ICE to run on hydrogen?

[Tracy D'arth]

Its worse than that!!!!

 

 

3 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

I just can't understand this, whenever I walk past pour local windfarm and see half the turbines not running it just looks like madness. Wind turbines cost a lot to build and install but the running costs must be minimal. Why are we burning gas whilst having the turbines sitting idle?

 

...........Dave

  A lot of the time the turbines are motored, using electricity, to prevent damage to the gearboxes in the cold when the wind don't blow enough!!

[ditchcrawler]

2 hours ago, Tracy D'arth said:

Its worse than that!!!!

 

 

  A lot of the time the turbines are motored, using electricity, to prevent damage to the gearboxes in the cold when the wind don't blow enough!!

And save the main bearing sitting in one spot with all that weight on them

[peterboat]

7 hours ago, Mad Harold said:

Westport fuel systems of Canada are testing a large ice engine running on hydrodgen.

They say initial results are encouraging and these engines are being developed for truck,train and marine use.

Almost zero emissions and much cheaper than battery electric or fuel cell,and can use existing tooling and manufacture.

Technology seems to be moving quickly.

I used to install OMVL gas equipment, they developed a gas engine, Westport bought OMVL for that engine and then let the gas business go down the pan overa number of years, they were the best in the business with the gas equipment. When I talked to Richard who was the UK tech guy for OMVL he told us that the engine was special not a simple conversion but built for the job. Now like the others I think electric from wind turbines that would otherwise be turned off should make hydrogen, but its for use to create electricity when the wind doesn't blow, hydrogen for vehicles is a waste of energy and the distribution is a nightmare as it really can crack metal. That of course won't stop people believing its the future as they love their engines 

[Machpoint005]

3 hours ago, dmr said:

 

I just can't understand this, whenever I walk past pour local windfarm and see half the turbines not running it just looks like madness. Wind turbines cost a lot to build and install but the running costs must be minimal. Why are we burning gas whilst having the turbines sitting idle?

 

...........Dave

It's because it's far easier to pause a few turbines than shut down a thermal station. You can also reactivate a turbine in a minute or so. 

5 hours ago, Tracy D'arth said:

If we make too much hydrogen, will the world get lighter and float away?

Converting sunlight into hydrogen is technically an energy gain for the planet and will worsen global warming more than releasing our earthbound energy, a bad idea?

 

Worsen global warming? How do you work that out? By the way, it's climate change that's the problem - warming is just one aspect of it.

[Tracy D'arth]

14 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

It's because it's far easier to pause a few turbines than shut down a thermal station. You can also reactivate a turbine in a minute or so. 

 

Worsen global warming? How do you work that out? By the way, it's climate change that's the problem - warming is just one aspect of it.

There is a time to take me seriously, then there is my previous post, Gotcha!

[Machpoint005]

2 minutes ago, Tracy D'arth said:

There is a time to take me seriously, then there is my previous post, Gotcha!

 

I obviously spend too much time conversing with numpties!

[dmr]

14 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

It's because it's far easier to pause a few turbines than shut down a thermal station. You can also reactivate a turbine in a minute or so. 

 

 

 

It might be difficult to turn a gas station right off, but surely its very quick and easy to turn the output down?. We were told that the "dash to gas" was because these power stations are very controllable, so nuclear would run at a fixed output and gas and wind would then work together to do the rest, as the wind drops so the gas would increase to compensate. Now it looks like as the demand drops so the wind power gets reduced rather than the gas.

I have heard that the turbines are stopped to increase their lifespan but this also makes no sense to me.

 

..............Dave

[peterboat]

1 minute ago, dmr said:

 

It might be difficult to turn a gas station right off, but surely its very quick and easy to turn the output down?. We were told that the "dash to gas" was because these power stations are very controllable, so nuclear would run at a fixed output and gas and wind would then work together to do the rest, as the wind drops so the gas would increase to compensate. Now it looks like as the demand drops so the wind power gets reduced rather than the gas.

I have heard that the turbines are stopped to increase their lifespan but this also makes no sense to me.

