Why Hydrogen DOES Have a Future

[@UndecidedMF]

Is hydrogen still worth exploring as an energy storage medium? Go to brilliant.org/Undecided/ and get 20% off your subscription and a 30 day free trial with Brilliant.org! If you liked this, check out Why This NASA Battery May Be The Future of Energy Storage kzbin.info/www/bejne/aKuqXo2oeJl1hZI

[@blogobre]

'cisro' is pronounced 'C. S. I. R. O.' specifically.

[@adr2t]

Personally, no still, main reason is you are converting H from something else - always - and thus you always going to never have a good return on the power you use. Granted, if it comes directly from the sun (not solar plans it self), but the light, then it will have a better value as the sun is free, but you are still using up a resource we still need such as clean water. Water that normally we have to clean up to some level and in some places clean from salt water that takes even more power. Batteries already have a return rate of 90% - and uses resources that can be recycle once mine out. Let alone, dont have to waste resources we need to live. At best, its a long shelf life of power storages, but even, I would argue that not even true because its hard to store the stuff from pressure to the stuff leaking from its storage container. Let alone the the floor space it takes just to make, store, and burn where batteries take even less floor space of that. The big move will be moving away from Li and into Na batteries along with switching from Carbon to something else like S or Si. Na allows for more batteries to be produce + reduce the cost while the other two help with power dens of the batteries themselves.

[@peacepoet1947]

I still believe that hydrogen directly from solar panels will become a source of fuel for off the grid living. Batteries are a problem as vehicle fires increase as the Sun hits us with an EMP in the future as the magnetic fields weaken.

[@Science-Vlog]

i have no future..

[@justanothercomment416]

@@adr2t H is energy storage, not a fuel. Most currently comes from NG. It's just more expensive fuel than the status quo. Beware anyone telling you otherwise.

[@themekfrommars]

For reference, the Netherlands hospital hydrogen/solar example is a quoted 60% self-sufficient for total energy needs. Impressive for such a large consumer of energy.

[@BMWHP2]

It should be investigated how much Hydrogen is leaking during the production, storage, transport and usage. Leakage of hydrogen (already about 18% during electrolysis) is preventing methane from breaking down in the atmosphere. That is contributing to global warming.

[@MostlyPennyCat]

​@@BMWHP2 Yes, but with increased focus on _not releasing the methane in the first place_ Honestly, it's like proper forget "an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure" Or gram of prevention and kilogram of cure if you're not American.

[@UndecidedMF]

While I think those reports are overblown (the benefits outweigh the negatives), it's an interesting point to raise.

[@ProjectileGrommet]

⁠@@BMWHP2are you referring to the Rocky Mountain institute briefing from Jan 2020? Just curious

[@eddymaddix1786]

@@UndecidedMF Matt those reports come from reputable sources: Priceton (acee.princeton.edu/acee-news/switching-to-hydrogen-fuel-could-prolong-the-methane-problem/), Nature (www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35419-7), UK Government (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/624eca7fe90e0729f4400b99/atmospheric-implications-of-increased-hydrogen-use.pdf), Columbia (www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/hydrogen-leakage-potential-risk-hydrogen-economy/)

[@RetiredRhetoricalWarhorse]

As an opponent of people touting hydrogen as the salvation I welcome these developments. I hope they will in fact be able to commercialize these products at scale and it isn't just a scam to get venture capital.

[@dufung3980]

Container embrittlement is often the issue, but on the large scale I like it’s storage duration. Mathematically the larger the vessel the less waste of containment material, which is part of why larger is better. Picture an inch thick water bottle’s internal volume vs an inch and a half thick vessel the size of an olympic pool. Bigger the better.. Also not soo much irretrievable waste as batteries leave behind.

[@cad4246]

Have you looked at liquid air energy storage?

[@DaveEtchells]

Yeah, the inefficiency of electrolysis was the main problem I had with the idea of an H2 economy. (Although safe, efficient, dense and high cycle-life storage for transportation usage is an issue for that energy segment.)

[@williammeek4078]

I’ll believe it when I see it.

[@znail4675]

The key thing here is that hospitals also needs the oxygen making that part needed anyway making the power storage feature bonus. Without that so do I think batteries make more sense still.

[@dishwashersafe222]

The hospital use case of an electrolyzer to get hydrogen for heat and oxygen for medical uses is cool! But the obvious question is how does that compare to using that electricity instead for a heat pump and a conventional air separation unit for oxygen. Even assuming only excess solar is used, I'd hazard a guess that adding battery storage might make more sense. This is the type of analysis that matters and I'd like to see more of.

[@multienergico9299]

There is a group where I work that looked into batteries vs hydrogen storage, apparently hydrogen is much more economical. Air separation units are very power hungry and don't do well with fluctuations or sudden ramps.

[@user-jm8sy5ox2j]

Batteries have a problem where they are very expensive and they don't get cheaper with the more you buy. If you get a electrolytic separator, a generator, and tanks to store hydrogen for later then you only have the high capitol cost when you buy the generator and separator. More tanks to increase your capacity are very cheap in comparison. Liquid hydrogen stored in a tank is also much more energy dense than batteries meaning that you don't need a big building full of batteries and the associated cooling for the massive amounts of heat that they generate either

[@bensemusx]

@@user-jm8sy5ox2j You can’t compare the energy density of liquid hydrogen without accounting for the refrigeration power. Cooling down to -253C isn’t cheap.

[@richyfoster7694]

I'm pretty sure the hospital's accountants have checked the other options. They have more management staff than nurses after all.

[@erikdietrich2678]

​@@bensemusxI don't think hydrogen is usually stored as a liquid for that reason. High-pressure tanks are more common, though those (and their pumps) are expensive as well. There's ongoing research into trying to store hydrogen adsorbed into what amounts to metal sponges to increase the storage density without high pressure. I'm not sure what the latest progress is on that, though.

[@BlindMonk93]

Hi matt, hydrogen systems engineer here. You did a great job explaining how power efficiency for hydrogen production is indeed a big arguing point against hydrogen power. Excited to see that efficiency improving! Thanks for sharing. There is going to be a whole other energy efficiency issue, around cryogenic liquid hydrogen storage and infrastructure. Currently tackling that with an aviation client. Would love to know your thoughts on that side.

[@maxhugen]

Hydrogen has the lowest energy content by volume as a liquid (about four times less than aviation fuel) so theoretically requires four times the onboard storage volume - and kept refrigerated at extremely low temperatures. How would that be handled by aircraft?

[@DavidHalko]

@@maxhugen- contrast that to batteries 🔋- H2 has a higher energy concentration. H2 does not have to compete with liquid aviation fuel ⛽️, but with batteries 🪫, if the goal 🥅 is to stop 🛑 using carbon fuels.

[@maxhugen]

@@DavidHalko Batteries are the Achilles heel of electrical-based green power. Hardly a surprise. At this point of their development, I'd call batteries for aircraft totally unrealistic apart from small private aircraft.

[@chisaomusician7752]

Are there any other countries besides China with solid hydrogen storage becoming active? Matt did a great video on metal hydrides.

