Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 11:22 AM Jun 2012

Hydrogen fuel cells begin to show off in the world of competitive racing

http://www.hydrogenfuelnews.com/hydrogen-fuel-cells-begin-to-show-off-in-the-world-of-competitive-racing/854142/
[font face=Serif][font size=5]Hydrogen fuel cells begin to show off in the world of competitive racing[/font]

By John Max – June 8, 2012

[font size=3]
[font size=5]Fuel cells targeted for their ability to compete with conventional engines[/font]

Performance means everything in the world of competitive racing. Race cars have long been powered by fossil-fuels due to the fact that conventional engines are designed specifically for the use of gasoline. Fossil-fuel has been the cornerstone of competitive racing for decades due to its high energy output. As alternative energy begins to gain tractions, however, racers are beginning to take note of hydrogen fuel cells. One of the reasons behind the increasing popularity of the energy systems is because of the fact that hydrogen fuel cells can perform on par with conventional engines.

[font size=5]GreenGT to introduce the H2 racer at Le Mans[/font]

At this year’s 24 Hours of Le Mans, an annual competitive racing event, the GreenGT H2 racer will make its debut. The vehicle was developed by GreenGT, a maker of clean and sustainable vehicle propulsion systems, as a way to show the viability of hydrogen fuel. The H2 is powered by a single hydrogen fuel cell, which is used to provide electrical power to two motors that generate up to 540 horsepower. Though not the first of its kind, it is among the most powerful hydrogen-powered racecars currently active.

…[/font][/font]

27 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hydrogen fuel cells begin to show off in the world of competitive racing (Original Post) OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 OP
Electric motors can provide 100% torque just about instantaneously LARED Jun 2012 #1
Race cars have been the R&D platform for a number of automobile technologies. OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #2
Unfortunately hydrogen is not an energy source. longship Jun 2012 #3
Petroleum products are also not an energy source. They merely store energy in the form of chemical kestrel91316 Jun 2012 #4
What????? longship Jun 2012 #5
And how (exactly) is this relevant? OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #6
Thank you. You just made my point. longship Jun 2012 #8
And the point that I made was…? OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #9
Hydrogen is fucking NOT a source of energy!!! longship Jun 2012 #12
I believe everyone knows that OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #13
Okay, OKIsItJustMe. longship Jun 2012 #14
“I confess that my teaching life more than occasionally kicks in here on DU.” OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #15
Water, Sunlight intaglio Jun 2012 #7
Well, you've made my point. longship Jun 2012 #10
I don't believe anyone here thinks that Hydrogen is an energy source. OKIsItJustMe Jun 2012 #11
There is not a natural source of gasoline intaglio Jun 2012 #19
It is thermodynamics 101 longship Jun 2012 #20
And if the energy is free, what happens to your calculations? intaglio Jun 2012 #21
I don't give a shit about efficiency of oil longship Jun 2012 #22
So what is your alternative? intaglio Jun 2012 #23
Well, I think we're on the same page longship Jun 2012 #24
What is the specific problem you want storage to solve? kristopher Jun 2012 #26
Hydrogen, as an energy carrier, is far more efficient than petroleum and H2 Cars will kick ass and.. NYC_SKP Jun 2012 #16
I like it to even out the day/night solar power cycle longship Jun 2012 #17
H2 peaker plants at every wind farm... NYC_SKP Jun 2012 #18
Would you propose putting peaking plants next to baseload plants? kristopher Jun 2012 #25
I'm in an ag area, and my reply was quite a generalization. NYC_SKP Jun 2012 #27
 

LARED

(11,735 posts)
1. Electric motors can provide 100% torque just about instantaneously
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 11:47 AM
Jun 2012

creating the ability to compete with a fossil fuel engine.

While this a nice PR it does not get us closer to making Hydrogen fuel cells a viable transportation system.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
2. Race cars have been the R&D platform for a number of automobile technologies.
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 12:22 PM
Jun 2012

They also popularize technologies.

