Hello Philip, coming back to your query from yesterday regarding the breakdown of German train service I think it has more to do with the breakdown of the society around them. Germany definitely has big problems unleashed by Fr Merkel’s ill-advised invitation to millions of immigrants hostile to German culture to settle in Germany. The Germans are paying the price for this stupidity now. When you see your society circling the toilet bowl you tend to see the worst in other areas, such as train service. Refer to Barry M’s link from yesterday’s open thread post. As an aside, as a railway engineer, I was embedded into a group of former Deutsche Reichsbahn or DR (East German Reich Railways) engineers in Berlin shortly after the Reunification. Interesting times!
Now I would like to address Physicsguy once again who probably missed my earlier inquiry posted on yesterday’s open thread :
Physicsguy, Sabine is skeptical about all the buzz put into hydrogen as the future savior for our energy needs. Can you comment on the process summarized below? What are the chances of this process being developed on a commercial scale. As an investor would you make a stake in this company?
“Fake news you can trust”.
I love that, and I do trust that what they say reflects the absurdity of the subject of their choice.
In this bizarre world you can actually learn quite a bit just by observing the subjects on which the Bee writes, and how they present it.
On the subject of media mottos, the NYT claimed: “All the News that’s fit to print”. It would be more honest if they updated that to: “All the slanted news that we choose to print”.
The political scene. It would take the wisdom of Solomon and the patience of Job to sort it out. Intrigue layered upon intrigue; confusion upon confusion. Actually, Solomon would be too wise to attempt it at this point, unlike every talking head with access to a microphone or keyboard. Job would probably advise; ‘be patient, all will be revealed in the fullness of time’.
This notion that fossil fuels are the problem drives this category error
The bee has access to the time machine like wells or bradbury pick one
So federalism is not something they can get behind though
Re: Xylourgos; Hydrogen as an energy source – I’m sure physicsguy could comment more intelligently than I could, but my understanding is that if your goal is to have a net reduction in CO2 emmissions versus current energy sources (fossil fuels), the various methods of extracting usable hydrogen for energy don’t quite check all the boxes in terms of production costs at scale while maintaining said net reductions. But it’s complicated since there are all sorts of politics involved and good luck getting a straight answer in terms of a Google search.
Left home at 8AM, got inspection receipt, real estate receipt, paid bill at Ozarks Med, paid car insurance & receipt, DMV & tag stickers, home and applied to license plate @9:45.
Xylourgos,
That’s kind of interesting. There’s all these basic issues as to whether one considers hydrogen as an actual source of energy or more of a storage system, or an eco friendly way of powering prime movers, e.g. internal combustion engines or fuel cells.
There is all this insanity about using batteries to store off-peak power generation at power plants. Something like this could be much better.
I didn’t go past the sign-up point on your link, but looked at some other web material. Apparently, releasing the H2 is a quick, zero (or near zero?) energy input event, but retaining the H2, i.e. the storage process, does require other energy input.
I once carried a few ounces of depleted uranium in my coat pocket. We used it to store a considerable amount of pure tritium in what was called a “uranium pot.” Metals like nickel will store H2 as well, but at room temp., H2 stored in uranium has an extremely low vapor pressure. Which is nice when dealing with a radioactive gas like tritium.
But metal hydrides require high temperatures to release the H2. So time and energy to heat it, are drawbacks.
Hydrogen fuel cells are a lovely idea, if practical. The utility companies and all their associated suppliers oppose the idea of every household having its own handy energy production source. It would ruin their businesses.
science would dictate you test say 5% of an area, using hydrogen, then depending on results, you advance, but because this is all driven by the sky dragon cult, the point is mute,
Where is it that you people think Hydrogen, in its diatomic form, is freely available in large quantities, without breaking existing chemical bonds? ( Using energy to make pure hydrogen.)