[@18earendil]

@@maxhugen Safran and Thales put any plan direct use of hydrogen in airplanes far in the future. More direct usage in their plan is to synthetize kerosene with (green) hydrogen and atmospheric CO2 to use mixed with biofuel from alimentary waste like used frying oil (current airplanes engines apparently can technically support having half of their fuel coming from such waste, like a test last year with used frying oil), after improved both the engine efficiency to try to reduce fuel comsumption to a third or less or current fuel consumption, while trying to increase the amount of alimentary waste oil in the fuel that engine can support. Synthetic kerozene from green hydrogen and atmospheric CO2 is also something which is studied for space rockets, because while rocket using liquid hydrogen and oxygen is a solved problem, those rockets are finicky compared to kerosene rockets. And yes, those studying this option know that it will be even less energy efficient to produce this synthetic "green" kerosene , but the point is that kerosene is more energetic dense than hydrogen and above all far far easier to store and transport.

[@clehaxze]

Everytime new energy storage tech comes up. The number I always want is the round trip efficiency. For lithium battery it is around 90%. Pumped hydro is ~80%. What's missing from this video is exactly this, the round trip efficiency. If hydrogen battery have round trip efficiency of even 70% and cheap enough, it's usible.

[@s.i.m.c.a]

what round trip efficiency do you expect, if hydrogen generation efficiency is 10%-20% and hydrogen generation is a part of "charging battery" part.

[@edfx]

There is also need very cheap energy storage even if round trip efficency is horrible

[@clehaxze]

@@s.i.m.c.a I don't expect anything. If hydrogen's round trip efficiency is 20%. Then unless there's a very good and strong strength elsewhere like density or price. We are much better off using batteries as power storage device. Let's say hydrogen is 1/4 as efficient as batteries. You literally need 4x the power to charge it. You are likely doing more good by selling your power to the grid instead. That way at least coal plants burn less coal.

[@clehaxze]

However, if you are trying to fuel the battery by adding more hydrogen to it. Then the question becomes how is that hydrogen made. Is it low-emission enough to justify? Or is it better to just use batteries? I was expecting these answers form the vid. But I got no critical information

[@Krydolph]

I am not sure you completely understand... The hydrogen IS the battery - you are not charging a battery with hydrogen, you are producing hydrogen instead of charging a battery, and then you use the hydrogen as a fuel source later when you need it, instead of using a battery. And the whole video was more or less about HOW the hydrogen was made. But to your first point, I don't think the roundtrip efficiency is very good, and that is the big problem imo, specially compared to batteries. You have a HUGE loss when you make the hydrogen, where you only get a few % of the power you use as potiental power in the hydrogen. And then I have to assume there is a loss again when you convert it back from hydrogen to electricity. It might have a lot promise on the surface, and 10 - 20 years ago, it probably was the most obvious solution- but batteries has come SO FAR, and the hydrogen tech is barely moving, and has little to no chance of catching up. Seems the challenges is a lot bigger than expected. @@clehaxze

[@petewright4640]

The thing I really like about the hospital example is the 'green oxygen' - brilliant! The H2 is almost just a bonus. Even better would be to use the H2 to power a fuel cell for electricity when the sun isn't shining and then use the waste heat to heat the building. Also I think the future of H2 is to produce and use it on site, as it gets around the transport issues.

[@digger450r]

interesting thing about that, creating 02 by electrolysis isn't an FDA approved process, so it can't be used for medical use here in the US.

[@booobtooober]

Or how about using a MegaPack for electricity when the sun isn't shining

[@improveyourwoodwork11]

Great video Matt. I would like to correct just a minor error in the video. As a 72 year old Australian, I can assure you that the CSIRO is never called Cisiro ! As I'm sure you know, it stands for Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation. It is ALWAYS referred to as the C S I R O, never as a single word. I've watched and enjoyed many of your videos, and I was quite confident that you would want to know what I have explained. Keep up the excellent work.

[@Robert-sq7bp]

+1 to it mostly being spelled out C-S-I-R-O. I have heard people who work there pronounce it "sye-row"

[@fleachamberlain1905]

Great response @improveyour woodwork11, but I'd like to make just one small correction. While not as senior as you, I can assure you, by being a Canberran and from knowing people who work there, CSIRO is also referred to as a single word by many, sounding like sigh-roe. 😉😁

[@Robert-sq7bp]

@@fleachamberlain1905 +1 on sigh-roe

[@mitchdownunder2549]

Agree, having done work with the Newcastle solar group, who are a great team. It's C.S.I.R.O!

[@someotherdude]

You dug in deep there, Improve, yet 3 Australians in the same thread insist that even Sye-roe employees sometimes pronounce it as 1 word. Next you'll be insisting Kangaroos can run properly. For now, just worry about driving on the right side of the road.

[@lachiem]

I'm a student at the University of Newcastle, one of my old professors is working on some of this tech with the CSIRO currently! Super cool to see 🙂 Also much prefer your pronunciation of "Scissiro" Matt, we usually just say each letter in CSIRO 😅

[@MostlyPennyCat]

How could anybody possibly not immediately pronounce it Cicero?!? 😂

[@MostlyPennyCat]

Or however you want to spell the alliteration.

[@MostlyPennyCat]

Although it's kinda funny because Marcus Tullius Cicero was a politician and one of the types we would generally refer to as a "Conservative"

[@UndecidedMF]

That's awesome! But I should have pronounced it "Sci-ro." Not sure why I added the extra S in there (brain misfire). 😂

[@snakezdewiggle6084]

When working there, most say Sc-eye-row. It's an Aussie thing...

[@circuitdotlt]

What I am missing from all these videos is actual running costs in terms of electrolyzer degradation. I've seen some very different numbers, and all were quite high.

[@yensteel]

About your question at the end of the video: My favorite tech is the boring, basic kind: Compressed Air. It requires basic materials, can directly transition kinetic forces to storage without chemicals, and is adequate for short range uses, where energy density isn't important. People have created cars out of them and they work fine, but they're outclassed by electric and gas powered machines. It has some uses for low- cost deployment that is still green, particularly for remote areas. Not everything should immediately go hydrogen right?

[@brettgracey9682]

Compressed air is one of the least energy efficient processes out there. Typically most systems only run at 10-15% efficiency. Now if heat was recovered for use it might go higher, but still not great. I did see a guy in France who made an air powered car, looked neat, but he basically took advantage of gas stations “free” air to operate. If he had to fill it at home, he wouldn’t use it, guaranteed.

[@yensteel]

@@brettgracey9682That is one of the other big downsides indeed! I double checked online for content, there's too many clickbait scams.

[@jimsvideos7201]

I wonder about using a caboose on trains going downhill to brake the descent using a compressor plant. As long as there's a local user for that air, it's all but free.q

[@joshuatate6106]

Compressed CO2 seems a much more efficient system. Check out "Energy Dome".

[@JT_771]

It is certainly worth exploring. H2 is very useful for many industries; in short, we need it. The key is in realizing where it fits ... and where it does not. It certainly has areas of both.

[@Timlagor]

As a potent GHG that leaks most readily, it shouldn't even be contemplated for domestic usage.

[@JT_771]

@@Timlagor Given the level of use for the stuff (this isn't going to be car transport, etc), environmental impact shouldn't be an issue. Not in the quantities that make sense.

[@Timlagor]

UK has been talking about pumping H2 into gas mains. I don't think it's going to happen but it was seriously mooted.@@JT_771

[@Brad_Fallon]

The future is Hydrogen!