Imagine what “Joe Six Pack” will think when he sees a high-performance (fuel cell) electric-powered car refueled at pit row, as quickly and easily as a conventional automobile is.

longship

(40,416 posts)
3. Unfortunately hydrogen is not an energy source.
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 01:00 PM
Jun 2012

Hydrogen is a good energy storage medium. It can be efficiently made by electrolysis, but which requires energy greater than the energy released by "burning" it. Of course, the ideal situation would be to power an electrolysis plant with solar. Then, the hydrogen can be used to generate power for when the sun doesn't shine, or for powering things not adaptable to solar, for instance airplanes, or autos.

I agree with another responder that competitions often give rise to technical advances. Another good example is the DARPA Challenge, autonomous, driverless automobiles.

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
4. Petroleum products are also not an energy source. They merely store energy in the form of chemical
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 01:17 PM
Jun 2012

bonds, just like hydrogen. Matter can be converted to energy and vice versa, but neither can be created or destroyed by man - merely rearranged.

longship

(40,416 posts)
5. What?????
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 01:59 PM
Jun 2012

There are awesome petroleum reserves on Earth. The thermodynamics of petrol go back millions of years when the origins of coal and oil was first laid down.

Molecular Hydrogen, on the other hand, is not a natural resource on Earth. There is no natural repository of hydrogen on this planet. All hydrogen gas escapes because our measly planet doesn't have enough mass to hold it. Sorry, buddy, that's just the physics of the situation.

This means that hydrogen must come from other sources. The major source is hydrolysis of water, which thermodynamically takes more energy than is released in burning the hydrogen. (There's that pesky physics and thermodynamics again.)

To sum up, whereas oil and coal were laid down millions of years ago and remained for that time for us to use to generate energy, all the molecular hydrogen escapes our planet so we have to generate it from other sources which takes more energy than is released by burning it.

Therefore, hydrogen is not an energy source, but an energy storage method (but a very good one).

QED.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
6. And how (exactly) is this relevant?
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 02:46 PM
Jun 2012

Petroleum is an energy storage medium. Generally, it is thought to store solar energy, in the form of chemical energy, thanks to photosynthesis which took place millions of years ago. Today, we release that energy, by combining petroleum products with oxygen, to produce heat. We convert that heat to mechanical energy in rather inefficient heat engines.

Today, we can store solar energy in the form of chemical energy by producing hydrogen, and later release that energy, by combining the hydrogen with oxygen in a fuel cell to produce heat and electricity. We can use that electricity to drive a rather efficient electric motor.

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/artificial-leaf-0930.html

[font face=Serif][font size=5]‘Artificial leaf’ makes fuel from sunlight[/font]
[font size=4]Solar cell bonded to recently developed catalyst can harness the sun, splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen.[/font]

David L. Chandler, MIT News Office
September 30, 2011

[font size=3]Researchers led by MIT professor Daniel Nocera have produced something they’re calling an “artificial leaf”: Like living leaves, the device can turn the energy of sunlight directly into a chemical fuel that can be stored and used later as an energy source.

[font size=1]The 'artificial leaf,' a device that can harness sunlight to split water into hydrogen and oxygen without needing any external connections, is seen with some real leaves, which also convert the energy of sunlight directly into storable chemical form.
Photo: Dominick Reuter[/font]

The artificial leaf — a silicon solar cell with different catalytic materials bonded onto its two sides — needs no external wires or control circuits to operate. Simply placed in a container of water and exposed to sunlight, it quickly begins to generate streams of bubbles: oxygen bubbles from one side and hydrogen bubbles from the other. If placed in a container that has a barrier to separate the two sides, the two streams of bubbles can be collected and stored, and used later to deliver power: for example, by feeding them into a fuel cell that combines them once again into water while delivering an electric current.

The creation of the device is described in a paper published Sept. 30 in the journal Science. Nocera, the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy and professor of chemistry at MIT, is the senior author; the paper was co-authored by his former student Steven Reece PhD ’07 (who now works at Sun Catalytix, a company started by Nocera to commercialize his solar-energy inventions), along with five other researchers from Sun Catalytix and MIT.