 

..............Dave

They are turned off to extend their life, the company still gets paid so it's  a win win for it

[dmr]

2 minutes ago, peterboat said:

They are turned off to extend their life, the company still gets paid so it's  a win win for it

 

So the turbine owner gets paid for owning them rather than for making electricity??? This would explain a lot. I note that some big financial institutions are buying up windfarms.

 

.............Dave

[peterboat]

2 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

So the turbine owner gets paid for owning them rather than for making electricity??? This would explain a lot. I note that some big financial institutions are buying up windfarms.

 

.............Dave

My mate Mick Longford has 6 on his farm, one always spins as it powers his farm the others spin if electric needed, if you are on the M1 at Sheffield you can't fail to see them big majestic things they are.

[ditchcrawler]

9 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

So the turbine owner gets paid for owning them rather than for making electricity??? This would explain a lot. I note that some big financial institutions are buying up windfarms.

 

.............Dave

Correct, the ones in the next village to us were earning money before the HV cables were laid to connect them

[Murflynn]

7 hours ago, Sea Dog said:

Good idea - it won't be so windy then either!

 

yeah - I've noticed that it's only windy when the turbines are rotating   -  that's OK for some but personally I could do with less wind.

[Murflynn]

8 hours ago, Sea Dog said:

Hydrogen is an absolutely brilliant solution... right up until you have to produce it, move it or store it in large quantities. All of those things present challenges as yet unsolved.

 

Seems to work for Shell in California (filling stations for vehicles) and in the Netherlands using wind farm power in the North Sea. 

They seem to have solved it to the point where it can be produced economically and stored in car fuel tanks.

 

Interesting link here:  https://www.carboncommentary.com/blog/2017/7/5/hydrogen-made-by-the-electrolysis-of-water-is-now-cost-competitive-and-gives-us-another-building-block-for-the-low-carbon-economy

this report suggests that making hydrogen from water by electrolysis is 80% efficient (80% of the electrical energy used is recovered in the energy available from the hydrogen).

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Murflynn

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

 

Seems to work for Shell in California (filling stations for vehicles) and in the Netherlands using wind farm power in the North Sea. 

They seem to have solved it to the point where it can be produced economically and stored in car fuel tanks.

 

These are economically impractical pilot schemes run by fossil fuel companies like Shell to try and preserve their unsustainable business model. If they had to roll this out on a large scale they'd be bankrupt, because the numbers simply don't add up.

[Murflynn]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

These are economically impractical pilot schemes run by fossil fuel companies like Shell to try and preserve their unsustainable business model. If they had to roll this out on a large scale they'd be bankrupt, because the numbers simply don't add up.

 

do you have a reference for that?

[ditchcrawler]

9 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

 

Seems to work for Shell in California (filling stations for vehicles) and in the Netherlands using wind farm power in the North Sea. 

They seem to have solved it to the point where it can be produced economically and stored in car fuel tanks.

 

That's one less worries for the pension then

[IanD]

17 hours ago, Murflynn said:

 

do you have a reference for that?

Do you mean -- references for the numbers not adding up for hydrogen?

 

Any number of them, but I'm sure if I quoted them (again!) you'd point out how biased they are... ?

 

Do your own research with an open mind, look at the sources of articles, and especially be suspicious of claims about how green hydrogen is while ignoring the realities of where it comes from. The same with all the claims about how terrible lithium batteries are for the environment.

 

It could be a niche fuel in applications like aircraft where density is all-important, cost is not so important, and the vehicles regularlyreturn to a small number of high-volume refuelling stations (airports) which can justify the cost. Long-range shipping is another application, though other non-fossil liquid fuels may be better for this.

 

Even truck manufacturers are giving up on hydrogen and moving towards BEV as the green transport solution.

 

https://www.rechargenews.com/transition/blow-to-clean-hydrogen-sector-as-major-truck-maker-rules-out-h2-for-long-distance-transport/2-1-951345

 

For the much-quoted case of storage of excess renewable energy, the industry is moving towards mega-battery banks precisely because converting electricity to hydrogen and back is so inefficient and always will be (thermodynamics, chemical bonds and all that stuff), and this isn't something that a magic new invention can fix. If you have 100kWh to spare, why store it using a method which only gives you 30kWh back when you could use one that gives you 90kWh back?