[@Brad_Fallon]

@@Timlagor The future is Solid Hydrogen, Lasts forever!

[@chlistens7742]

nice to see a hospital using h2 splitting as a byproduct of O2 generation for patients. I have had to use o2 in hospitals before. the thing most people don't think about is semi-portable local generated.. vs our current route to get anything. If you can local produce something you have an extra savings right there.

[@Warp9pnt9]

After the intro but before watching: Hydrogen seems best suited for on-site renewable production (PV, wind, water, etc.) as a chemical energy storage mechanism, provided that the electrolysis unit is NOT consumed in the process (within reason ... 5-10 year life span, preferably 20-30+). The thing about electrolysis (be it in lab conditions, an acid battery, galvanization process, the anodes and cathodes are either consumed/pitted, or grow spikes, and are irreversibly consumed in the process, giving a disingenuous assessment of "green" energy, as the replacement parts aren't factored in. If they've found a way for the electrolysis unit to suitably regenerate itself at sufficient quality for 10,000+ cycles, that'd be a good start. Then even factoring in the extraction, transport, refinement, transport, and installation/maintenance of consumables, it'd bring the average renewable energy up over the life.

[@Freshbott2]

I know it’s far less efficient but if it’s cost efficient vs. replacing the cells, you can always burn hydrogen in a piston engine, boiler or turbine. For something big like a hospital that’s reasonable.

[@bringiton8989]

Good job electrolysers are generally rated for ~80,000 hours of operation already then.... They do degrade, but think of them as a flow battery that you only ever charge. Users generally "discharge" the energy in another location or process. Given the pretty horrendous chemical environment generated within the stacks (remember H+ ions floating around in liquid media are generally just referred to as "acid") - that's not too bad.

[@joeyager8479]

I have been following H2 as an energy source for over 50 years. There have been a lot of "promising" developments, but we don't seem to be any closer to widespread use of H2 yet. Cost to separate, transport and store are still the holdbacks. I have to ask; is it more efficient to use the electricity directly generated by the solar panels instead of using it to separate H2 then using the H2 to generate electricity? In any case, I think that H2 will be eventually used to generate electricity "on-site" (stationary generation) rather than used as a transportation fuel because of the all the high costs involved in that.

[@mm650]

I think that adsorption based Hydrogen Storage is WAY more impressive than any advance in Hydrogen production. I would love to see some attention on your Channel about Plasma Kinetics and it's technology.

[@alexs.1683]

Methanol is the best form of Hydrogen storage we have and there's so many ways we can make it. You can use captured CO2 to interact with Hydrogen to make Methyl alcohol. There's already direct methanol fuel cells on the market ready for purchase...!

[@bellofbelmont]

Thanks Matt. Hydrogen will definately be worth the effort. Storing as ammonia has been tried and I think it works well. BTW we call the CSIRO by it's letters ie. it's spelled out C-S-I-R-O >>>> 🙂 Jim Bell (Australia)

[@georgepal9154]

Thank God someone realized we should use ammonia and not pure H2.

[@teardowndan5364]

When talking about the efficiency of electrolysis, you cannot forget about all of the energy required to process water until it is pure enough to use for electrolysis.

[@glittalogik]

Small correction: the CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) is generally just pronounced by its letters 😉

[@zephan69]

I came here to say that. Not quite CISRO haha

[@tuberroot1112]

Correct but completely stupid. It's a right mouthful.

[@pulsecodemodulated]

My parents, who both worked for CSIRO, would often just pronounce it as "csi-ro"

[@UndecidedMF]

Yeah, I'm not sure why my brain threw the extra S in the pronunciation. I had some former CSIRO employees tell me to pronounce it as a word vs. saying the letters a long time ago. Might be a generational thing. Interesting.

[@Axman6]

I’ve worked at CSIRO, and it is commonly pronounced as an acronym, not an initialism. The pronunciation is sci-row though.

[@roberthoward9500]

I love that Australia is a world leader in this field. I feel like Australia is an ideal location for hydrogen as well given our massive amount of sunlight.

[@theharper1]

Agreed, but it's a shame that so many Australian inventions (especially from CSIRO) have been bought and buried. On the other hand, some have been spectacularly successful like WiFi. CSIRO has also developed more efficient methods for converting hydrogen to ammonia for simpler storage and transport.

[@dominionscave4752]

30+ years ago Australia lead the world in solar PV R&D, and most of it paid for by the taxpayer. It seems it was all given away for free, and in particular to China who have many of those researchers working for various Chinese corporations. So the question is, will the same happen again, especially if the funding comes from entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, or shareholders in the private sector who have a tendency to sell IP to the highest bidder for the highest short term profit if this IP is not under the total control of the founders or the CSIRO. Imagine where Australia would be if the Solar technology was nurtured here into an industry and the profits feeding back into developing better PV and other "green" energy production and storage.

[@tbix1963]

Great video, once again inspiring me to ask for a video on the HydroMax process. Uses molten iron and tin to make hydrogen from waste hydrocarbons and then reset with water injection to make carbon monoxide. Seems like a natural for sewage waste treatment especially if you consider the hydrogen content found in urine. The two main inputs for the process are found at every sewage plant, water, and bottled up hydrogen in the urine and solid waste. If you were to combine the hydrogen with the carbon monoxide you can make storable fuel with the Fischer- Tropsch process or combust the carbon dioxide and power an electrical generator to power the process with an induction furnace powered crucible. With hydrogen as your primary waste product.

[@tbix1963]

For those that don’t know, The HydroMax process is a simple process that takes place in a crucible full of molten iron and tin. Water is injected into the molten metal. The oxygen in the water gives up its bond to hydrogen and chooses a stronger bond with the iron leaving the hydrogen to boil off and be captured. Then the iron oxide with tin that works as a wetting agent is scrubbed of its oxygen by injection of carbon waste that has a higher attraction to the oxygen than the iron producing carbon monoxide as a byproduct that is then captured to be burned or used as needed. In the process resetting the iron to capture more oxygen in the hydrogen production process. The temperatures it operates at breaks all the bonds down on the atomic level thusly cleaning the input materials from their less than pristine conditions prior to the process. Any excess materials are cleaned off of the iron in the form of dross and can be processed for their elements or even used as a substitute for Portland Cement reducing the co2 that is typically made in the process of making Portland cement for the construction industry.

[@piraterubberduck6056]

I love that there are hospitals using both the hydrogen AND oxygen from the process. That is the kind of efficiency we need to see.

[@dony2852]

Honestly, even if production issues are panned out, I am skeptical about storage and transportation ever being anything but expensive. I am supportive of research but realistically, development likely only makes sense in niche environments like space exploration.

[@DavidHalko]

Aluminum containers, surrounded by carbon fiber is pretty common, and not for space exploration. Aluminum is cheap, light.

[@user-pt1ow8hx5l]

One can clean the urine from a hospital on site. And then recycle the water as...... hydrogen and oxygen,........ Saving on sewage..... And the spaceships can be good metafors for how one handles a small unit and its issues..... CarbonCapture included...

[@rvandokkum]

It's hardly ever mentioned, but in the old days of 1860 - 1960 many towns and cities in Europe used to produce their own "towngas" from coal. It was stored at day time in big "floating" iron silo's and piped in the evenings to the customers for cooking and lighting. Remember those romantic old streetlights that needed to be lit at evening? Now what is "towngas" you will ask? Surprise! A mixture of 60% hydrogen, 25% methane and the rest was most poisonous carbon-monoxide (CO).

