, so that it cannot be presented as the necessary solution ...

It seems to me that it comes from the CEA, but hosted on the site http://www.afhypac.org/, their goal is not to denigrate this path since it is their reason for being.

[geo444]

But don't get angry Geo, this is just a discussion…

No, not angry, sad!
because you are Worse than Pessimist, you are downright BioMass-Skeptical!

and it's there 2th Resource Available in France = 4 to 500 Millions of tonnes of Bio-Waste!
= it represents 10 Super Tankers = AmocoCadiz of Bio-Mass to be valued each Business Day: Considerable! ...
in France it sometimes takes 10 for throwing 1 Methanization unit

But it goes far beyond : if we do not save the forests (fires), we lose the planet,
et the Promotion of Bio-Mass with the Prize of the Common Good is the only way to get there soon:

> Brush clearing> Collection> Methanisation> Gas network!

... with a yield final also Low for the Hydrogen sector

So, if we had stopped at the Miserable Return of 3% Fossil Fuel Thermal Vehicles in 1898...
... we would not have to undergo soon a destructive global warming?
You see like your Résoning is 100% Bias!
we are Before the year Zero of H2

- do you prefer "Reforming on-Board"? I wish you a lot of fun, on a individual vehicle [ ] ...

But yes, of course it will start on industrial vehicles!
that's the advantage of having several fuels available at the entrance to the fuel cells:
= Adaptation to different kinds of Vehicles!

Hello, Is there a serious alternative to platinum in fuel cells, allowing their generalization? not only promising

Hi we are Before the year Zero of H2 = we are going to invent and perfect thousands of aspects ...
> idem for Fossil Fuel Thermal Engines in 1898 !

[Ahmed]

I am "downright Biomass-Skeptic!" How could any process, assuming it be virtuous from the CO² point of view (which is far from being demonstrated, unless we are content to look at the finger that points to the moon) influence the planetary ecocide since the use of this energy would serve the same objectives as at present?
Biomass is one of the constitutive targets of this delirium of the pseudo energy transition and, of course, it is presented in an enticing way, marketing obliges. Fire prevention is one of these rhetorical figures: it is the tree of good intentions that hides the forest from real predation; once the projects are launched, it will be necessary to supply these industrial boilers and the usual hawkers will adapt their arguments accordingly.

[geo444]

I am "downright Biomass-Skeptic!" In what way a process whatever it is and assuming that it is virtuous from the point of view CO² ...

It's extremely simple :
la biomass - especially if nothing is done = the Current Case ...
anyway ends up degrading into CO2 and CH4 = GHG 100 times more powerful!

Methanization is an almost free production GHG issue
... and Downright Free versus Oil + Gas imported from "Democratures / Autocracies"
and paid from ~ 40 à ~ 80 Billion $ per year!

la biomass is infinitely renewable ...
-vs- Oil + Gas are Fossil Energies that Increase GHGs!

[Ahmed]

it's especially extremely simplistic ...