Xylourgos,
Your link requires a registration, which I won’t do, but I did a search on that technology to get an idea of what they are doing. From my quick look, that company says they can transport H2 easier and cheaper with silicon hydrides. Not being a chemist, I’m not sure what compounds they are using. However, their claim that they can release the H2 from the silicon hydride with net zero energy input sounds very fallacious to me. As Jon Baker notes, breaking any molecular bond requires energy….other wise there would be no molecules as they all would spontaneously fall apart.
Hydrogen, to the green crazies crowd, sounds like a wonderful fuel as the main result of the 2nd Law heat engine using H is water. Not, that nasty CO2. As noted, H2 has to be produced by breaking molecular bonds…energy input. Then it has to be transported (see your link) and then stored all of which require more input energy. Right now, it’s a net negative in terms of total energy in to what is output. H2 has it’s highest energy density in liquid form which is why it is used in rockets. Not at all practical for common energy uses.
When someone finds a way to match the energy density of H2 in some form to that of gasoline, let me know.
an illustration of another ill considered project,
I apologize for my curt ” Where is that you people think that Hydrogen…” comment earlier.
A lifetime ago I started majoring in Chemistry at college after taking an advanced second year of chemistry in High School. Life and difficulties etc and didn’t finish .
” Hydrogen as a net energy source on planet Earth” tends to irk me.
My understanding of hydrogen fuels cell at this point is they are basically fancy, water making batteries. Good for space stations maybe. Not true net producing energy makers.
In that second year of chemistry in high school they let the cat out of the bag and we found out that the ” Standard Model” with the electrons orbiting the nucleus like planets around the sun was basically a dumbed down lie.
Well, I felt lied to anyway.
Jon,
Don’t feel lied to. The Bohr model works fantastic for hydrogen. Any other element or add an electron is where it falls apart. Even for large atoms where they have a lone electron far out from the nucleus one can do a decent job just assuming Bohr type orbit…..save the headache of a complicated Schrodinger eqn.
Jon baker,
Where is it that you people think Hydrogen, in its diatomic form, is freely available in large quantities, without breaking existing chemical bonds?
Why, in blimps, of course. 🙂
Xylourgos, upon saying
… as a railway engineer, I was embedded into a group of former Deutsche Reichsbahn […] engineers …
, caused me to recall the one time I rode in a DR wagon (2nd class) in Thuringia on the segment from roughly Hof to Weimar. What a neat thing to know the rails that well (engineer level)!
Apparently the White House pressured the Marine Corps Band to compose and play a “Fanfare for the First Lady” for “Dr.” Jill. *
Chicago police fatally shoot man while trying to arrest him
Subtext (emphasis mine):
CHICAGO (AP) — Law enforcement officers in Chicago fatally shot a 33-year-old man who pointed a gun at them as they tried to arrest him Friday, authorities said.
——- WHO
POINTED
A
GUN
AT
THEM
——
Why is THAT not part of the headline???Z
Why not:
“Chicago Police kill man using gun while trying to arrest him”.
Better, more contextual, innit?
And insanely relevant to one’s perception of what happened.
>:-/
}}} Nonapod: the various methods of extracting usable hydrogen for energy don’t quite check all the boxes in terms of production costs at scale
Actually, it’s a certainty they do, if you go with nuclear energy to do the job.
That, of course, opens up a whole can of worms for the Green Zealots, who go into anaphylactic hysteria upon hearing the word “Nuclear”.
}}} Kate: Hydrogen fuel cells are a lovely idea, if practical. The utility companies and all their associated suppliers oppose the idea of every household having its own handy energy production source. It would ruin their businesses.
Ummm. Fuel cells don’t generally “create” hydrogen (IIRC, some designs can be run backwards, mind you, to store energy to use later by creating the hydrogen from energy inputs. But this is irrelevant in context).
So somehow, you have to either deliver hydrogen (Think piped natural gas, but much more escapey and with leaks far more dangerous) or create it on the spot, presumably with some form of electricity to break a water molecule, which is a fairly high-energy bond(Ammonia and Alcohol are also an option, here, IIRC). So, where is the electricity going to come from, in the first place? It does not have to be a central power location, but that is, in general, the most functional and efficient system for doing so.