[@andrewt9204]

Even as a stationary battery, it doesn't seem as good as a flow battery or even LFP based chemical storage. Still need rare earths for the hydrogen catalyzers. LFP you need lithium of course, but it is highly recyclable. I believe the platinum and nickel anode/cathode in a fuel cell does slowly get used up.

[@ericlotze7724]

Can you cover Dimethyl Ether (DME) ? It stores like Propane, yet can be made from (Sustainable!) Biomass, or via Power-to-X Chemicals *like* Hydrogen etc Also it works well as a Diesel Fuel due to it’s high Cetane Value. Also it *cannot* produce Soot, thus Diesel Particulate Matter is WAY lower. I’m rambling, but this is a neat solution that needs more coverage and you could do a great job!

[@ericlotze7724]

@@morningstarsci i was reading up on the tendency of Diethyl Ether to do that vs the tendency of DME to do that a while back, I’ll grab the links after work for that. In terms of how it’s made, it’s a catalytic conversion from Methanol (or some fancy catalysts that go directly from syngas to dme)

[@karlstathakis7786]

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.

[@TLguitar]

A few years ago there was a news story on Israeli television about a startup called H2Pro, which was founded by a university team, and they claimed their way of electrolysis separates the H2 and the O2 production into two separate steps, which "eliminates the need for the membrane, the most expensive and delicate part of an electrolyzer" and enables high pressure, scalable and relatively cheap hydrogen production. Supposedly it has a "98.7% HHV inside the cells and a 95% system efficiency." One of the interviewed scientists from the company went as far as saying "we can win a Nobel prize for this". I haven't really heard anything from them since, although looking up their name now shows they did sign a $250 million hydrogen supply deal with a Japanese company called Sumitomo. Anyway, I wonder how their electrolysis technology compares against the one with the capillaries discussed in the video.

[@janami-dharmam]

the major problem is not the bubbles but the overpotential. Both hydrogen and oxygen need higher voltages (compared to the theoretical voltage) to discharge at the electrode. Hydrogen overpotential can be reduced using expensive and specialized electrodes (like platinum) but the oxygen overpotential has not been really tackled. One trivial solution is to carry out the electrolysis at high temp when the overpotential is reduced. But high temp electrolysis cells are messy and expensive. Getting a theoretical efficiency of 95%++ is really difficult.

[@xIQ188x]

Sounds like VC hype

[@TLguitar]

​@@janami-dharmamPerhaps they discuss that aspect in their Nature article. It's called "Decoupled hydrogen and oxygen evolution by a two-step electrochemical-chemical cycle for efficient overall water splitting".

[@TLguitar]

​@@xIQ188xThat did seem a bit like it, although I think they already had investors such as Bill Gates and Hyundai.

[@petewright4640]

​@@janami-dharmamThe problem is the bubbles as they block the electrodes and cause the over potential.

[@katiefrisk980]

as a chemist, i’m most excited about a photocatalytic haber process replacement - a process that uses light to turn water and atmospheric nitrogen directly into ammonia and oxygen gas. ammonia is a much easily stored form of hydrogen, and most industrial hydrogen production is used for ammonia production anyways. the ammonia could then be either used as fertilizer or burned in a fuel cell to release stored energy, or perhaps simultaneously (ostwald process) if the correct catalysts are there.

[@nevillegarden5114]

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. 😊😊

[@davestagner]

I’ve noticed a real uptick in the quality of your videos in the past few months, Matt. Bravo! This was a really interesting, thoughtful take on the subject. It seems to me that much of the green hydrogen hype just assumes it can replace natural gas in the existing pipeline/storage infrastructure, which just isn’t true - not enough pipe density. But as *locally generated* energy time-shifting, it’s very promising! If the products are available, it allows individual facilities (like hospitals) to operate fully off-grid for long periods of time in a completely clean way. And building-scale electrolyzers can benefit from economies of scale and relatively low-risk manufacturing. Contrast this with the lack of ANY industrial scale electrolyzers on the market, due to the intense commercial risks for the first movers. I like it when I get new ideas about how the green energy transition can work!

[@BinkSayres]

Matt is going to need a new channel now. UnOreoed with Matt Ferrell. It's the same exact channel and content as before, but everything is explained through the manipulation and destruction of Oreo cookies. The Nabisco sponsorship writes itself. In all seriousness, thanks for the content. It's great to see this space evolve as the technology behind it comes out of its infancy.

[@garrettmoynihan7229]

I understand why Matt used Oreos in his analogy, but he had a real opportunity to make a Hydrox cookie pun and he missed it.

[@Halfwalker]

"Be all to end all" is the phrase ... My Mum hammered that into me at an early age :) Best channel ever - we intend to go hard for solar/battery mainly thanks to you.

[@jopo7996]

Viable hydrogen production and its use may not be available yet, but it's really going to blow up in the future.

[@beaudavis3808]

Did you had to say "blow up?"

[@iamaduckquack]

​@@beaudavis3808It was quite likely deliberate.

[@s.i.m.c.a]

aha...with side effect like increased consumption of fresh water...same problem like electric car increase without updating network grid.

[@UndecidedMF]

I see what you did there ... and I like it. 😂

[@beaudavis3808]

@@s.i.m.c.a Not necessary. The hydrogen fuel cell would be another part of the water cycle.

[@jamesmartens160]

I used to be pro hydrogen but considering the need to move it, and compared to moving electrons over a wire.... It just doesnt make sense to me anymore, save for remote, off-grid use.

[@robinconnelly6079]

I'm a big hydrogen fan. Nice to see a positive video about hydrogen amid this anti-renewables wave that is going on. Regardless of climate change and all the fighting that is going on around that, I think renewables are a great thing. I was a fan before all this started. The idea of on-site conversion has a lot going for it. I really like what this hospital is doing and I hope this thinking gets applied in many other areas

[@muntee33]

Saying hydrogen doesn't have a future because of the efficiency of electrolysis is like horse owners of 1900 saying the ICE doesn't have a future because of the perforce and cost of the motor car not outweighing the established horse and buggy transport industry.

[@bigpete1014]

I would think battery storage would be more efficient, more economical, and make more sense. Hydrogen storage is always going to be a big problem at any scale.

[@gelisob]

and safer..

[@Spencergolde]

It makes sense solely for mobile applications, and specifically for aerospace, where high energy density and fast refueling can be worth the inefficiency. Also, hydrogen has a lot of use in the chemical industry as a feedstock, mainly for producing ammonia which fertilized all the crops on earth. That need will not go away any time soon, so developing green(er) ways of making hydrogen is very important

[@NeblogaiLT]

This is not really true. Hydrogen storage can be at least tens of times cheaper than batteries if you only want to store energy accumulated in summer to use in winter. There is also the benefit of scaling- being able to use underground gas storage facilities with huge capacity, while there is simply no way to scale up battery production that much. And then, you can also tie hydrogen atoms with nitrogen to produce ammonia for energy storage, which is easy to store, easy to burn, and production of which will have to scale up greatly as we transition from agricultural ammonia made from gas (production emits CO2), to green one.