The device, Nocera explains, is made entirely of earth-abundant, inexpensive materials — mostly silicon, cobalt and nickel — and works in ordinary water. Other attempts to produce devices that could use sunlight to split water have relied on corrosive solutions or on relatively rare and expensive materials such as platinum.

…[/font][/font]




http://hypersolar.com/news_detail.php?id=41
[font face=Serif][font size=5]HyperSolar Completes Proof of Concept Prototype that Successfully Produces Renewable Hydrogen[/font]
[font size=4]Company combines its unique, low-cost polymer coating with a small-scale solar device to form a self-contained particle that separates hydrogen from water using only the power of the Sun[/font]
[font size=3]SANTA BARBARA, CA – May 22, 2012 - HyperSolar, Inc. (OTCBB: HYSR), the developer of a breakthrough technology to produce renewable hydrogen using sunlight and any source of water, today announced that its first proof of concept prototype is successfully producing renewable hydrogen. By integrating its unique, low-cost polymer coating with a small-scale solar device to form a self-contained particle, the company has proven the scientific validity of its breakthrough technology.

“Using our self-contained particle in a low cost plastic bag, we have successfully demonstrated our ability to mimic photosynthesis to produce renewable hydrogen from virtually any source of water using the power of the Sun,” commented Tim Young, CEO of HyperSolar. “Unlike approaches taken by others in the past, our small scale solar devices actually float in the water. Our next step is to complete the development of our nanoparticles, extremely small solar devices, optimized to significantly reduce the cost of separating hydrogen from water.”

A video showing the proof of concept prototype is available at the company’s website, www.hypersolar.com. It features the self-contained particle floating in a common baggy filled with wastewater from a pulp and paper mill. The video clearly shows hydrogen bubbles being generated in the small baggy. The company’s next prototype will feature nanoparticles, which can be mass-produced at a low cost and can float freely in large scale bag systems to generate large quantities of renewable hydrogen, the cleanest and greenest of all fuels, using only sunlight and water.

Young concluded, “We believe we are on the right track to produce the lowest cost renewable hydrogen. Most hydrogen used today is not renewable and not very clean because it is produced from finite hydrocarbon sources, such as oil, coal and natural gas. Renewable hydrogen produced from nearly infinite sources of water and sunlight, is clean and carbon free. The worldwide impact of using renewable hydrogen to generate electricity and power fuel cell vehicles would be extraordinary.”



…[/font][/font]

longship

(40,416 posts)
8. Thank you. You just made my point.
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 03:51 PM
Jun 2012


Because there is no fucking natural source of molecular hydrogen on our planet!!! (physics and chemistry 101) All molecular hydrogen comes from electrochemical, or chemical, processes, all of which require more energy than is achieved by burning the resulting product (thermodynamics 101)

And again, I am not saying that hydrogen isn't useful. It decidedly is, specifically that it doesn't contribute to global warming, and that it may be the most efficient energy storage medium. But a source of energy it is not, because it takes more energy to make it than it releases. Plus there's this problem that the Earth rotates and 1/2 of it doesn't have the Sun shining on it to generate all that free energy. A great solution is to use the energy to make molecular hydrogen -- did I mention that there is no better source on Earth?

You can store the hydrogen and use it during night, when the sun has set, or you can use in automobiles, or in airplanes, neither of which are likely to go all solar.

Again, since there is zero natural hydrogen on Earth, it requires more energy to make it than it generates by burning it.

For the naive who think I am arguing against hydrogen power, read very carefully my posts here. I am doing no such thing. Instead, I am trying to put into perspective where hydrogen stands in the energy economy and why hydrogen alone is not a solution.

I think hydrogen energy is essential for our future, but only as a storage medium. There are no molecular hydrogen sources on Earth that don't require more energy input. NONE!

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
9. And the point that I made was…?
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:02 PM
Jun 2012

I really don’t see what you’re on about. No, we have no hydrogen wells (I don't believe that anyone on this board thinks that we do.) So what point are you trying to make?

We are running out of fossil fuels (oh, and killing ourselves with them at the same time.) Hydrogen is a fuel, which we can generate, without digging holes in the ground.

