- cross-posted to:
- china@lemmy.ml
- china@lemmygrad.ml
- cross-posted to:
- china@lemmy.ml
- china@lemmygrad.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Zero emissions at the tailpipe, sure. The problem is that the most common type of commercial hydrogen production involves massive uncontrolled emissions of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Can't beat the laws of chemistry and physics. Crack CH4 with hot H2O and you'll get your H's, sure. But you'll also get a whole lot of C's and O's, and capturing them is very unprofitable. So they all get vented into the atmosphere.
So yeah, you can safely drink the exhaust of a hydrogen car. But every top-up of a hydrogen fuel tank means greenhouse gas emissions at the source.
And that's not even getting into the leak issues (the H2 used is the smallest molecule in the universe, it likes to leak out of everything), the tank wear-and-tear issues that come with leaks (it's called hydrogen embrittlement), and the interesting politics of a hydrogen station developer trying to convince a city council that they'd like to install what is basically a rocket fuel depot in an urban area.
A lot of hydrogen produced in China is actually clean, and they do have a concrete plan to move towards zero emissions hydrogen production:
- https://rmi.org/insight/chinas-green-hydrogen-new-era/
China is making less than 1% green hydrogen right now, if they really can get it to 10% by 2030 id be very happy. But as far as I can see from that report, the plan is "invent some technology that makes this more efficient". I think will happen eventually just not predictably enough to make a plot out to 2060 like hydrogen will be a good idea compared to other renewable technologies that will also advance in that time period.
But anyway China is taking green energy seriously so they might as well try everything.
You're right that there are unknowns and risks involved here. And I think you're completely right that they're trying a wide range of approaches to see what works for different kinds of use cases. I'm hopeful they figure this stuff out, somebody has to.
But anyway China is taking green energy seriously so they might as well try everything.
I saw a survey that said 60% of china believes climate change is a real and important issues compared to less than 40% of Americans lol
I never read the study but I always thought the charts were funny
Show
As far as I am aware, hydrogen production at an industrial scale through water electrolysis has simply never been attempted before. They are in a situation where by default they have to invent some technology that makes this more efficient. I think the shape and composition of electrodes is still evolving rapidly, and they’re working on reducing the rate of their deterioration.
I'd rather the money and research power be put into advancing electrolysis than soms war machine. I know it can be done. It just needs to be refined like any tech.
If they are smart and synergistic about it, they can make a self sustaining program. Once they get there, they will have energy dominance and affordability. Other nations will replicate it and it will remove the motives for global conflict.
Playing half-Earth socialism, moving the dial from "blue hydrogen" to "green hydrogen" and hoping I don't cause shortages
There are challenges to burning hydrogen for energy, but the upsides are really compelling. I was astounded to read in the article that China is already producing hydrogen from electrolysis, and that they are planning for 10% of their hydrogen production to be from hydrolysis by 2025! That’s absolutely astounding. This is the only project in the world actually trying to produce hydrogen through electrolysis on an industrial scale. Clearly they have a lot of confidence in the technology.
It's gonna be real funny when all the rich assholes who invested in Lithium mines lose all their momey when Hydrogen Fuel Cells and Sodium Ion Batteries become the mainstream.
China is also developing stuff like sodium-ion batteries that could end up being a lot cheaper than lithium as well.
Yeah I saw some demos on bilibili. They're still not quite as good as lithium but similar enough that any fears of a "lithium shortage" during a time of crisis is basically wishful thinking now lmao.
Exactly, and it's also worth noting that longer ranges you can get with lithium only matter for private cars. A lot of transportation such as buses, trucks, and so on, can run on fixed routes, so you just need a battery big enough to handle that. Incidentally, this is another argument in favor of public transport over private vehicle ownership.
Extract salt from the ocean, extract sodium from salt. Turn sodium into batteries, throw batteries into the ocean. That's the beautiful circle of life
You act like they won't pressure US congress to ban the "dangerous" new battery technology so they can maintain their monopoly.
Sleeper builds in 2034: "No officer this car doesn't have any of those godless commie hydrogen fuel cells. It's all good old Nevada Lithium. I just paid for the Tesla™ Pro Maxx XL 2 advanced battery discharge™ service package is all."
lol that's not gonna happen because there'll be no need for cars
all US workers will just be in prison insteadIn Prison they make you lease golf carts from GM that you need to drive 3 miles from your cell to the work site.
"I only get 3 miles to the gallon officer, I swear! Only good old American wastefulness in this vehicle!"
The US sold an advanced battery license to china because they didn’t take it seriously. China reached out to the American scientists and engineers who developed it to help guide their production. Now Americans can’t afford to produce it like china and china refuses to sell it to Americans despite it being a requirement for the license lol
Excuse my ignorance but is this the sodium found in desalination sludge? If so does that they can reuse that sludge rather than dumping it?
They produce hydrogen by putting hundreds of citizens into those giant spheres and then crushing them
im far from a China hater, but the massive number of coal fired plants they are putting online with each passing year really reduces the impact. i used to be against nuclear but now im kinda for it, i think it has to be part of the equation.
Emissions in China have now entered structural decline and Clean energy was top driver of China’s economic growth in 2023, and they're building nuclear reactors faster than any other country.
- https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/13/chinas-carbon-emissions-set-for-structural-decline-from-next-year
- https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-clean-energy-was-top-driver-of-chinas-economic-growth-in-2023/
- https://www.economist.com/china/2023/11/30/china-is-building-nuclear-reactors-faster-than-any-other-country
Also worth noting that China has a concrete plan for becoming carbon neutral, and short term coal usage has been found to be in line with China's climate pledges
- https://www.visualcapitalist.com/chinas-energy-transition-in-5-charts/
- https://www.carbonbrief.org/chinas-2060-climate-pledge-is-largely-consistent-with-1-5c-goal-study-finds
The coal plants are normally not active, actually. They have a policy that when building renewable energy, they need to hedge it with some amount of active power generation that can be used to supplement the green energy in times of exceptional demand. Since the new plants are rarely used, it's actually more eco-friendly than having to vastly overprovision solar panels or batteries for the 99.99% power requirement, when the 95% or 90% power requirement is a fraction of that (and the footprint of the coal plant used to stretch to the maximum power requirement is vastly smaller than equivalent solar power).
It probably would still be better to use nuclear power as a hedge, not coal, but it's not as economically viable to build a nuclear power plant that is rarely going to be active.
Since the new plants are rarely used, it's actually more eco-friendly than having to vastly overprovision solar panels or batteries for the 99.99% power requirement, when the 95% or 90% power requirement is a fraction of that (and the footprint of the coal plant used to stretch to the maximum power requirement is vastly smaller than equivalent solar power).
Where can I read more about this so that I can shut up the redditors
https://chinadialogue.net/en/climate/chinas-five-year-plan-for-energy-one-eye-on-security-today-one-on-a-low-carbon-future/
Wish I could read the actual 5 year plans cited in this article, but that's the best source I could find. Sadly, if you look up terms like "China coal backup" you get Reuters articles that fail to mention the fact the new coal power plants are only being opened for energy security, not for around-the-clock generation.
im far from a China hater, but the massive number of coal fired plants they are putting online with each passing year really reduces the impact.
I understand the concern, but I'm pretty sure those new coal plants are used for developing regions that don't yet have sufficient clean energy (renewable or nuclear) due to development (and therefore poverty alleviation, quality of life improvement) taking priority.
All these science spheres are made of asbestos by the way, keeps out the rats...