 

[mark99]

On 12/03/2021 at 22:43, IanD said:

These are economically impractical pilot schemes run by fossil fuel companies like Shell to try and preserve their unsustainable business model. If they had to roll this out on a large scale they'd be bankrupt, because the numbers simply don't add up.

The UK main gas transporters plan is by 2023 to be able to transport 20% uk domestic gas as Hydrogen either blended in existing gas or via Hydrogen only networks. The UK plan is to produce 1 GW Hydrogen  by 2025 and 5GW by 2030. By 2032 would spend £28 Bn on ensuring existing pipes can all take hydrogen. These pipes would have to be probably replaced anyhow.

 

Leeds has been earmarked as a first discrete H2 city. H21 project is its name.

 

No doubt timescales will slip but the political will is still there.

Edited March 14, 2021 by mark99

[peterboat]

2 minutes ago, mark99 said:

The UK main gas transporters plan is by 2023 to be able to transport 20% uk domestic gas as Hydrogen either blended in existing gas or via Hydrogen only networks. The UK plan is to produce 1 GW Hydrogen  by 2025 and 5GW by 2030. By 2032 would spend £28 Bn on ensuring existing pipes can all take hydrogen. These pipes would have to be probably replaced anyhow.

 

Leeds has been earmarked as a first discrete H2 city. H21 project is it's name.

The reality is Mark that lots of turbines will be running 24/7 to produce the hydrogen, I know Ian likes batteries but it is a huge amount of resources that would better used as smaller car batteries. In the future that might change as battery chemistry  changes

[mark99]

Natural gas is used in UK for some HGV applications. Typically you need an "anchor" fleet. Same vehicles using same known route using same filling station as the number of filling stations are limited in number presently.  The gas is taken from the network and compressed to 250 bar. 

 

Waitrose is a good example.

[mark99]

Just now, peterboat said:

The reality is Mark that lots of turbines will be running 24/7 to produce the hydrogen, I know Ian likes batteries but it is a huge amount of resources that would better used as smaller car batteries. In the future that might change as battery chemistry  changes

Indeed Peter. The hydrogen is meant to be sent to 21 uk million homes using existing buried networks. In my professional life I see lots of investment in this and material sciences to get ready for this.

 

Good to never underestimate the political wills driving such things.

[peterboat]

1 minute ago, mark99 said:

Natural gas is used in UK for some HGV applications. Typically you need an "anchor" fleet. Same vehicles using same known route using same filling station as the number of filling stations are limited in number presently.  The gas is taken from the network and compressed to 250 bar. 

 

Waitrose is a good example.

Over twenty years ago I was delivering trucks to the London Tesco depot they had compressed Natural gas, Liquid natural gas and liquid petroleum gas. it was trial to see what worked best it wasnt the compressed natural gas as the tanks were to big

[mark99]

Some gas fired power stations can start within 2 or 3 mins. These are generally recip.engines about 15 to 50 Mw in size. These are used as "peak shavers" operating perhaps 2 hours per day. They do get paid to be there available. They also get a massive kick in the financial nuts if they go offline without reason or notification.

6 minutes ago, peterboat said:

Over twenty years ago I was delivering trucks to the London Tesco depot they had compressed Natural gas, Liquid natural gas and liquid petroleum gas. it was trial to see what worked best it wasnt the compressed natural gas as the tanks were to big

 

I've helped put three new gen CNG stations into service and got another in build.

Edited March 14, 2021 by mark99

[peterboat]

3 minutes ago, mark99 said:

Some gas fired power stations can start within 2 or 3 mins. These are generally recip.engines about 15 to 50 Mw in size. These are used as "peak shavers" operating perhaps 2 hours per day. They do get paid to be there available. They also get a massive kick in the financial nuts if they go offline without reason or notification.

 

I've helped put three new gen CNG stations into service and got another in build.

Things have changed in twenty years maybe? But at the time the liquid versions were getting the thumbs up as greater range from smaller tanks, also from experience smaller pipes required from the tanks the vaporizer

[mark99]

I think so Peter. The range is up to 500 miles. IIRC Waitrose have alone circa 80 hgvs running on cng.