If you like, once the heavy lifting of splitting water has been done, you can use the hydrogen to make hydrocarbons.

longship

(40,416 posts)
12. Hydrogen is fucking NOT a source of energy!!!
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:18 PM
Jun 2012

That's my fucking point. It fucking takes energy to get hydrogen on Earth. And the fucking energy it takes is more than the fucking energy it generates.

No body said anything about your straw man. I was merely making a point that hydrogen isn't a fucking energy source.

We still fucking need solar and other carbon neutral sources, otherwise, hydrogen is fucking useless, because there are zero sources of molecular hydrogen on Earth.

Sheesh! I apologize for my profanity and maybe I didn't make myself clear. I don't think I ever argued against hydrogen. My sole point is one that I presented. It ain't a source because we have no sources.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
13. I believe everyone knows that
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:22 PM
Jun 2012

God knows, people point it out frequently enough (as if they're the only ones who understand it.)

longship

(40,416 posts)
14. Okay, OKIsItJustMe.
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:41 PM
Jun 2012

But not everybody viewing this thread are regulars. Some may be lurkers, or horrors, trolls.

I confess that my teaching life more than occasionally kicks in here on DU. I confess that I didn't know what you were about in your original response. Mine was intended merely to put hydrogen power in perspective. I don't know where we went off the rails.

Sigh! Such are the vagaries of text on the Intertubes and DU. Sorry, my friend.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
15. “I confess that my teaching life more than occasionally kicks in here on DU.”
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:54 PM
Jun 2012

I recognize the symptoms.

Believe it or not, I can be pedantic myself at times.

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
7. Water, Sunlight
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 02:48 PM
Jun 2012

Guess what? You can make hydrogen from those 2 ingredients - and not just by PV cells providing electrical energy. you can also make hydrogen by letting wind turbines provide electrical energy. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/artificial-leaf-0930.html

Now hydrogen provides 141.86 Megajoules per kilogram

Petroleum provides 46.4 Mj/kg

Fuel cells are about 50% - 60% efficient and modern electric motors are about 80% efficient (40% for the cycle). Add into that regenerative braking feeding supercapacitors

Racing internal combustion engines are about 8% - 10% efficient. Regenerative braking in F1 race vehicles depends on compressed air and is not efficient but does provide a quick boost to acceleration

The big problem at the moment is that the infrastructure for producing bulk hydrogen depends on cracking hydrocarbons - but that is expected to change.

longship

(40,416 posts)
10. Well, you've made my point.
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:05 PM
Jun 2012

Hydrogen isn't a source because there's no natural source of molecular hydrogen on Earth. All must be generated by electrochemical or chemical sources, all of which require more energy than is generated by the resulting hydrogen.

Hydrogen may be the best energy storage medium, however. We can use power generated by other sources -- solar, wind, tidal, geothermic, even nuclear and (horrors) oil and coal -- to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. We can store the hydrogen. (It's difficult, but we're already doing it. A lot of new infrastructure would be required to scale things up. But that isn't beyond our technology.)

My posts here are intended to educate people here on how important hydrogen can be, but also that it is not a panacea for our energy future because it is a simple fact that hydrogen is not a source of energy because Earth has no source of molecular hydrogen. NONE.

OKIsItJustMe

(19,933 posts)
11. I don't believe anyone here thinks that Hydrogen is an energy source.
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 04:12 PM
Jun 2012

In other news, plastic isn’t natural.

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
19. There is not a natural source of gasoline
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 04:55 AM
Jun 2012

It has to be refined - which is pretty damn energy intensive.

You'll be saying next that diesels have no part in motor sport.

longship

(40,416 posts)
20. It is thermodynamics 101
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 07:17 AM
Jun 2012

It is a fact that it takes more energy to make hydrogen than is released by burning it. Therefore it cannot be termed an energy source. Any clean hydrogen economy must therefore be based on a power structure that is itself clean, for instance solar, wind, etc. But the energy gained by burning the hydrogen will always be less than that used to make it. Always! So hydrogen is only a way to store energy, not a source itself.

