Hydrogen fuel breakthrough

[Tonz]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-0...ntial/10082514

surprised no one has brought this up today....

IF it ever gets off the ground whats the prediction we Aussies wont see any benefits due to it all being exported just like LNG...what a governmental cockup.

[simon varley]

hydrogen is easy to make in so many ways that there is absolutely no need to transport it any distance. You can crack water in the local servo if you need to. the problem with H2 powering cars is the safety issue of carrying a tank of explosive stuff if you have an accident.

[Tonz]

https://www.9news.com.au/world/2018/...pse-fatalities

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by simon varley

hydrogen is easy to make in so many ways that there is absolutely no need to transport it any distance. You can crack water in the local servo if you need to. the problem with H2 powering cars is the safety issue of carrying a tank of explosive stuff if you have an accident.

A tank of Hydrogen in a car would be less explosive than a car equipped with an LPG tank.

[Wretched]

Expect Hydrogen activities to ramp up here soon.
Toyota are opening a centre of excellence for Hydrogen in Melbourne.
They also have their Mirai car here in Pt Melbourne.

[Sprintey]

Great article & work by CSIRO. Ammonia as stable state storage and transportation medium is genius, as is the membrane.
A couple of questions.

Can ammonia not also be created as a byproduct of natural gas refining? Explaining attempts to build fertiliser plants near the NW gas trains? If so, for Australia to export it based off completely renewable energy, what is the feedstock used? And do we have renewable infrastrutcure in place that would rival the output scale of Natural gas based ammonia? Lead researcher has a fantastic vision for Australia to open an entire export industry, worth following.

And cost: $15 per kilo retail, 5kg in car is $75, a lot like fuelling a current car. Electric off solar off roof will still beat this and save you paying fuelco a tank a week.

[Vesper Martini]

Interesting read, says Hydrogen safer than petrol powered cars. I like many just assumed they would be quite dangerous, apparently not.
https://www.computerworld.com/articl...ndenburgs.html

[Crazy Dazz]

Checks Calender, Nope not the 1st of April...

That is certainly one of the stupidest ideas I have heard recently.

So instead of simply exporting Natural Gas, a safe, clean, and efficient product we already export by the boatload.
We should convert it, at considerable expense, into ammonia, then ship the ammonia (which is not only toxic but highly corosive) where upon it can be converted (again at some expense) into Hydrogen, Fuel less useful than the Natural Gas we started with.

For those that don't understand, let me explain, the idea behind hydrogen fuel cells is driven by one simple fact. You can't power your car with a Nuclear reactor.
In countries where the bulk of their power is generated from Nuclear Power, or Hydro power, if you could make the technology work it could be viable to to have local filling stations where you simply electrolysise water to make hydrogen. This prepossesses that it is a more efficient way to store electricity than batteries.
In theory, you could have a filling station at home.

This technology might overcome the danger of having compressed Hydrogen in your car by replacing it with Ammonia, but there goes the idea of simple electricity driven fuelling stations.

The idea that Australia export Ammonia is absurd.

There also the fundamental problem that whilst battery powered vehicles have started to gain traction, Hydrogen Fuel-Cells haven't, which must certainly bring into question which is the more efficient.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by simon varley

hydrogen is easy to make in so many ways that there is absolutely no need to transport it any distance. You can crack water in the local servo if you need to. the problem with H2 powering cars is the safety issue of carrying a tank of explosive stuff if you have an accident.

Being lighter than air, it's actually much safer than having a bottle of LPG .
If ruptured in an accident the H2 rises up and away from the crash.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

There also the fundamental problem that whilst battery powered vehicles have started to gain traction, Hydrogen Fuel-Cells haven't, which must certainly bring into question which is the more efficient.

Even without fuel cells, you can run ICEs on Hydrogen gas...

this is about producing hydrogen from renewable energy sources,
not gas from out of the ground or from nuclear power,so having
greater consequences for after all our natural gas is sold to every
other country around the world.

[stefcio007]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Expect Hydrogen activities to ramp up here soon.
Toyota are opening a centre of excellence for Hydrogen in Melbourne.
They also have their Mirai car here in Pt Melbourne.

Last week saw a Toyota Mirai on the M80 (Melbourne) so there is something happening at least.

[383hq]

The planet will have to do something different regarding fuels in the future:



The inevitable oil supply crunch

Published time: 30 Sep, 2018 20:34

See link at: https://www.rt.com/business/439990-i...supply-crunch/


© Nick Oxford / Reuter
“The warning signs are there – the industry isn’t finding enough oil.” That’s the start of a new report from Wood Mackenzie.

