Hey vcxy,
you are correct,
the conversion of water to hydrogen then back again, is super inefficient.. losses on the conversion, losses on the re-conversion. But if you consider the bigger picture and major uses of hydrogen, like, large transport energy production.. busses, trains, trucks etc.. that need very quick charging as opposed to batteries for cars etc.
To address your issues, yes.. hydrogen is explosive, but People think of the Hindenburg when they think of hydrogen and think that it is very dangerous.. to dangerous to put in a car.. imagine putting an explosive gas in a car.. like... LPG.. or petrol.
but hydrogen explodes, I hear you say.. no, it doesn’t.. in fact it is probably safer than petrol. There are videos on YouTube of people firing bullets into hydrogen tanks. The plume of hydrogen ignites but is Like a flame thrower, as opposed to petrol that spreads everywhere and burns hot. If hydrogen doesn’t ignite, it mixes with oxygen in the atmosphere and becomes water..
Hydrogen when produced from methane is much more efficient than from electrolysis.. then there is another element.. biogas.
if the process that FGR has gotten their paws on can be used to convert bio methane into Graphene and hydrogen. (Both very saleable products) they can make some good dollars, but bio methane will also earn a carbon credit.. and it’s quite substantial. From hazer’s data they are using bio methane and building a commercial demonstration plant to prove up the process.. but their carbon abatement is in the vacinity of 150t per ton of hydrogen produced.. (from memory, appologies if it’s wrong).. that means sell hydrogen, $2 a ton, sell Graphene for 200k per ton, and get 150t of carbon abatement at $30 a ton (uk numbers.. give or take) $450 a ton..
You do the math on feasibility..
But it could be quite a way to get there yet. Hazer is 5 years deep to get to commercial demo stage.
but if the GEIC is the source they could very well be accelerating it..
Hope that helps.
Expand
