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.

Might've been a step forward 40 years ago. Today its finding a spot to dig in, so they can keep the fires of hell burning.

But they aren't capturing the carbon. They aren't storing it. It's supposed to be the easiest case of CCS and they dump the CO2 in the atmosphere

I strongly suspect that CCS is a lie aimed to make people happier to continue burning fossil fuels

bp themselves still talks about "if we can decarbonise it's production" (it being hydrogen). They have published in more detail, but they've not made it as easy to find. If you do some searching you can find their approach in more detail tho.

For the rest: knowing an electric device does not care where the electricity came from. You can double check this by seeing if the same smartphone exists all over the planet.

https://www.bp.com/...

Solar panels (PV) degrade over time and use and have to be replaced and disposed of. A better case would be for things like solar furnaces that are simpler, but most of the time solar implies PV panels.

Wow, solar panels that last forever? That's quite the technological achievement...

Read it again, slowly.

There's a better way to word the argument: it isn't possible to do hydrogen in renewable ways economically.

Electrolysis is easy enough to do at home if you like. Doing it at mass scale to fuel cars and airplanes is another matter.

No. You can manufacture lots of small batteries too. And invest in different battery technologies.

Why is it either/or? That feels like a purposeful false equivalence.

No. No, we remember, Americans just pretend it doesn't exist.

I used the quotes because seeing her condition before I can't imagine she's going to be 100% better. I just meant to ask if her condition improved at all that she would be able to make another video knowing that ok isn't going to mean perfectly healthy. The long covid quotation was just because that's what we call it colloquially but I don't think that's a real diagnosis. I'm not a covid denyer or anything lol

Seeing another comment though I see the video being discussed was before she got sick.

For sure she's still making some money and receiving support. Her channel has also been reuploading clips of old content as shorts. I'm certain it doesn't keep pace with what it used to though, plus she's got mounting bills. I'd understand if she did something desperate right now basically, but not at her peak.

Oof. I'd offer psychadelics, seen implications they can sometimes help with that sort of thing; potentially resetting the thinky bits of the immune system and stuff, but I have no idea where you are.

They 100% know that electrolysis methods won’t be economically viable.

I would argue against that any day. Electrolysers are viable, they are just not the current state of the industry because dirt cheap solar and wind weren't around in previous decades.

It's the storage that might not be viable in most countries (because only some have geology that allows for underground gas storage). Producing hydrogen from water at 95% efficiency is doable with today's tools, if you have somewhere to put it.

Electrolysis is a great idea for local generation using excess domestic solar capacity. They are shit as a centralized fuel generation mechanism.

The biggest issue is that batteries are just better than hydrogen electrolysis for local domestic storage.

Fucking. Mood. People need to stop relying on fucking governments; I can think if like five that aren't hardcore invested in the end of the world (the largest of those being, like, Cuba, which still uses oil for everything because its all they can get-the others are even more marginal). We need more guerilla infrastructure or syndicalist infrastructure. Especially energy.

How is that relevant here?

Didn't realize what instance I was on!

Gotcha! I came here from the everything feed. I shall now subscribe!

Not everyone knows what these instances mean, and you're federated. In fact, this message is the first time I knew what it meant. I also don't necessarily look at instances before commenting.

Edit, also ty for explaining, the rest, although unintentional I'm sure, felt condescending for us not knowing what every single abbreviated instance we interact with means.

Not clear on what you’re trying to say here. The energy generated from a fuel cell is electricity. The entire fuel cell assembly is essentially a battery, using hydrogen and oxygen as the electrochemical components.

But, I think you’re trying to argue that one is better than the other. To that all I can say is we all are just getting out of being locked into a singular infrastructure (combustion engines) for the last 90 so years, it’s probably best to invest concurrently in multiple alternative energies instead of putting all of our eggs in one basket. Hydrogen has some strengths where lithium ion does not and vis versa. I’d assume it would be best to diversify so if one fails we have multiple backups. Kinda like investing money, don’t put all your money behind one horse.

This usually happens at night. When the sun comes back up, try it again.

Proton emission does happen, and that's just a positive hydrogen ion waiting to steal an electron from something else.

You could say that everything came from fusing hydrogen in the first place, and so the hydrogen being created here is just returning to its original form.

Water is non issue since it doesn't have to be too close to generators. We kinda figured out how to transfer electricity where we need it.

If you can transport the electricity then you can find better, more efficient uses for it (e.g. EV charging)

Transporting it is a small issue but we're already transporting a lot of liquid gasses and other flammable stuff like gasoline.

So, you want to liquefy hydrogen? Below 20 kelvin? As a gas it's much more difficult to contain than methane. It's nothing like gasoline.

If nothing else it could be used by millions of semis for which current battery tech is absolutely fucking useless and likely will remain that way for decades.

All it takes is an additional, interchangeable, battery trailer.

But really if we didn't jump on completely wrong tech years ago and just switched to hydrogen instead of batteries,

Nah. Hydrogen is very inefficient to produce and difficult to store. It does have niche use cases like for ammonia and methanol products

we would have cars with zero emissions, zero range issues and zero charging problems a decade ago.

I think you have a point here. Hydrogen was mature enough a decade ago. If a distribution network existed, backed by a cheap source of electricity production then EV tech wouldn't get a foothold.

Yup, that's the exact talking point they want spread all over the media. Notice how we're no longer talking about "petrol". They want people to associate "Petrol" and "Hydrogen". The "petrol" can go unnoticed while the "hydrogen" gets all the bad press. And after all, you can't not use petrol if green hydrogen were more available.