The report concludes that a supply gap could emerge in the mid-2020s as demand rises at a time when too few new sources of supply are coming online.

By 2030, there could be a supply shortfall on the order of 3 million barrels per day (mb/d), WoodMac argues. By 2035, it balloons to 7 mb/d, and by 2040, it reaches 12 mb/d. “Barring technology breakthrough beyond what we already assume, we’ll need new oil discoveries,” the report says.

The seeds of the problem were sown during the oil market downturn that began in 2014. Global upstream exploration spending plunged from $60 billion in 2014 to just $25 billion in 2018, according to WoodMac. Unsurprisingly, that translated into a steep decline in new discoveries. In the early part of this decade, the oil industry was discovering around 8 billion barrels of oil annually. That figure has plunged by three quarters since 2014.

Read more
US sanctions against Iran could give oil a boost to $100 amid dramatic shortfall in supplies

The precise figures vary, but Rystad Energy came a similar conclusion, noting that the total volume of new oil and gas reserves discovered plunged to a record low in 2017. “We haven’t seen anything like this since the 1940s,” Sonia Mladá Passos, Senior Analyst at Rystad Energy, said in a December 2017 statement. “The most worrisome is the fact that the reserve replacement ratio in the current year reached only 11 percent (for oil and gas combined) - compared to over 50 percent in 2012.”

This year, the industry has had a bit more success. Spending is on the rebound and new discoveries are on track to rise by about 30 percent, although that is heavily influenced by the developments in Guyana, where ExxonMobil and Hess Corp. have reported nearly a dozen discoveries, and hope to ramp up production to around 750,000 bpd by 2025.

It still may not be enough. Even if the industry were to somehow return to the good ol’ days prior to the 2014 market crash, and begin discovering around 8 billion barrels of oil each year, it would only delay the supply crunch into the 2030s, according to WoodMac.

But, of course, that rate of discovery remains far below those levels, so the supply crunch may take place much sooner. Moreover, because large-scale projects take several years to develop, the activity taking place today will determine the supply mix in the mid- to late-2020s.

WoodMac says that the rate of discovery is highly correlated with the level of spending, so closing the supply gap will require more capital. And because of the run up in oil prices this year, the industry will have a lot more cash to throw around.

Read more
Oil surges to 4-year high as investors see no sign of production rise amid Iran sanctions

The problem for the industry is that over the last few years the mindset, and the demands of shareholders, have shifted from production growth to profitability and investor returns. Shareholders are pressuring executives to return cash in the form of dividends and share buybacks. Energy stocks are not the darlings of Wall Street in the way they once were, particularly prior to the 2014 market meltdown. That puts extra pressure on oil and gas companies to dish out more of their earnings to investors rather than plowing it back into the ground.

But that means less spending on exploration. “The mind set for most E&Ps is still to be conservative, and default is to return capital to shareholders. Yet the duty to shareholders' interests cannot be myopically short term. More of the ‘windfall’ cash needs to find its way into exploration to sustain the business in the long term,”WoodMac said in its report.

Shale output will continue to grow, especially after new pipelines come online in Texas, which will ease the current bottleneck. But the large-scale increases in production in the medium-term will come from “frontier areas,” WoodMac says, as the string of discoveries in Guyana prove. WoodMac says the areas with the highest potential include “Suriname, the Brazilian Equatorial Margin; Mexico; Senegal, Gambia, Namibia and South Africa; Australia…and Alaska.”

For now, the level of activity is not enough to stave off the supply crunch, WoodMac warns, unless there is a dramatic increase in spending. “More explorers need to get in on the action if the spectre of ‘peak supply’ is to be kept at bay,” the consultancy says.

[Bossxr8]

Do those future estimates take into account the real possibility of electric vehicles being the majority on the road, and demand for oil being lower because of it?

[kmav23]

Hydrogen wont be successful.
A Hydrogen station costs millions to set up
Making Hydrogen takes lots of energy and storage while not being efficient.

Electricity is available everywhere and can be charged at home.

You can charge from solar rooftop for free.

The world is moving to electricity and battery storage.

Why would you buy a hydrogen car when you can charge at home and even for free with solar panels.

[theBlake]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Do those future estimates take into account the real possibility of electric vehicles being the majority on the road, and demand for oil being lower because of it?