}}} physicsguy: As Jon Baker notes, breaking any molecular bond requires energy….other wise there would be no molecules as they all would spontaneously fall apart.
Well, there is a possibility of catalyst chemistry to reduce that quite a bit, but that would probably require a breakthrough in catalyst chemistry, so, unless they’ve done this, I’m in concurrence.
}}} As noted, H2 has to be produced by breaking molecular bonds…energy input. Then it has to be transported (see your link) and then stored all of which require more input energy.
Or use electricity at the endpoint to do the job, but yeah, still much the same issues. IF you have hydrogen fuel cells, you might be able to use a back and forth process to use electricity to break it apart, run the fuel cell, then collect the combined cell component for further breakup… obviously, entropy says this will be a net negative process, but the real question is how much energy is lost, and, among other things, how this compares — the important factor — to the efficiency of other options, including batteries and chemical storage (that including ICEs), as well as the concern of CO2 (if it’s to be taken seriously, which seems largely questionable — it certainly isn’t to the Greens, as their goal is to turn us back to the Stone Age… not supply humans with any power. And yeah, the number of people who will die as a result? Not a concern to them)
Jon Baker @ 4:11:
“… electrons orbiting the nucleus like planets around the sun was basically a dumbed down lie.”
In my HS physics class [decades ago] I came across some pamphlet showing a graphic of the electron “shells”, such that the 6 p electrons were distributed in a “probabilistic” representation of three sort-of-dumbbell shapes at right angles (x, y, z axes). I was very pleased with this as the next deeper or more “realistic” representation vs. the Bohr planet model.
Physicsguy or someone else might now explain that model has been superseded by another even less “defined location” version?
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
babylon bee hitting out of the park this morning with two great, and amusing headlines:
https://babylonbee.com/news/republican-party-implements-emergency-platform-change-after-seeing-how-close-they-are-to-winning-landslide-victory
https://babylonbee.com/news/janet-yellen-reassures-nation-that-bidens-dementia-is-transitory
Hello Philip, coming back to your query from yesterday regarding the breakdown of German train service I think it has more to do with the breakdown of the society around them. Germany definitely has big problems unleashed by Fr Merkel’s ill-advised invitation to millions of immigrants hostile to German culture to settle in Germany. The Germans are paying the price for this stupidity now. When you see your society circling the toilet bowl you tend to see the worst in other areas, such as train service. Refer to Barry M’s link from yesterday’s open thread post. As an aside, as a railway engineer, I was embedded into a group of former Deutsche Reichsbahn or DR (East German Reich Railways) engineers in Berlin shortly after the Reunification. Interesting times!
Now I would like to address Physicsguy once again who probably missed my earlier inquiry posted on yesterday’s open thread :
Physicsguy, Sabine is skeptical about all the buzz put into hydrogen as the future savior for our energy needs. Can you comment on the process summarized below? What are the chances of this process being developed on a commercial scale. As an investor would you make a stake in this company?
https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/innovation/the-cheapest-and-safest-way-to-transport-hydrogen-silicon-based-liquid-carrier-requires-zero-energy-to-release-stored-h2/2-1-1396369
“Fake news you can trust”.
I love that, and I do trust that what they say reflects the absurdity of the subject of their choice.
In this bizarre world you can actually learn quite a bit just by observing the subjects on which the Bee writes, and how they present it.
On the subject of media mottos, the NYT claimed: “All the News that’s fit to print”. It would be more honest if they updated that to: “All the slanted news that we choose to print”.
The political scene. It would take the wisdom of Solomon and the patience of Job to sort it out. Intrigue layered upon intrigue; confusion upon confusion. Actually, Solomon would be too wise to attempt it at this point, unlike every talking head with access to a microphone or keyboard. Job would probably advise; ‘be patient, all will be revealed in the fullness of time’.
