to think that electric cars, electric radiators, hydrogen fuel cell cars are not zero emission?

[chomalungma]

First things first - I am totally for reducing a carbon footprint. I do things myself that are bad for the environment. Even starting this thread is using some energy that doesn't need to be used. I also think that electric cars, hydrogen power etc are a really good idea.

BUT

I was looking last night at getting electric radiators in the house. Inspired by the Government Green Grant. Even though this doesn't cover them.

There was a bit about a good reason to replace the traditional hot water radiators with electric radiators is that they have zero emissions of CO2 and so are 'infinitely' better for the environment.

Well - yes, in the house, there would be zero emissions. You aren't burning gas. And they are much more efficient than other radiators. But the electricity still has to be generated and we still have a lot of our electricity generated by gas turbines. We are getting better though

gridwatch.co.uk/

The same applies to electric vehicles - with the added issue that the energy costs in producing them - especially in mining the metals used for the batteries is high. And takes place in countries where they haven't got as much renewable energy sources.

Hydrogen - it's the future. Boris was in Teesside talking about the hydrogen economy. Hydrogen fuel cells. Great. Non polluting in cars - and that's a great thing for the local environment.

But you need to get hydrogen.

Most hydrogen is made by reacting methane with steam. This makes hydrogen and also leads to making CO2.

You can also make hydrogen by electrolysis of water. Which needs energy from electricity.

It's all so complicated. It's such a great idea to reduce pollution in cities. So important.

But at the moment, it seems that the CO2 is being made elsewhere - unless we move to more renewables to produce electricity (and even moving to more renewables has energy costs in that)

Really, we want to be finding ways to reduce our energy use, make things more energy efficient, reuse things that have cost energy to make.

And to be aware of all the energy costs and the ultimate life cycle in energy costs, CO2 production of everything we do.

I wonder how much energy this thread used?

You are absolutely right on hydrogen so called grey or blue hydrogen is made from methane (CH4) using fossil fuel generation which is half the price of green hydrogen produced from water (H2O) using renewable generation.

Customers are largely driven by price especially if the distinction between grey, blue and green hydrogen is too complex for the lay person.

@1dayatatime

You are absolutely right on hydrogen so called grey or blue hydrogen is made from methane (CH4) using fossil fuel generation which is half the price of green hydrogen produced from water (H2O) using renewable generation.

Customers are largely driven by price especially if the distinction between grey, blue and green hydrogen is too complex for the lay person.

Why not just use the methane directly ?

Why not just use the methane directly

You mean that it seems strange to use a high energy process to convert methane to hydrogen which is then used in a hydrogen fuel cell to make cars / trains move when we could just use the methane directly to make electricity to make the car / train move?

@chomalungma

Why not just use the methane directly

You mean that it seems strange to use a high energy process to convert methane to hydrogen which is then used in a hydrogen fuel cell to make cars / trains move when we could just use the methane directly to make electricity to make the car / train move?

Not quite.

But it seems a little bit strange to use x kWs of energy to create hydrogen which will then deliver x/i kWs (where i is >1) energy.

It's a little bit like delivering letters using a 40 tonne artic ...

You want energy from hydrogen ? Either get better fusion, or make it into a hydrocarbon for ease of transport, storage and use.

Why not just use the methane directly ?

Pros and cons here (natural gas is mostly methane)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalgass_vehicle

@ErrolTheDragon

Why not just use the methane directly ?

Pros and cons here (natural gas is mostly methane)

[[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural]]gass_vehicle

I wasn't picturing a gas powered car ....

Oh sorry - did you mean methane fuel cells or suchlike? (My chemists brain didn't categorise that as 'direct use') There has been some work on that, is it anywhere near commercial viability?

It's true that nuance doesn't travel well in text

I was trying to make the point that burning methane to make electricity to split water into oxygen and hydrogen to then put in a dodgy fuel cell to power a car seems on the same level as a project I had for years to fit wheels to a tomato.

There are some interesting energy diagrams here - with inputs and eventual useful outputs.

Having seen cars being manufactured I completely agree.
The manufacturing process uses a lot of natural resources, also the longevity of the batteries and end of life recycling.

Hydrogen production goes together with CCU (carbon capture and storage). In UK hydrogen will be made from natural gas and similar (biogas etc.) ans CO2 will go underground to carbon capture. It's about decarbonizing the country (also EU has similar ideas) and stopping global worming.

It's about decarbonizing the country (also EU has similar ideas) and stopping global worming.

You've more likelihood of stopping global worming with hydrogen fantasies than global warming.

global worming heh sorry, typing on my phone :)

I'm not saying it will work but the aim of hydrogen plants to stop releasing CO2.

Hydrogen production goes together with CCU (carbon capture and storage

Interesting.

If we are going to make CO2, we might as well try not get it into the atmosphere.

Maybe we need little plants in our exhaust fumes

www.engadget.com/2019-12-23-epfl-truck-carbon-dioxide-capture-system.html

The system is more appropriate for large vehicles like trucks or buses than for cars as it is rather bulky, requiring a 2-meter-long capsule and weighing 7 percent of the total payload of a truck. However, the researchers calculate that 90 percent of carbon dioxide emissions could be recycled in this way.

@Gobbycop

People flying the flag and taking the moral high ground about having an electric car also conveniently forget about the cobalt mining for the batteries.

I suppose as long as it's little black kids in the congo dying it matters less.

I think renewable energy is largely a bullshit hoax.

Fun fact 1:

More cobalt is used in oil refining than in electric car batteries

Fun fact 2:

Led by Tesla, electric car manufacturers are rushing to eliminate cobalt from batteries

Not an expert by any stretch, but I did come across an interesting article about the development of nano-diamond technology in the energy sector - I can't find the exact article, but this gives an interesting overview:

sustainable-nano.com/2020/03/30/nanotechnology-and-the-future-of-fuel-cells/