I dont have the figures, but my understanding is that the majority of oil production does not go into motor vehicle petrol tanks, so conversion to alternative fuels wont even be noticed by oil producers.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by theBlake

I dont have the figures, but my understanding is that the majority of oil production does not go into motor vehicle petrol tanks, so conversion to alternative fuels wont even be noticed by oil producers.

After a quick google I think that is incorrect. 70% of oil production goes to transportation.

But that also factors in airplanes, ships, trucks etc.

But would still be a significant % that goes to cars.

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

After a quick google I think that is incorrect. 70% of oil production goes to transportation.

But that also factors in airplanes, ships, trucks etc.

But would still be a significant % that goes to cars.

I would guess jet fuel (kerosene) would be the biggest seller.

[kmav23]

Shenzen the third largest city by GDP in China has converted all 16,000 buses to electric and taxis will all be electric by next year.

Hydrogen has no future as battery prices keep falling.

Is so much easier and cheaper to plug into electricity then build expensive hydrogen stations costing millions.

[Franco Cozzo]

Doesn't hydrogen have to be stored at -270 degrees Celsius to be considered safe for automotive use for ICE?

That's some tricky stuff.

Read - spondoolies

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by kmav23

Is so much easier and cheaper to plug into electricity then build expensive hydrogen stations costing millions.

But the long term problem is when the majority of cars in the future on our roads are electric.

Everyone going home at night after work plugging into the grid, which can't cope now on hot days in Summer with everyone running their air conditioners as it is.

Will the governments spend the billions required to build new power stations, or prefer private enterprise to build smaller hydrogen stations?

Solar panels are great when the sun is shining, and storing that unused power generated into storage batteries to use at night, but defeats the purpose of powering your home at night, if you are going to be charging your electric car at night which requires heaps of kilowatts.

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

A tank of Hydrogen in a car would be less explosive than a car equipped with an LPG tank.

I believe that hydrogen would be far more explosive than LPG.

BTW a half empty petrol tank is also far more explosive than any LPG tank.

Dr Terry

[kmav23]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

But the long term problem is when the majority of cars in the future on our roads are electric.

Everyone going home at night after work plugging into the grid, which can't cope now on hot days in Summer with everyone running their air conditioners as it is.

Will the governments spend the billions required to build new power stations, or prefer private enterprise to build smaller hydrogen stations?

Solar panels are great when the sun is shining, and storing that unused power generated into storage batteries to use at night, but defeats the purpose of powering your home at night, if you are going to be charging your electric car at night which requires heaps of kilowatts.

Battery and solar costs are falling yearly as more EVs are being made, due to research and economies of scale manufacturing.

Producing more electricity will be even cheaper in the future with solar and wind, so supply is easy to produce.

Batteries should flatten out the demand and supply curve so in theory it should be flat and peak and off peak prices should not be as huge as it is today.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Being lighter than air, it's actually much safer than having a bottle of LPG .
If ruptured in an accident the H2 rises up and away from the crash.

1) LPG is stored as a liquid at ambient temperature under very moderate pressure. Hydrogen won't liquefy, so it must be stored under high pressure. Any gas at that pressure is dangerous.
2) Hydrogen under pressure is highly corrosive, it actually forms hydrides. So it can eat through most normal tanks and fittings.
3) If you manage to trap even a minute quantity of oxygen in the tank, eg with an incorrectly used filler fitting, under pressure the Hydrogen will spontaneously combust.
4) If an LPG tank gets caught in a fire, usually it will pop the safety valve and burn off. Compressed Hydrogen just goes BOOM.
5) For their "Massive Ordinance - Air Burst" the US Military wanted a huge tank of gas that would go boom. They decided Hydrogen was too dangerous (it tended to explode whilst still in the plane) and so used compressed Methane.
6) You're correct, Hydrogen does rise whereas LPG sinks. So do you have fuel tanks in the roof of your car? That was actually one of the problems when they trialled Hydrogen FC buses in Perth. The tanks had to be mounted on top for safety reasons.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by kmav23

Battery and solar costs are falling yearly as more EVs are being made

Say WHAT?

Originally Posted by kmav23

Producing more electricity will be even cheaper in the future with solar and wind, so supply is easy to produce.

Unfortunately Solar Power is considerably more expensive than other forms. Wind Power unbelievably so.

Originally Posted by kmav23

Batteries should flatten out the demand and supply curve

That's not how Supply & Demand curves work, but I understand what you're trying to say.
Problem is that Batteries just don't work.