I don't care about gasoline or diesel since they are decidedly not clean, no matter what their thermodynamic efficiencies are.

A hydrogen economy based on, for instance, coal-fired or natural gas generated electricity is likewise not clean since one actually loses energy to make the hydrogen.

That was my only point. I feel it is an important one regarding hydrogen since many correctly see burning it as carbon neutral, but do not understand that it is not carbon neutral if you make it with power that is not. All because of that pesky 2nd law of thermodynamics.

I am totally for building a hydrogen economy. But it cannot be carbon neutral without carbon neutral power sources to generate the hydrogen. We'll need solar, wind, or some other clean source to make it work. There is no escaping these facts because there is no source of molecular hydrogen on Earth and, as I wrote above, it takes more energy to make it than it generates.

I am sorry if I didn't make myself clear.


intaglio

(8,170 posts)
21. And if the energy is free, what happens to your calculations?
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 09:03 AM
Jun 2012

Technically oil is also thermodynamically inefficient because you have to ignore the amount of energy used to produce the original plants and bacteria.

Then let us look at the ridiculous amount of pollution produced by the oil industry and the nonsensical amount of energy involved in the clean-up and the stupid amount of CO2 that has never been cleaned-up and is part of the source of AGW. This too is not included in your efficiency calculations.

I agree that no energy source can be totally carbon neutral but you have to try and the closest to C neutral is likely to be solar, wind and tidal. Energy storage is an important element of a near neutral energy economy and, at present that problem has not been cracked (no pun intended). Likely elements of the energy storage solution are:
1) Hydrogen from water, disadvantage bulk storage (low mass per volume);
2) Hydroelectric pumped storage, disadvantage limited suitable sites;
3) Pneumatic pumped storage, disadvantage limited sites (void oil fields, salt caverns);
4) Chemical battery; problems low energy density, scaling and noxious byproducts;
5) Mechanical battery (gyroscopic), problem bulk;
6) Heat storage (molten salts), limited to thermal solar power stations and noxious byproducts.

Hydrogen storage is likely to be partially resolved by the use of clathrate type nanostructures

longship

(40,416 posts)
22. I don't give a shit about efficiency of oil
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 10:17 AM
Jun 2012

Because oil, coal, and other non-carbon neutral sources are destroying our climate it doesn't matter how efficient they are. They have to go no matter what their efficiency. So fuck oil, etc. They are irrelevant to the discussion.

But when calculating the cost of carbon neutral energy futures one cannot ignore the fact that there are zero sources of molecular hydrogen on our planet. All hydrogen is made by electro-chemical processes, presumably by hydrolysis of water which always takes more energy than the subsequent burning of hydrogen gives back.

What is wrong with people in this thread? Are you all that ignorant of basic physics that you cannot understand what I have written here? Or am I that bad at communicating?

What do you think I am trying to say? That hydrogen is bad? No! That it isn't useful? No! I am only saying that it isn't a fucking energy source since it takes more energy to make it than it generates by burning it. But it IS a great energy storage medium assuming we can do that efficiently.

We need to put billions of dollars into research on energy, including solar, wind, yada-yada, and hydrogen.

intaglio

(8,170 posts)
23. So what is your alternative?
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 01:45 PM
Jun 2012

Genuine question. What non-polluting intermediary storage are you proposing?

I enumerated most only leaving out biomass and ethanol production because they are not intermediary between electrical energy and usage. Are either of these your solution? Is there another solution that you know of that I do not?

longship

(40,416 posts)
24. Well, I think we're on the same page
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 03:45 PM
Jun 2012

I just think you may have misunderstood my posts here. My bad.

What I recommend is all of the above, the extent to which the tech has carbon neutral or negative carbon footprint.

No oil, no coal, no gas. This to the extent we can achieve it. EG, Airplanes will probably burn oil for some time.

Power generated only by non-carbon as soon as possible.

But hydrogen shows a lot of promise because it is so damned clean. Lots of technological problems with storing it, and there's the big issue of no source that doesn't use energy (which was the point of my posts here).