[@TarisSinclair]

Battery storage has nowhere near hydrogen's energy density per mass and can be produced with simple electrolysis as opposed to often harmful and complicated processes of fabricating modern batteries. Just for comparison, NiMH batteries provide 0.4MJ of energy per kilogram. Lithium based batteries provide 0.72MJ of energy per kilogram. Hydrogen provides 142.5MJ of energy per kilogram - a value on an entirely different scale. Now that said, it does come with a whole lot of disadvantages (or challenges to overcome). Reliable and lightweight storage will be one of the most crucial problems to solve. Once that is done, I could see us even filling our cars' fuel tanks with water instead of gasoline, and letting the car do the electrolysis and run on hydrogen.

[@Spencergolde]

@TarisSinclair Energy density per volume unit. And it takes enormous energy to compress or condense hydrogen to a meaningful density, given that it has the highest specific heat capacity of all known materials

[@remplante]

Love it. CSIRO is pronounced as it is spelled C S I R O not Csiro as a word. And as you said it is the federal govt owned Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. They are very prominent also in agriculture development and pest management techniques.

[@kitteecatt4681]

while the levellized cost of hydrogen is important to its widespread use. but at the moment, the clincher is storage. without safe, easy, effective storage; which we don’t have

[@TexLogan-du2yi]

This is good to see. I think all the self sufficiency solutions from here on out will involve a pastiche of methods that work together. Thinking that solar or wind alone will carry the day is naive at best and dangerous at worst.

[@libouban]

Hi Matt, I really like your channel. With a title like "Why H2 DOES have a future", I thought you'd at least talk about the 2022-2023 natural H2 (or white H2) resources discoveries on many continents and how that will fuel the future of H2. "According to the Financial Times, there are 5 trillion tons of natural hydrogen reserves worldwide." That's natural. Not green. Would you consider a video around the exploitation of natural H2 and how that may shape the future of 'clean energy', cost, etc. starting with transportation (maybe the very first one is truck/heavy loads). Thanks for describing the Hysata process, I found that part the most interesting. Kind regards

[@Soothsayer210]

I really believe that in future there WILL be a parallel economy with Green H2/Fuel Cell and EV's complementing each other in different areas. For applications like Locomotives, Heavy Trucks, Ferries and even Shipping, I think there is a good possibility for H2 to capture that market. Not to mention manufacturing industries like Steel, Cement etc. Another use for Green H2 would be the possibility for it to be converted to Synthetic Fuels. I am keenly watching this segment. Thx. for the videos.

[@Anfros.]

Most land based shipping should just be conventionally electrified, ie with overhead wires. We've had the technology to fully electrify our railways for more than 100 years, and we are starting to see pilot projects for electrified highways for trucking. Hydrogen does have great potential for ships and aircraft, and some land based vehicles. As long as we get places where vehicles can fill up on hydrogen, I think we are going to start seeing plug-in hybrids with fuel cells as backup replacing fossil fuels.

[@Anfros.]

@@pin65371 For trains they are a nobrainer, tracks already have height limits with tunnels and bridges, I agree it can be a problem for roads, the solution I've seen proposed is electrifying the leftmost lane on the highway, so if you need to drive something big you drive with the other cars, there have also been proposals to put the transmission wires on the side of the vehicles instead of above. The first solution would obviously only work for 3-lane+ roads, but all solutions have issues.

[@richyfoster7694]

In New Zealand we built a natural gas to petroleum converter in the late 70's. Just before fuel prices crashed back down. It has been mothballed nearly 30 years now. Unfortunately now that fuel prices are rising the gas field is close to collapse.

[@andersbentsen3107]

Matt Ferrell, Cleanplanetinc from Japan expect to build a hydrogen boiler called Ikaros in 2024. They already tested Ikaros 2kw output for more than 500 days. It will be able to power a private home with heat and electricity for 10gram of hydrogen per month, if a kg of hydrogen cost 3dollar, then your energy bill could be 3cents per month. It really doesnt matter what price hydrogen are sold at

[@krisingelsson]

I don't know if I have mentioned this on your channel before, but in Sweden there is a big project called Hybrit, it is using green H2 to make "green" steel amongst a few things. Maybe worth looking in to. 😊

[@cad4246]

What's your definition of green? If the grid is burning anything whilst the hydrogen elctrolisers are running then it's not green. You could have exported that energy to the grid and reduced the carbon emissions. Are Hybrit spending a fortune on electrolisers and then running them only when the grid is zero carbon? Sweden's grid looks pretty good per Wikipedia, but still 16.6twh of "other", which means burning stuff, in 2021.

[@theharper1]

@@cad4246 does the concept of transition have no meaning for you?

[@onyhow]

@@theharper1 Seems like @cad4246 believe less in "perfect is the enemy of the good" and more in "go big or go home".

[@wimhey]

Coal is now used to purify iron ore. CO is the gas that removes oxygen from the iron ore. Hydrogen can replace CO

[@dainesjk]

I know you've had a problem with the pronunciation of our Australian peak science agency, and thought you might like a little tip on Aussie pronunciation of CSIRO. You actually have 2 options. 1. You can pronounce by saying each letter individually which is the traditional way. 2. The modern way is start saying science - 'sci' and finish with the 'ro'. Join them together and say as one syllable. The 'I' should be the emphasised letter in the modern pronunciation. I hope this helps.

[@kennystrawnmusic]

Grid-level storage is definitely a good use for hydrogen since it’s much more abundant than lithium. However, in order to make it work for transportation, we’d need to start transforming the recent fusion ignition achievements into power plants. Deuterium, after all, cannot fit through a proton exchange membrane, so it’s literally a waste product of hydrogen electrolysis - so if Helion and other startups like them manage to succeed, then it may be possible to have a system where the energy powering the electrolyzers would cost absolutely nothing since it would come from the very waste deuterium that would otherwise just sit around in storage tanks.

[@maximvyshegorodtsev]

Hydrogen is interesting, but... watching this I kept thinking about the law of conservation of energy. Yes, hydrogen is good source of energy, but you need to get it first. Water molecule bonds are strong so you need a lot of energy (more than you will get from burning it because of energy waste) to brake it to get H2 and O2. So you need to find a way to use green (free) energy to do it. And so on... you just adding more steps into the process... Looking at that I started thinking about another law of physics: losses during conversion. Any new conversion means losses. I think I posted something like that before, but I didn't hear anything new in that area. How to make less steps in storing energy we can get from the sun and the wind and convert it into energy we use? That would be interesting question. Why we still use fossil fuel? Because we can take it, clean it and use - it's that "simple". "Simple" means not simple process but you don't waste too much energy on cleaning fossil fuel. It is efficient. But if you look at whole picture - from the hole in the Earth to a consumer being moved from point A to point B - efficiency of fossil fuel is very low. (Combustion engine, let's say 25% average, so add here digging oil, transporting, storing, cleaning, transporting ready to use fuel to stations - all that lowers efficiency; I don't know, but I can guess altogether efficiency could be around 5-10% (or less than that!) and all we need to get is cleaner but more than those 10% efficiency at the end). It looks doable. 30% efficiency for solar panels is a great start - you get the energy you can use with efficiency of 30% - that's already better that fossil fuel! But you need to store it. Convert it back to electricity to use... 👎 So this is what seems to me a logical move - create a model with fewer steps and more efficiency. I hope it make sense. This is all so exciting, because we're living at the time of new technological revolution. We don't know but tomorrow we could wake up in the morning and there are no fossil fuel cars on the roads and the world would look different from what we have now. This is also a big topic to discuss because energy resources are the main cause of the wars. If the humanity can get rid of centralized energy model to distributed - that would have greater effect on human life everywhere on Earth.

