Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MostlyPseudonymous t1_iy8lt7k wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Rolls-Royce successfully tests hydrogen-powered jet engine by je97

Free hydrogen is actually shockingly uncommon anywhere we can actually safely acquire it.

11

[deleted] t1_iy8mbgt wrote

[deleted]

−11

MostlyPseudonymous t1_iy8mf9m wrote

Actually it's incredibly energy intensive, so 'easy' is misleading. That's only one of the very major problems with hydrogen as a fuel. Electrolysis of water consumes more energy than combustion of hydrogen releases.

25

Art-Zuron t1_iy8s0k4 wrote

That's why it wouldn't be useful for power generation for a country, but as a fuel for discrete things like jets. Renewables like wind and water, and nonrenewables like fission should make up the difference. And, if we can ever figure out fusion, we could get nuclear power out of water too.

It took more energy to make Petrol than you get out of it too. And it takes millions of years to make it at that.

3

johnny_memetic t1_iy8r26a wrote

You mean the device we call, "the bomb"? We almost never ran it. We'd light off all of our O2 candles before we'd turn that fucker on.

3

wrgrant t1_iy8whgz wrote

Why not, out of curiosity?

1

johnny_memetic t1_iy9awsa wrote

It's a bitch to maintain, and it has a salient tonal at frequency AAAAARRGHHHHHHHHHH

2

wrgrant t1_iy9cqwf wrote

Ah thanks, makes sense. Last choice to get oxygen then over anything else for the sake of the sanity of the crew lol

1

hazelnut_coffay t1_iy9zdq9 wrote

you do know that the vast majority of hydrogen is manufactured via steam reforming rather than hydrolysis right? there’s a reason why O&G companies are pushing for hydrogen as the next energy source rather than renewables.

steam reforming is methane (ie natural gas) + water -> carbon monoxide + hydrogen

hydrolysis is an energy intensive process. meaning you need to put in more energy than you get out of it. it’s not sustainable at large scale.

1