I wish I got to do fun little projects like this at my job. Anyway, this proof of concept shows that hydrogen would be a great alternative to propane and natural gas for cooking. Hat tip to @hypx@mastodon.social.

  • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Fun project! But replacing gas with hydrogen seems really tricky. Hydrogen is much harder to transport without leaks because it’s such a tiny molecule. Electric seems better than trying to still burn hydrogen.

    • jabjoe@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Electric is far more efficient too, thus cheaper. Electricity you can transit over distance over wire and generate however you like. We’ve done it a long time, far and wide.

      Turning electricity into hydrogen, distributing it, and then turning it back into electricity to move a vehicle, is so wasteful/expensive.

      Just use a big battery.

      • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        For some applications like spacecraft where weight is critical, it does make sense to use hydrogen fuel cells as a battery. But usually it doesn’t make sense.

        • jabjoe@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Certainly not the way we lunch right now. The energy used, that focused, in that short a time, is insane.

    • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.workOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      As Toyota has demonstrated (and speaking from my own experience), it’s not that tricky. As for cooking with the stuff, sometimes you just need portability and/or a flame. Electric is a poor choice in those cases.

      • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Portability is hard for hydrogen since you hadn’t liquify it without huge pressures and cryogenic temps, so you need big tanks. But cooking stoves does seem like a pretty good use case.

        • themurphy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          I think the experts who believes in this technology know a bit more than you and me who only read a few wiki pages.

          If money is going into this, they also have a believable plan. But big oil certainly want you to think otherwise.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            Huh? It’s big oil and the like who are pushing hydrogen over electricity.

            And the problem with hydrogen is largely to do with the laws of physics, so it’s unlikely to change soon.

            • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.workOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              I don’t understand this suspicion. It’s easier to burn fossil fuels for electricity than to reform them into hydrogen.

              • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                But they can still sell hydrogen, they can’t really sell solar panels. Even encouraging people to keep burning things (like hydrogen) benefits gas since it slows down electric alternatives to gas heating.

              • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Well yeah but they know their days of selling that are numbered, at least for lots of markets. If they can get people onto hydrogen they’ve got more money coming in for decades.

                • CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.workOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Their days aren’t numbered until governments actually say so. In the meantime, non-GHG emitting sources supply less than half of the world’s electricity as is, nevermind the hypothetical demand of a predominantly electrified vehicle fleet.

          • wholookshere@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            That’s an appeal to authority fallacy if I’ve ever seen one.

            They’re doing proof of concepts, not mass production. They’re at best answering is it possible, not is it a viable alternative.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Just need to waste a ton of energy extracting it then liquifying it then hoping that transport doesn’t face any issues (and I mean, considering our track record with petrol which doesn’t corrode everything it touches I sure as hell wouldn’t worry about it [/s if it wasn’t clear]) and then fill up your personal car that could have simply been powered by electricity from the beginning…

        Also, ever heard of energy density? Because hydrogen won’t win prizes on that front!

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Wait wait wait, you’re telling me that taking electricity, sending it along wires, generating hydrogen with it via hydrolysis, packaging it, compressing it to an extreme degree, physically transporting it, putting it in pumps, pumping it into your car, then doing reverse hydrolysis to charge a battery that then powers an electric motor…

          Is less efficient than sending electricity along some wires to your car battery, to then drive an electric motor?

          I’m shocked!

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Tons of experts believe the only way hydrogen based transportation makes sense is by using it to fuel heavy transport right at the source instead of trying to transport it via pipeline.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yup. Produce it with wind or solar at the warehouse, then load it onto trucks or forklifts or whatever. It’s a nice little closed ecosystem.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Exactly.

          Hydrogen is mostly a greenwashing scam; it isn’t any better than what we already have.

      • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Nah, combustion engine is just one step up from the steam engine, such a wasteful technology, should long be in a museum.

        First thing i think about in using a hydrogen-carbon fuel, is fuel cell (no better word for “Brennstoffzelle”?) to create electricity. Next up a steam turbine.