• m0darn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Using hydrogen doesn’t emit carbon. But the principal way hydrogen is produced is called steam reformation. It’s a process that turns methane (CH4) and water (2* H2O) into hydrogen (4* H2) and CO2 (i think, I’m not an expert). So all the carbon get emitted as co2. So it’s not better, and there are a bunch of inefficiencies too. (The reformation process itself, and transportation challenges, and leakage). But theoretically, it does centralize the emissions which would make them easier to sequester so there’s that.

    • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Is it less than using fossil fuels for power exclusively? If so then it’s a step in the right direction. Yes I know it sounds like I’m shilling for BP now but we get lost in the doom spiral so fast we forget we are indeed making progress. We just have to keep their feet to the fire or…erm… solar panel?

      • Aphelion@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        They’re not using electrolysis and water to make hydrogen, they’re using power and steam to crack petroleum products into hydrogen.

        • CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          And this is still a large step in the right direction, because cheap hydrogen creates an incentive to develop hydrogen infrastructure, which increases the demand for hydrogen, and can help lay the groundwork for a future in which hydrogen is produced from renewable sources.

          Also, steam reforming lends itself well to CCS, and as such it can be performed without carbon emissions.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            There isn’t a real need for hydrogen. We have plenty of other solutions. People have the expectation that our society changes from unsustainable to sustainable by just swapping in clean technologies in place of the dirty one’s. That isn’t going to happen, and hydrogen won’t change that.

            • Dojan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I mean it’s not bad to have alternatives though.

              My roomie is a trucker, and the idea of an electric truck is laughable, at least in my country, because of how trucking works here. Unless the truck is out of order, being loaded, or being refuelled, it’s always on the road; they just swap drivers around like a relay race. Unless a truck came with a swappable battery it wouldn’t be feasible to operate like that, they’d have to at least double their arsenal, (at which point we can already start to question how environmentally friendly that is), and that’ll increase the overall operating costs, which will ultimately end up on the consumer; everything will get more expensive because that’s what they transport. Another problem with pure electric is also that the batteries weigh a shit ton, so the trucks end up being able to transport less because they have to lug the battery around everywhere.

              Biogas is an alternative, and as far as I know it works alright; they already use it. They end up not as powerful as diesel trucks though.

              Something I wonder if it might be applied is something like Toyota’s hybrid system, with regenerative braking etc. I wonder if it scales. My roomie recently had to leave his Golf at the shop for a week, and got it swapped with a Yaris. It cut his fuel consumption by three quarters.