People here seemed to think that I was dissing hydrogen. That isn't true. I was merely highlighting a major issue.

Thanks for the dialog. Sorry if I confused people about my intent.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
26. What is the specific problem you want storage to solve?
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:45 PM
Jun 2012

You first need to answer that question before you start looking at the best way to solve it. The goal of being carbon neutral is good, but that is a characteristic you want to incorporate into your solution, it doesn't define the problem.

Is the problem meeting home heating needs in Maine during the month of January?

Do you want to provide power for your automobile?

Does a hospital need to have emergency power available no matter what?

The list you presented is a start but trying to incorporate the pros and cons into it is premature without a specific application in mind. What might be the best solution for a large agricultural operation will require a degree of energy portability that supplying an office complex wouldn't, so the solutions would probably be different.

Also, I'd suggest that neither heat storage nor battery storage are characterized by "noxious by-products". There are some technologies in these categories that you might say that about, but not-so-much for most of them (lithium, zinc and NIMH (chemical) ice or rock batteries (thermal).

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
16. Hydrogen, as an energy carrier, is far more efficient than petroleum and H2 Cars will kick ass and..
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 06:56 PM
Jun 2012

Change the world of racing.

Basically, electric cars whether powered by battery or fuel cells are making their debut and within a generation will have eclipsed dinosaur ICE powered racers.

Career technical high schools aren't designing or building gas burners, they're building electrics.

.

longship

(40,416 posts)
17. I like it to even out the day/night solar power cycle
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 07:16 PM
Jun 2012

Use excess solar to split water and store the H2. Save the O2 also, of you wish. When the sun goes down, use the H2 to generate clean energy until the sun roses the next AM.

Repeat as needed.

Also usable for wind or tidal.

Plus, if you have extra H2 you can use it to fuel autos, airplanes, trains, almost anything with zero carbon emission.

Unfortunately, the only way to get H2 is by way of some other power source. A hydrogen economy depends on other clean sources.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
18. H2 peaker plants at every wind farm...
Sat Jun 9, 2012, 08:38 PM
Jun 2012

Combined with additional pumped hydro can go a long way to giving wind and solar more penetration.

A clean future is going to need a change in the ways we fuel our transportation technologies, so electric cars (battery powered or H2) are going to have to be adopted along with more rail transport, and much of it electric.

So the green future is going to need a combination of more electrical generation and storage technologies, applied to the grid and to vehicles.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
25. Would you propose putting peaking plants next to baseload plants?
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:23 PM
Jun 2012

Why would you want to co-locate the wind farm with the H2?

Looking at storage as a totally separate issue brings far more clarity to the problem it is meant to solve. When we conflate the role of storage with the role of variable resources, we are falling into the trap of working with a mental model based on large scale centralized thermal generation. We don't need to duplicate the properties of those plants to push penetration of variable resources; in fact, such a model incorrectly limits our intuitive sense of what variable resources are capable of doing. It also inflates the perceived direct cost of variable energy sources.

For example, think of the combination of generating sources necessary to fill the load profile of a centralized thermal system and then ask yourself if you associate
a) the cost of peaking power + the price of baseload coal/nuclear in the same way you are associating
b) the cost of flexible generation + the price of variable resources?

I know there could be some savings associated with less transmission, but that needs to be balanced with end user needs. Developing storage solutions that incorporate end user needs and resources are likely to be the most often used strategy for deploying storage technologies.

H2/fuel cells have a role but it really isn't a very efficient storage process for most applications.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
27. I'm in an ag area, and my reply was quite a generalization.
Sun Jun 10, 2012, 08:50 PM
Jun 2012

Would have been more accurate to say "at every wind farm where it makes environmental, economic, and eligibility sense"...

When there's a resource available, it makes sense to store what isn't immediately needed by demand.

I think you know what I mean and, no, I wouldn't put peakers next to baseload.

You and I would agree, I think, that ultimately we won't need either peakers or base load plants in the current application of the terms, right?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Hydrogen fuel cells begin...