[@FriedrichWinkler]

I believe hydrogen transportation at high pressure is going to be prohibitive. If it is converted to ammonia with low-cost heat, it could maybe alleviate some transport costs. An ammonia video would be interesting.

[@raffly4449]

As you stated, it’s all about cost per unit of energy. A comparison of battery chemistry’s, hydrogen and other forms of energy storage showing cost in the past versus far past, present and projected future would show trends which might be useful.

[@A_Changed_Heart_Ministries]

Plug Power will be a big winner 🏆 Plug Power already has contracts with Walmart, Amazon, Home Depot, and many large businesses

[@dannywitz]

Efficiency is hilariously ignored in nearly all of these scenarios. Just charge and discharge batteries, multiple times as efficient. There are a few scenarios that makes sense excess power at a large wind or solar farm. Then sell the hydrogen to aircraft, big rigs or trains (new hypothetical ones😊)

[@Hans-gb4mv]

Some times there are more important things in a project than just efficiency or cost. Take both hospital examples. In the Netherlands, where they use it as a power source for the hospital itself, they have the advantage that in case of a grid outage, they can also keep powering from hydrogen as long as you get the tanks refilled in time. The other one is reusing the oxygen, so that's also a big win that would not be possible with a battery system. This goes to show that while hydrogen has its downsides, it also has its use cases that we should not ignore to easily.

[@DavidHalko]

Human & material cost to replace dead ☠️ batteries 🪫, energy cost to recycle ♻️ dead ☠️ batteries 🪫 An H2 aluminum tank is better than a battery 🔋 for TCO & recycling ♻️ liability.

[@dannywitz]

@@DavidHalko please look into the amount of energy consumed to make hydrogen then compress and refrigerate it so a significant amount can be stored in a given tank. Lead acid batteries have a very high recycling rate over 90% there is no reason other batteries cannot be readily recycled as well. All of these scenarios are better than the current grid sources. Also hydrogen is acidic and needs expensive materials for hoses and tanks. Also electrical infrastructure is everywhere and easily reconfigured.

[@DavidHalko]

@@dannywitz - “please look into the amount of energy consumed to make hydrogen…” Renewables suck. Peak solar usage is so high that there is no value in selling it back to the grid. They shut down wind turbines because the grid can’t handle it. When the sun is down & wind stops or is too fast, they have to crank up the natural gas turbines. H2 solves all these issues, by consuming the solar energy that is negative in cost, keeping turbines running when they are overproducing, and can be stored to be used for peak power so natural gas is no longer needed. Refrigeration is not required, is can be pumped underground for storage & retrieval, the renewable energy is wasted now anyway, so we might as well use it. “Lead acid batteries have a very high recycling rate” True, north of 95%! Lithium batteries have a low recycle rate, south of 5% worldwide… and lithium batteries are being used more. “Hydrogen… needs expensive materials” Aluminum is not expensive “Electrical infrastructure is everywhere” So is water, for H2 production. “Electrical infrastructure… easily reconfigured” Price getting a 50 Amp plug on the other side of your house and see how expensive that is. An EV charge is north of 4x the electricity a house uses, at least my house, and the EV has to be charged in 15 minutes??? Sorry man, think about that, when people are driving home to their apartments (~30% of Americans) and they all want to charge up before they park their cars in a lot… or on the way to work because they could not get a slot before dinner! This is a NON TRIVIAL problem. The size of the electrical lines and power will require unbelievable peaking during those times, and local power generators will likely be required. They are already deploying diesel generators at EV charging stations, today. NON TRIVIAL.

[@AldrinAlbano]

Hyrdogen, IMHO, has a GREAT potential in the industrial sector. Can you imagine a LiIon battery-powered container ship? a 100-car locomotive? Metro buses? Steel and cement factories?? Hydrogen will be a major factor to decarbonization as outlined in the COP28 summit.

[@Brad_Fallon]

H2 is EVERYTHING. It should have been the past but has been suppressed, but we can make it the now and the future. HYDROGEN will be cars, trucks, busses, and ships. HYDROGEN will free the world!

[@darthsirrius]

Hey matt, great video! I remember a few years ago hearing about a physical hydrogen tape that helps solve some of the storage issues, but they had to pause research on it because the US DOD stop them or something. I'd love more info on that if there's anything new

[@kgsails7102]

Matt, there was a recent article in the New York Times about how France has discovered naturally occurring hydrogen in an old mine. It's being called white hydrogen. They think there's a 5-10 year supply (based on worldwide current hydrogen use) in a single mine. The US also admitted that hydrogen is often found during oil well drilling but is often flared off (similar to natural gas flaring - both are a huge waste and in the case of natural gas, an unnecessary source of CO2 emissions). I think it is the future of clean energy storage despite the low round trip efficiency because at the end of the day, battery manufacturing is a huge source of CO2 emissions and just nasty pollution in general. I find it comical that so many so-called environmentalists have embraced battery storage when the manufacturing (especially in the short term) is so environmentally noxious.

[@DavidHalko]

We really need pipelines to be more readily built for H2 and such,not blocked via regulatory agencies.

[@stevehayward1854]

It's been having a future for the last 50 years and still nothing

[@ohsweetmystery]

Electric cars have had more than a hundred years of development and they still suck.

[@stevehayward1854]

@@ohsweetmystery In what way do they "suck". They are utterly reliable, cheap to run compared with a high maintenance ICE vehicle, they have great ranges and can charge anywhere there is a power outlet, they can rapid charge to 80% in 15 mins, well some can, and are ridiculously fast, they are very efficient and convert 95% of the electricity into propulsion, unlike the ICE car after over 100 years of development is still only 25% efficient, converting 75% of the energy is gas to heat. I think you will find that ICE vehicles suck after over a 100 years of developement whilst electric cars have only been in development for the last 15-20 years and already EV's out perform ICE cars

[@James_ZA]

@@stevehayward1854 "Great ranges" 😂😂

[@stevehayward1854]

@@James_ZA I agree, ranges of 350-500 miles is more than enough to burst anyones bladder 😜

[@pyros4333]

​@@stevehayward1854 you must be fun at parties

[@zinaustro]

Great video, thanks. I'd like to see more on ammonia as a hydrogen carrier, especially in light of the recent Japanese development of perovskites for ambient pressure ammonia storage. Thanks!

[@gerritgovaerts8443]

Big problem wit H2 remains medium to long term storage . The molecule is so tiny it will escape thru any container wall . More than a few days and your tank is empty . Not a good way to store that precious green energy

[@OculusGame]

Hydrogen is overrated.

[@Pleezath]

How?

[@vyrv6719]

yeah, but we've seen enough tech find random breakthroughs and resurge that it's probably still worth some significant part of the market share. Interesting debate to figure out how big or small that should be though. :)

[@jasonborne5724]

Hydrogen is underrated

[@oldschool31]

I love seeing the titles of articles but good you also link to the articles please :)

[@gzoechi]

Hydrogen might bring more money to influencers, but it has no future for EVs or residential power supply.