Engineers have been trying for centuries to figure out the issue of peak demand, and even with improvements in batteries are still NOT the answer.

I worked on the project for what was claimed to be the biggest off-grid Solar Array in the SH. It was so successful that we had to rapidly deploy two new mW Diesel generators to compensate. The problem of course was the batteries, just an abject failure. We got stuck paying millions extra each month (under take or pay) for power we couldn't use.

[Warrenk]

Originally Posted by jpd80

If ruptured in an accident the H2 rises up and away from the crash.

Although H2 is lighter than air, it can self ignite if suddenly released under pressure. A H2 flame is invisible to the eye as well.

Warren

[kmav23]

https://reneweconomy.com.au/origin-s...se-load-70999/

Origin says solar cheaper than coal, moving on from base-load


Origin Energy says the cost of wind and solar farms has fallen so far it is now cheaper than the marginal cost of coal generation, and the company is moving on from the concept of “24/7 base-load”.

The assessment was made by Greg Jarvis, the company’s head of energy trading and operations, in an interview for RenewEconomy’s popular Energy Insiders podcast, published on Tuesday.

“I have been in this game for so long … the one thing I have seen is just the cost of renewables really change the game,” Jarvis says. “It is amazing what we have been seeing.

“Renewables are cheaper than the marginal cost of black coal at the moment. They are very cheap.”

Jarvis puts the cost of solar in the mid $40s/MWh and the cost of wind at the low $50s/MWh. That cost of solar is around half the average price of wholesale electricity in most states this year.

The assessment accords with other views in the market about the cost of wind and solar, including from UK billionaire Sanjeev Gupta, who is looking at solar to underpin the expansion of his newly bought steel business in Australia.

However, it should be noted that such numbers have yet to be seen in power purchase agreements – apart from Origin’s deal with the Stockyard Hill wind farm – largely because they are hidden, but also because the developers need to make a margin of profit.

And costs are being blurred and added to by increased requirements for connection agreements.

Still, with China now mulling a dramatic lift in its 2030 renewable energy target to 35 per cent from 20 per cent, the chances are that the costs of both wind and solar will fall dramatically again.

And with the falling cost of storage – this is likely to enable “firm” renewables to emerge as a serious contender to existing fossil fuel plants.

Jarvis also made it clear that Origin Energy has moved on from thinking about new generation in terms of “base-load”, which stands in sharp contrast to current government thinking and the conservative commentariat.

Asked if Origin Energy had moved beyond the idea – promoted by the federal government and many in mainstream media – that reliability depended on 24/7 base-load power, Jarvis said:

“Oh, a Long time ago. The idea of base-load power stations is well and truly gone.”

He cited Origin’s recent investment in its last coal fire generator Eraring, and its efforts to make it more flexible so it can power down in the middle of the day so Origin can focus on cheap renewables, before turning up the power at peak times.

Origin’s position in the market is in stark contrast to AGL, which remains the largest generator of coal power, and hopes to keep its Loy Yang A brown coal power plant going until 2028, even if it plans to close the ageing and decrepit Liddell plant by 2022.

Origin plans to close Eraring, by 2032. In the meantime, it is turning to wind and solar, and battery and pumped hydro storage investments.

The first of these new investments is a large scale battery at the Mt Stuart peaking plant, which burns jet fuel at times of high demand or for grid security issues such as an approaching cyclone, will test its fast response and “black-start” capabilities.

The second, a potential expansion of the Shoalhaven pumped hydro facility, is also under consideration, and Jarvis says more storage investments are inevitable.

In South Australia, Origin is also looking to replacing units at its Quarantine gas fired power station with fast-start “aero-derivative” plant that can combine well with battery storage.

And it is looking at opportunities in its “brown field” sites, including Eraring, where it sees big opportunities for a change of technology, just as AGL is planning at Liddell.

“We see a combination of fast gas, pumped hydro and battery storage, and combination of those with renewables is the future,” Jarvis says.

“And let’s not forget what’s behind the meter, and how do you aggregate those resources,” he said, noting that Origin was now the biggest installer of rooftop solar in the country, and was also heavily involved in household battery storage.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by kmav23

Battery and solar costs are falling yearly as more EVs are being made, due to research and economies of scale manufacturing.

Have you ever wondered why some manufacturers are looking at producing Hydrogen powered cars when they know that electric cars look like the next obvious technology?

Here's the truth...

Electric cars will ALWAYS be more expensive than conventional petrol/diesel powered cars.

