I wish I got to do fun little projects like this at my job. Anyway, this proof of concept shows that hydrogen would be a great alternative to propane and natural gas for cooking. Hat tip to @hypx@mastodon.social.

  • Corigan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Sooo just cooking gas with more steps.

    Oil industry loves pushing hydrogen but it’s nearly all made from fossil fuels, so what benefit is there?

    • inefficient_electron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Key words being “current supply”. There are major moves being made to change this. Supply and demand need to grow at the same time if this is to work though.

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Blue hydrogen is made by stripping the hydrogen from fossil fuel hydrocarbons (chains of hydrogen and carbon, hence the name), and sequestering the carbon. It produces a fuel that contains enough chemical energy to be burned as fuel, but without the carbon atoms that would turn into greenhouse gases.

      Most hydrogen currently produced though, is gray hydrogen (made from natural gas, but without sequestering the carbon, so that CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere).

    • xthexder@l.sw0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The biggest use-case I see for hydrogen is more of an energy storage and transfer mechanism. With the world switching to renewables that generate power inconsistently, some countries are looking at putting the extra power into hydrogen generation via electrolysis, which can then be used at night/low-wind days to keep the power grid stable.

      If we ever get to the point that we’ve got a surplus of renewably generated hydrogen, then it could make sense to start using to power cars, heating, cooking, whatever.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      TBH I respect Toyota for being realistic more than grifters like Musk. The fact is that car will never be a sustainable replacement for cars. They’re here to save the auto cartels, not the planet.

      But on the other hand public transit and LEVs are much more realistic. I would very much like to see a Toyota e-bike.

  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Fun project! But replacing gas with hydrogen seems really tricky. Hydrogen is much harder to transport without leaks because it’s such a tiny molecule. Electric seems better than trying to still burn hydrogen.

  • barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Back in the early days of gas infrastructure, before wide-spread electrification, you know gas street lights and everything, the gas was produced by gasifying coal, resulting in gas that was often over 50% hydrogen, with only ~20% methane. Rest nitrogen and CO.

    Natural gas has a methane content upwards of 75%, which meant that everyone had to switch out their burner nozzles but the rest of the infrastructure stayed intact.

    All this is to say: Nothing about is really new or rocket science. Europe is certainly creating a backbone pipeline network for hydrogen, parts of it new pipes, other parts re-purposed natural gas pipes, many were built to a standard that allows them to carry hydrogen though some valves etc. might need upgrading. Some of those were originally built for hydrogen in the first place, and checking Wikipedia there’s actually a 240km segment in the Ruhr area, built in 1938, still in operation, which always carried hydrogen. Plain steel but comparatively low-pressure so it works.

    Oh and have another number: According to Fraunhofer, Germany’s pipeline network can store three months of total energy usage (electricity, transportation, everything). Not in storage tanks, but just by operating the pipelines themselves at higher or lower pressure.

    And we need that stuff one way or the other: Even if tomorrow ten thousand fusion plants go online that doesn’t mean that the chemical industry doesn’t need feedstock, or that reducing steel with electricity would make sense. Both of those things need hydrogen.

    Fusion is still in the future so the plan is to import most of that hydrogen, mostly from Canada and Namibia, in tankers carrying ammonia which is way more efficient that trying to compress hydrogen also ammonia is needed for some processes anyway.

    • ruse8145@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Hydrogen is so much smaller than natty light that on a Continental scale the losses could be significant, but that’s neat history. It’s fun how long stuff has been around like gasification.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        From all that I’ve seen electricity lines (also HVDC) have higher transmission losses by a magnitude. With hydrogen and modern material science you’ll probably have the choice between higher losses and embrittlement, but that’s just another economical equation: Do you want to eat the higher losses, or replace the pipeline in a couple of decades or a century.

        At least environment-wise hydrogen leaks aren’t an issue: Some atoms diffusing through the wall don’t constitute a fire hazard and the end result is water. Methane, OTOH, is a nasty greenhouse gas.

        Speaking of nature: Ammonia is nasty, but nature produces it itself (just not at those concentrations) and can deal with it. The site directly surrounding a leak would be dead, a bit further downstream (literally) there’s going to be over-fertilisation. Not nice but definitely better than an oil leak and fixing it quite literally involves waiting until grass has grown over it as rain dilutes it and microorganisms migrate back in to eat it. Similar things apply to ethanol which I’d say would be a better choice for general use such as hybrid cars, camping stoves and whatnot because it’s not going to burn your lungs away. Can’t rely on people being conscious enough to get up and flee the ammonia stench when they’re in a car accident.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          At least environment-wise hydrogen leaks aren’t an issue:

          Hydrogen is a strong indirect greenhouse gas.

          The climate impact of hydrogen is about 34 times higher than CO2 when measured over a 20-year period. Looking at the impact over 100 years, the global warming potential reduces to between eight and 13 times.

          Hydrogen causes this by stabilising methane in the atmosphere and creating tropospheric ozone and stratospheric water vapour.

          https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/scientists-reiterate-concerns-about-climate-warming-hydrogen-leaks/

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            We shouldn’t be having methane in the atmosphere in the first place. Sure, if you produce the hydrogen from natural gas then you have a problem because that stuff comes with plenty of methane which won’t suddenly stop leaking.

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              We shouldn’t be having methane in the atmosphere in the first place.

              Ha. So we are banning farmers from owning livestock

              Sure, if you produce the hydrogen from natural gas then you have a problem because that stuff comes with plenty of methane which won’t suddenly stop leaking.

              Also if you inject hydrogen into the existing natural gas pipeline.

              The point here is that hydrogen leaks are very much an issue. Your previous statement was false.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Noone here is planning to inject hydrogen into existing pipelines. If anything, synthesising methane during the transition so that consumers only have to switch their burners once, from nat gas to hydrogen, and not first to nat gas + more hydrogen and then to pure hydrogen. Gotta switch whole municipalities at once doesn’t make sense to duplicate the last-mile gas pipes. If, and that’s not even clear yet, hydrogen pipes will even be a thing for private consumers.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Noone here is planning to inject hydrogen into existing pipelines.

                  Ok. Not you. But lots of people elsewhere in this thread.

                  If anything, synthesising methane during the transition so that consumers only have to switch their burners once, from nat gas to hydrogen, and not first to nat gas + more hydrogen and then to pure hydrogen.

                  Agree. Burning hydrogen has to be done carefully to avoid NOx and other side effects.

                  And that’s not even clear yet, hydrogen pipes will even be a thing for private consumers.

                  Agreed.

                  Industrial green hydrogen is a necessity to remove fossil fuels. Residential hydrogen I am very sceptical about. Even 100% clean fuel cells burn too hot for domestic heating.

  • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s cool and all…but hydrogen isn’t an energy source, not the way we use it…it’s more like a battery. And we have battery powered ovens now.

    The hard part of current tech is making recharging the battery economical given that there will be a significant loss.

    The even harder part of hydrogen, though, is storing and transport. Hydrogen atoms are real small. Anything you put it in will leak, and that impacts the recharge efficiency, as well.

    • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      There is promising research into mixing hydrogen with existing natural gas pipelines at low concentration (<2%). It doesn’t leak any more than gas pipes do already and the low concentration prevents embrittlement. And you don’t have to go through the horrendous efficiency of a fuel cell, you just burn it with the gas

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Burning hydrogen with natural gas without special equipment creates NOx which is 300x worse than CO2 (but released in smaller quantities).