[@gzoechi]

@viability33 No. If I would, I would be in favor of Hydrogen, because it's made from natural gas. It's just that Hydrogen from natural gas is much worse for the environment than burning natural gas directly.

[@sheepuff5999]

People were saying the same thing about EVs 10 years ago.

[@gzoechi]

@@sheepuff5999 These two things are completely different. There is currently no viable way to create Hydrogen except from natural gas. "Burning" Hydrogen from natural gas is much worse for the environment than just burning natural gas directly. Hydrogen is hyped just to make fossil fuel look environmental friendly and to keep up the revenue stream for the fossil fuel industry. I'm perfectly fine with using Hydrogen as soon as they can show that it can be produced at scale using renewables in a way that is efficient enough to compete with other technologies for example batteries. As long as we lose 70% of the energy in the process it's better to use electricity directly.

[@kmcd6140]

Cheaper and easier capture tech is definitely part of the equation. I still see solid state technologies like the film/cassette form factor to be the real key to widespread adoption at the consumer level. Every facility like these is a major step in the right direction.

[@Autovetus]

Each time you use " breakthrough" in your video title I want to subscribe and patreon you less 😮‍💨

[@ADreamPainter]

I did a bit of research (Please correct me if any of my information is faulty) but according to some sources, Hysata's technique uses about 33.33 KWH to produce 1 Kg of hydrogen. Compared to gasoline, my research stated that it can take 4 KWH to produce a Kg of gas. Also I found that hydrogen has approx. 3 times the energy output as gasoline. This would mean it would take about 11 kwh to create what we produce with gas with 4 kwh. So we are not on the same playing field with gas (yet) if we look purly at energy consumption to energy output, however, seeing that we are narrowing the gap gives me hope.

[@dan2304]

Unfortunately the only thing that can be changed is the activation energy, the enthalpy and entropy energy never change. The efficiency of the round trip from water and electricity back to water and electricity is around 28%. That has to get to above 85% energy efficiency before it is comercial. We do not have the time.

[@MrTruckTube]

Costs are always high on a new energy sources, as more adoption and different forms of production methods are implemented the cost will decrease. H² is a great energy carrier and will only complement EV's and many industries in the future . Sustainability is not cheap nor will it ever be at first. Reducing carbon emissions is the goal, all goals are incremental H² is just another step. We should embrace all forms of clean energy. Whether we have the insight immediately or not.

[@Eridescent]

Really great video! I have to nitpick though - it's the see-ess-eye-are-oh, not "cicero"! Occasionally people say sci-roh, but usually we just spell out the initialism.

[@PomahXomehko]

The number target is to lower energy when producing green hydrogen at the moment it takes 50KW of electricity to produce 1kg of hydrogen gas. So 9 tonnes of water and 2.7 tonnes of KOH is needed and what to do with spent KOH salts use reverse osmosis to obtain K salts and water which consumes 5KW of electricity so 55KW of energy is needed. At the moment only small electrolysis units of 5MW are on the market and hopefully 50MW units will be on the market by 2030 .

[@lsporter88]

This is definitely worth more attention. Sounds like Hydrogen as a fuel/energy storage medium is cleaner and potentially more potent that any fossil fuel. The halting development of the technology sounds more like a Policy problem than anything else. Hydrogen Tech can and will be developed to an efficient level if the proper amount and type of resources are allocated to overcome any stumbling blocks just like any other new tech throughout history. Fossil fuels and steam engines are a good example, electricity transmission over distance and it's use in small circuits is an even better one. So let's get cracking on this clean and eternally renewable energy source. Great video Mr. Ferrell.

[@Hoigwai]

I'm convinced we will have to take a multi-faceted approach to power generation and storage. All renewables have to be considered since we can see the strengths and weaknesses prevent one source.

[@obijuan3004]

Lithium ion batteries are not a good energy source for aircraft, especially for long distance travel. Hydrogen could be best used in aircraft, if we can improve its production efficiency. Yet, if scientists succeeded today to create that efficiency, it would still take 10 years to prove hydrogen works for airlines, to produce hydrogen at scale, build delivery and fueling infrastructure, and 20 years or more to wait for gasoline powered aircraft to age out. There are over 100,000 airline flights per year. Powering those flights with hydrogen could make a huge dent in the carbon released into the atmosphere. Go Hydrogen!

[@tobiwan001]

There are companies like HPS Home Power Solutions that already sell combined packs (like "Picea") that include fuel cell, electrolyser and hydrogen storage for home use. So far it is still more expensive than just using the grid, but there is an increasing number of people that use it.

[@S0me0ne_S0meWhere_SaysHi]

The important item that stood out from this video to me is the decentalistaion of energy production!

[@victoryfirst2878]

Thank you for keeping us all in the know SIR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@isaacgraff8288]

I actually really like the thought of using excess renewable energy (Solar, wind, hydro) to make Hydrogen. No it isn't really efficient yet, but its something.

[@richarddeese1087]

Thanks. Nevermind the Oreos, just imagine you go to Disney World & pull Mickey's ears off. Those were the Hydrogens. tavi.

[@pohkeee]

😂

[@ajaysudan6834]

Hi Matt, I liked the video. I didn't like one part of the introduction @1:48 "there is even evidence it could be used to fight cancer" followed by the paper "hydrogen gas in cancer treatment". I appreciate it's a small line used to show that hydrogen has multiple uses. But you're stepping quite far out of your lane on this one. The "evidence" there is a particularly poor paper discussing others work at a cellular and mouse level. In medical research this has no clinical implications at all, on a Melnky & Fineout-Overholt level of evidence (used to grade levels of medical evidence) it's not on the hierachy, it doesn't make the bottom rung. It starts to become worrying because patients (particularly those with cancer), grab onto any bit of hope they can. I don't mean to be too harsh, I appreciate it was a one line throw away. It's just as someone who works in cancer medicine, this is what I see patients holding onto and then doubting they're not being given the "best" treatments. Please keep up the good work. I like your content.

[@mrnnhnz]

Interesting video Matt, thanks for your work on this, and presenting.

[@jooch_exe]

The limiting adoption factor in the Netherlands is safety regulations. If you want to store hydrogen you can't have any residential area's nearby.

[@MindForgedManacle]

And mind you, that's a good regulation, lol.

[@HermannKerr]

The hydrogen hospital examples are brilliant. My stupid idea is to use the potential energy of aluminium to rip oxygen from water to produce hydrogen. As aluminium is made with hydro-power (in a lot of places) by pulling the Oxygen from alumina (aluminium oxide) which initially comes from Bauxite. The Hydrogen could be fed through a fuel cell to eventually to power an electric motor. Trying to stuff hydrogen into a tank to power a motor vehicle doesn't make a lot of sense. Producing hydrogen with temporary storage is something that makes a whole lot of sense and using the oxygen as well is just brilliant.

[@aaronhann4931]

Good video, but pronunciation of CSIRO is sigh-row, not Cicero 😅

[@WildRapier]

I worked at a Chlor-Alkali plant that drew 3 MW of power at peak to make pool shock and bleach from sea salt via electrolysis. The chlorine was consumed BUT the hydrogen was just released into the atmosphere. I always thought that was such a waste of potential energy. The expensive part was already done, though I'm sure the liquification equipment would be a cost, better yet a generator feed to offset the 3MW draw! From a Chemical Engineering perspective, that's quite a loss / waste stream being untapped. All in all though, you still are only breaking 2 H-H bonds during (2H2 + O2 ->2H2O), far from a hydrocarbon!