This notion that fossil fuels are the problem drives this category error
The bee has access to the time machine like wells or bradbury pick one
So federalism is not something they can get behind though
Re: Xylourgos; Hydrogen as an energy source – I’m sure physicsguy could comment more intelligently than I could, but my understanding is that if your goal is to have a net reduction in CO2 emmissions versus current energy sources (fossil fuels), the various methods of extracting usable hydrogen for energy don’t quite check all the boxes in terms of production costs at scale while maintaining said net reductions. But it’s complicated since there are all sorts of politics involved and good luck getting a straight answer in terms of a Google search.
Ok then
https://x.com/SystemUpdate_/status/1811042142594158684
Life in a small town:
Left home at 8AM, got inspection receipt, real estate receipt, paid bill at Ozarks Med, paid car insurance & receipt, DMV & tag stickers, home and applied to license plate @9:45.
Xylourgos,
That’s kind of interesting. There’s all these basic issues as to whether one considers hydrogen as an actual source of energy or more of a storage system, or an eco friendly way of powering prime movers, e.g. internal combustion engines or fuel cells.
There is all this insanity about using batteries to store off-peak power generation at power plants. Something like this could be much better.
I didn’t go past the sign-up point on your link, but looked at some other web material. Apparently, releasing the H2 is a quick, zero (or near zero?) energy input event, but retaining the H2, i.e. the storage process, does require other energy input.
I once carried a few ounces of depleted uranium in my coat pocket. We used it to store a considerable amount of pure tritium in what was called a “uranium pot.” Metals like nickel will store H2 as well, but at room temp., H2 stored in uranium has an extremely low vapor pressure. Which is nice when dealing with a radioactive gas like tritium.
But metal hydrides require high temperatures to release the H2. So time and energy to heat it, are drawbacks.
Hydrogen fuel cells are a lovely idea, if practical. The utility companies and all their associated suppliers oppose the idea of every household having its own handy energy production source. It would ruin their businesses.
science would dictate you test say 5% of an area, using hydrogen, then depending on results, you advance, but because this is all driven by the sky dragon cult, the point is mute,
Where is it that you people think Hydrogen, in its diatomic form, is freely available in large quantities, without breaking existing chemical bonds? ( Using energy to make pure hydrogen.)
Xylourgos,
Your link requires a registration, which I won’t do, but I did a search on that technology to get an idea of what they are doing. From my quick look, that company says they can transport H2 easier and cheaper with silicon hydrides. Not being a chemist, I’m not sure what compounds they are using. However, their claim that they can release the H2 from the silicon hydride with net zero energy input sounds very fallacious to me. As Jon Baker notes, breaking any molecular bond requires energy….other wise there would be no molecules as they all would spontaneously fall apart.
Hydrogen, to the green crazies crowd, sounds like a wonderful fuel as the main result of the 2nd Law heat engine using H is water. Not, that nasty CO2. As noted, H2 has to be produced by breaking molecular bonds…energy input. Then it has to be transported (see your link) and then stored all of which require more input energy. Right now, it’s a net negative in terms of total energy in to what is output. H2 has it’s highest energy density in liquid form which is why it is used in rockets. Not at all practical for common energy uses.
When someone finds a way to match the energy density of H2 in some form to that of gasoline, let me know.
that would seem to a difficult problem, you think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xyAIrlIbI8
an illustration of another ill considered project,
I apologize for my curt ” Where is that you people think that Hydrogen…” comment earlier.
A lifetime ago I started majoring in Chemistry at college after taking an advanced second year of chemistry in High School. Life and difficulties etc and didn’t finish .
” Hydrogen as a net energy source on planet Earth” tends to irk me.
My understanding of hydrogen fuels cell at this point is they are basically fancy, water making batteries. Good for space stations maybe. Not true net producing energy makers.
In that second year of chemistry in high school they let the cat out of the bag and we found out that the ” Standard Model” with the electrons orbiting the nucleus like planets around the sun was basically a dumbed down lie.
Well, I felt lied to anyway.
Jon,
Don’t feel lied to. The Bohr model works fantastic for hydrogen. Any other element or add an electron is where it falls apart. Even for large atoms where they have a lone electron far out from the nucleus one can do a decent job just assuming Bohr type orbit…..save the headache of a complicated Schrodinger eqn.
