I heard people saying that while hydrogen isn't good for consumer vehicles, it is competitive on large size commercial ones such as city and airport buses, construction trucks etc. These big rigs have the room and load capacity for safer hydrogen storage. Their usage patterns allow them to use centralized or dedicated hydrogen refueling stations.
Filling up the empty tank of a regular sized city bus with hydrogen is a lot faster than recharging the batteries to full for an eletrical bus of same size.
Pump energy storage (hydro or air)Just remember that new solar electric plants are being specified with peak solar panel capacity in excess of what can be sent to the grid.
So if there is spare electricity, it might as well be used to produce hydrogen.
Pump energy storage (hydro or air)
methane/methanol/formic acid fuel cells or fossil diesel-electric hybrids are far superior for commercial vehicles.
hydrogen is better off converted to methane, methanol or formic acid. for example formic acid is nontoxic, can be burned in fuel cells, and There is no reason for direct H2 use.
But hydrogen might have a much smaller carbon footprint in comparison?Yes. But something like compressed natural gas would be a lot cheaper and more efficient than compressed hydrogen ever will be.
If you also want to liquefy it, liquid natural gas requires a lot less energy to make since it is higher temperature than liquid hydrogen.
Not if the hydrogen is made from natural gas. The process can be described as 脱了裤子放屁. The process is actually much worst than just burn the damn natural gasBut hydrogen might have a much smaller carbon footprint in comparison?
If the hydrogen is renewable, converting it to organic fuels like methane, methanol or formic acid can be done with waste CO2 or waste carbon sources that are burned for electricity (biowaste), which still reduces the carbon footprint.But hydrogen might have a much smaller carbon footprint in comparison?
Well, that's the wrong way to produce hydrogen then. There are ways to produce hydrogen without carbon. This beats all the carbon burning power sources in long run.Not if the hydrogen is made from natural gas. The process can be described as 脱了裤子放屁. The process is actually much worst than just burn the damn natural gas
Currently there isn't large scale renewable hydrogen production. There's 2 ways to go about it: direct solar splitting and electrolysis. The problem with direct solar splitting is that pure oxygen and pure hydrogen are reactive towards the electrodes. The problem with electrolysis is that it isn't as efficient as simply storing the electricity in a battery, pumping it into water, etc.Well, that's the wrong way to produce hydrogen then. There are ways to produce hydrogen without carbon. This beats all the carbon burning power sources in long run.
Making hydrogen production more efficient and more env-friendly is one side of the coin. The other is to find and test the right use-cases. I don't see why these two tasks cannot go in parallel.