[@mattiafrancescobruni8318]

Nice video; H2 has for sure a utility case for heavy duty stationary machinery, chipper, grinder, truck with PTO intense application (boom, fridges, cranes), excavator and such that need 24/7 operational capability; one startup in UK is using fossil fuels burned in absence of oxygen to produce graphite and hydrogen…while lot of people focus on fossil fuels usage the real problem (in my opinon) is, apart from the fact that is a finite resource, the out of control usage of the burning reaction - oxygen is (one) of the main source of problem. Alongside the fact that fossil fuel are toxic themselves of course, contrary to hydrogen, which is used even in alimentary industries to reduce fat.

[@skiffrace]

According to this channel, "World-changing breakthroughs" are dime-a-dozen, while at the same time the world still have not developed a fully reliable and economical toilet..

[@AArrad]

How awesome. I sat through a Brilliant ad, only to be shown that I’ll be forced to sit through 2 long ads by KZbin…

[@christerewald3224]

Yes, together with the fule cell. If we manage to store the H in safe manner (there are some great ides and prototypes on that) transformed or locked and released with a katalyst. Dont lose hope, battery yes but still quiet dirty in its making. Thank you for a good show.

[@ihcterra4625]

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.

[@hamishbracey5411]

I think it’s very cool what FFI are doing. They are really pushing to become one of the first large hydrogen company’s

[@johnapppel64]

One of the key take-aways from all the work on renewables and alternative energy sources seems to be that local generation needs to become a much bigger part of the puzzle than we've seen since the 19th century. I don't know that central generation and the resulting grid were inherently a bad way to go - I don't know enough to talk about that - but it seems very clear that while those won't go away, local generation needs to be a big part of the future. The added resiliency that comes from less reliance on the grid infrastructure is a bonus.

[@FinlayDaG33k]

Rijnstaete Elst is practically around the corner for me (just 3 trainstops/15 minutes away) and I was really surprised about their hydrogen solution as a sort of "backup power".

[@salembeeman370]

Being a supporter of Nuclear Power I was always intrigued by Co-Generation. We take a Nuclear Reactor and produce electricity and before the steam cools we use the energy to produce Hydrogen. This product can replace fossil fuels in transportation. It's not a perfect solution but moving in the right direction.

[@JaseTheAussie]

Haha - Love it - As an Aussie, hearing the CSIRO being pronounced as a word give me a giggle - locally we pronounce it by saying each letter C.S.I.R.O. :)

[@dwdanko]

At approximately 2:30, you state that it's 25% less electricity lost as heat compared, but since they go from 75% to 95% it should be 20% less electricity lost as heat.

[@BB-cf9gx]

The most efficient hydrogen is through Steam reforming or steam methane reforming (SMR) is a method for producing syngas (hydrogen and carbon monoxide) by reaction of hydrocarbons with water. Commonly natural gas is the feedstock. The main purpose of this technology is hydrogen production.

[@thomasgade226]

That's NOT the most efficient, just the cheapest so far. SMR turns high energy methane into lower-energy hydrogen at significant loss. And causes pollution.

[@BB-cf9gx]

@@thomasgade226 so glad you capitalized "Not". Ironically it makes the point that you are "NOT" correct. It is absolutely tge most economical and efficient way to produce hydrogen and that's why they use it. If another method comes along that is cheaper and more efficient they will switch to it for sure. And what remains is comparing the cost of CCS in steam reforming vs any other type of hydrogen production. It seems you do "NOT" know what you're talking about. Hugs and kisses.

[@Psychx_]

There are multiple options to tackle the money problem. I.e. for the private industry to adopt a technology and expand its use, things have to be profitable. For publically/govt. funded projects, a cost-covering mode of operation is enough - this used to be the absolute standard in creating infrastructure: Roads, railways, electricity and phone lines, satellite communication, etc. It's strange and exceptionally worrysome, that such an approach seemingly isn't even an option nowadays anymore! It's beyond reckless to make the success of halting climate change and the energy grid transition fully depend on whether private people can get rich from it in the process.

[@AlexM-tx2vr]

It is great to see an improvement in electrolysis efficiency, but without an affordable way to store hydrogen, I would rather see more effort into affordable synthetic hydrocarbons.

[@richardheasman]

Hi Matt... Great explanation and review examples. I still have problems with the inefficiencies of Hydrogen production. If we generate using renewables then it seems more efficient to store in batteries (could even be flow batteries rather than lithium for large scale static installations).... my largest concern over leaky hydrogen is that this is in itself worse than other greenhouse gasses... we are just creating a bigger problem. Hydrogen is a non starter in my opinion, except possibly for Mars colonisation. Appreciate your time and effort.

[@joelado]

I've been following hydrogen close to a half century. I remember when direct solar panels to hydrogen were first introduced. It was impressive as heck that you would point these water filled panels towards the sun and a lot of hydrogen bubbles would come off the dark backing behind the water. Separately, there was a company called Stewart from Canada that used a reverse proton exchange membrane (PEM) desktop tech to efficiently extract hydrogen from demineralized water for chemistry labs. Visionary people there created large scale PEMs for prototype hydrogen filling stations. Because the water only needed demineralizing and not distilling they could produce the hydrogen at the stations from regular water lines. The company also developed fuel cell technology to produce with Coleman camping supply a fuel cell generator that was for sale to the general public. They produced hydrogen bus prototypes in Canada and even the working prototype hydrogen skateboard car platform for GM. I was disappointed when both of these breakthroughs seemed to fade into nothing. I'm a BEV super fan, but given the advancements I've seen in hydrogen I'm frustrated that innovations like those above always seem to be just beyond our grasp. I have always wondered why? Being a business school graduate and having a brain that naturally thinks in economic terms, I have always been aware of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE). Never the less, I know that over time and with mass production at scale things that are too expensive now, may not be too expensive in the relatively near future. Just think how much batteries and solar panels costs have changed.

[@cad4246]

A major problem is there is no motivation to design and build cheaper and longer lasting electrolisers because dirty hydrogen is so cheap. A proper price on carbon is needed to push up the price of dirty hydrogen. Some of that money can then go to elctroliser research. That said there are better options for storage right now. Liquid air energy. Sodium ion batteries. Even hydro. We need to spend on what's going to deliver in 5 years time, not 20. The oxygen by product is very interesting though.

[@MarkoKukovec]

Why inefficient coversion and hydrogen storage? Why no use exponentially more eficient batteries?

[@estraume]

Methane pyrolysis is splitting of methane into hydrogen gas and solid carbon. By producing solid carbon, you avoid the additional cost for CO2 capture and storage that you need to make the conventional steam reforming process carbon neutral. According to the standard reaction enthalpies, 37.7 kJ are needed in methane pyrolysis to obtain one mole of H2. This is much more favorable than water electrolysis, where 285.8 kJ are required to produce one mole of hydrogen. The raw material costs for steam reforming is by that about 13% of the energy cost for water electrolysis + cost of methane. Which method would be cheaper and more energy efficient? Asking experts in the German chemical company BASF would be a good start on the research into methane pyrolysis.