Jon baker,
Why, in blimps, of course. 🙂
Xylourgos, upon saying
, caused me to recall the one time I rode in a DR wagon (2nd class) in Thuringia on the segment from roughly Hof to Weimar. What a neat thing to know the rails that well (engineer level)!
Apparently the White House pressured the Marine Corps Band to compose and play a “Fanfare for the First Lady” for “Dr.” Jill. *
https://pjmedia.com/victoria-taft/2024/07/10/hail-to-the-chick-dirty-jill-is-at-it-again-n4930521
How the merdia lies:
2021 Headline:
Chicago police fatally shoot man while trying to arrest him
Subtext (emphasis mine):
CHICAGO (AP) — Law enforcement officers in Chicago fatally shot a 33-year-old man who pointed a gun at them as they tried to arrest him Friday, authorities said.
——-
WHO
POINTED
A
GUN
AT
THEM
——
Why is THAT not part of the headline???Z
Why not:
“Chicago Police kill man using gun while trying to arrest him”.
Better, more contextual, innit?
And insanely relevant to one’s perception of what happened.
>:-/
}}} Nonapod: the various methods of extracting usable hydrogen for energy don’t quite check all the boxes in terms of production costs at scale
Actually, it’s a certainty they do, if you go with nuclear energy to do the job.
That, of course, opens up a whole can of worms for the Green Zealots, who go into anaphylactic hysteria upon hearing the word “Nuclear”.
}}} Kate: Hydrogen fuel cells are a lovely idea, if practical. The utility companies and all their associated suppliers oppose the idea of every household having its own handy energy production source. It would ruin their businesses.
Ummm. Fuel cells don’t generally “create” hydrogen (IIRC, some designs can be run backwards, mind you, to store energy to use later by creating the hydrogen from energy inputs. But this is irrelevant in context).
So somehow, you have to either deliver hydrogen (Think piped natural gas, but much more escapey and with leaks far more dangerous) or create it on the spot, presumably with some form of electricity to break a water molecule, which is a fairly high-energy bond(Ammonia and Alcohol are also an option, here, IIRC). So, where is the electricity going to come from, in the first place? It does not have to be a central power location, but that is, in general, the most functional and efficient system for doing so.
}}} physicsguy: As Jon Baker notes, breaking any molecular bond requires energy….other wise there would be no molecules as they all would spontaneously fall apart.
Well, there is a possibility of catalyst chemistry to reduce that quite a bit, but that would probably require a breakthrough in catalyst chemistry, so, unless they’ve done this, I’m in concurrence.
}}} As noted, H2 has to be produced by breaking molecular bonds…energy input. Then it has to be transported (see your link) and then stored all of which require more input energy.
Or use electricity at the endpoint to do the job, but yeah, still much the same issues. IF you have hydrogen fuel cells, you might be able to use a back and forth process to use electricity to break it apart, run the fuel cell, then collect the combined cell component for further breakup… obviously, entropy says this will be a net negative process, but the real question is how much energy is lost, and, among other things, how this compares — the important factor — to the efficiency of other options, including batteries and chemical storage (that including ICEs), as well as the concern of CO2 (if it’s to be taken seriously, which seems largely questionable — it certainly isn’t to the Greens, as their goal is to turn us back to the Stone Age… not supply humans with any power. And yeah, the number of people who will die as a result? Not a concern to them)
Jon Baker @ 4:11:
“… electrons orbiting the nucleus like planets around the sun was basically a dumbed down lie.”
In my HS physics class [decades ago] I came across some pamphlet showing a graphic of the electron “shells”, such that the 6 p electrons were distributed in a “probabilistic” representation of three sort-of-dumbbell shapes at right angles (x, y, z axes). I was very pleased with this as the next deeper or more “realistic” representation vs. the Bohr planet model.
Physicsguy or someone else might now explain that model has been superseded by another even less “defined location” version?