The very problem is the batteries themselves.

Lithium-ion cells that can store 1 KWh of electrical energy costs between $170 and $250 each.

If you put 100 KWh worth of batteries in a car to get the range everyone is wanting, the cost of the batteries alone is between $17,000 to $25,000.

This is before you add the cost of making the car.

So what you might say... As production ramps up, and scales of economies in manufacturing increases, the price of the batteries will come down, and so will the price of electric cars.

Not true...

Instead, some of the metal used to produce the Lithium batteries will go up, such as Cobalt... An essential ingredient of Lithium-ion battery technology.

Some manufacturers such as BMW are now trying to secure the price of Cobalt till the year 2030 for that reason.

Cobalt and pure Lithium will become like Gold and Silver, prices will not drop as demand increases.

When everyone wants Cobalt... The prices of cobalt will not go down, they will go up.

A hydrogen-powered car is much less costly to produce than an electric car because of the huge amount needed for the batteries.

Unless they find a way to make batteries that can store the electrical energy needed to power EV's using a different technology and cheaper ingredients... Don't expect EV's to become cheaper than conventional cars we drive now.

[kmav23]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

Have you ever wondered why some manufacturers are looking at producing Hydrogen powered cars when they know that electric cars look like the next obvious technology?

Here's the truth...

Electric cars will ALWAYS be more expensive than conventional petrol/diesel powered cars.

The very problem is the batteries themselves.

Lithium-ion cells that can store 1 KWh of electrical energy costs between $170 and $250 each.

If you put 100 KWh worth of batteries in a car to get the range everyone is wanting, the cost of the batteries alone is between $17,000 to $25,000.

This is before you add the cost of making the car.

So what you might say... As production ramps up, and scales of economies in manufacturing increases, the price of the batteries will come down, and so will the price of electric cars.

Not true...

Instead, some of the metal used to produce the Lithium batteries will go up, such as Cobalt... An essential ingredient of Lithium-ion battery technology.

Some manufacturers such as BMW are now trying to secure the price of Cobalt till the year 2030 for that reason.

Cobalt and pure Lithium will become like Gold and Silver, prices will not drop as demand increases.

When everyone wants Cobalt... The prices of cobalt will not go down, they will go up.

A hydrogen-powered car is much less costly to produce than an electric car because of the huge amount needed for the batteries.

Unless they find a way to make batteries that can store the electrical energy needed to power EV's using a different technology and cheaper ingredients... Don't expect EV's to become cheaper than conventional cars we drive now.

The large majority of car makers, boat makers, drones, scooters, motorbikes, light planes etc have chosen batteries.

Battery costs have declined every year and its still in its infancy.

Everything is being moved to electrification with battery storage.

Instead of billions on wasted on Sydney light rail construction, there is this new battery-powered trackless tram requiring no power lines.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/why-trac...ht-rail-59201/


Batteries are the future, have a look at Shenzen they already converted all their bus and taxis to battery power.

[solarite_guy]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

...

Instead, some of the metal used to produce the Lithium batteries will go up, such as Cobalt... An essential ingredient of Lithium-ion battery technology.

Some manufacturers such as BMW are now trying to secure the price of Cobalt till the year 2030 for that reason.

Cobalt and pure Lithium will become like Gold and Silver, prices will not drop as demand increases.

When everyone wants Cobalt... The prices of cobalt will not go down, they will go up.

Unless things have changed, these are additional reasons on top of performance aspects, why pursuit of the Goodenough-Barga technology should be pursued and the Li technology dropped.

Unfortunately, rare metals are better for profit numbers in the global financial markets when compared to such things as sodium and glass.

[solarite_guy]

Originally Posted by kmav23

Batteries are the future, have a look at Shenzen they already converted all their bus and taxis to battery power.

From a practical aspect comparing what China is doing with Li battery technology to the rest ofthe world may not be a good measure.

Do not make the following political. It is a statement of fact.

China has strong footholds in the mineral rights in such of Afghanistan and South America including Bolivia.

Minerals in question? Lithium and cobalt. Some of the worlds largest known reserves.

In this scenario China wins in both the global financial market trading floors and in the actual sale of the materials.

Such things as salt flats, salt mines and oceans lake the ability to create financial windfalls on the scale of Li and Cobalt. However, the sudium and glass based Goodenough-Barga technology promises not only better performance but also a better financial aspect for "Main Street". Unfortunatley, since the GFC Main Street has been pushed to the back seat.