I once read a description of the smell of the exhaust of hydrogen combustion powered bus as having the aroma of fresh laundry. But of course water vapor is the most potent green house gas. I guess you can’t win them all.

yours/
peter.

No. it will degrade the metal out of which they are made leading to cracks, thence leaks and fires. Hydrogen is far too nasty and hard to handle to want to store it for long or transport it very far.

“Why not just burn the hydrogen in a small turbine”

Or a large one. You are correct, fuel cells are too expensive to use. Furthermore, fuel cells do not, to my knowledge, gain any advantage from using the pure oxygen that derives from the electrolysis. Combustion driven processes would. Using oxygen instead of air for combustion would also limit the production of NOx.

Actually, I cannot see individual homeowners, or even small businesses using this type of technology. Having a small chemical plant in the basement is not something you would want from a safety view point. Too many parts in the process. The need to store highly flammable products in quantity (gas generated in June, will be needed in December). The expense of the equipment. All point to industrial size operations, that can be staffed with trained personnel, inspected by third parties, and have the size to use larger (and therefore less leaky gas storage surface volume ratio) gas storage vessels, and to build combined cycle generators, which are almost as thermodynamically efficient as fuel cells but are cheaper per kWh.

2)The reconversion of hydrogen to electricity is said to be done by a fuel cell. Unless the catalyst technology also has a big cost reduction impact on fuel cells, then fuel cells are probably too expensive for most applications. Why not just burn the hydrogen in a small turbine, or even a reciprocating engine? When dealing with new technogies, it is generally more practical to avoid making *everything* as different as possible.

3)I wonder if hydrogen can travel over existing nat gas pipelines.

Furthermore, there must be energy losses in the electrolysis process. Current does not flow through the process without resistance. Resistance produces heat, which is a loss of energy.

A complete solar energy system would have to be specified with a solar electric generating system (pick your favorite thermal or PV) and a storage system. Say we use this new electrolysis system as part (note PART) of the storage system. We still have to store the hydrogen and oxygen that are produced, and then turn them back into electricity. Pipes, pumps, tanks, generators (take your pick gas turbines or fuel cells) etc. all cost money. I would bet on gas turbines here because the Oxygen does not help fuel cells that much.

This does not make hydrogen a plausible transportation fuel. The problems of storage and transmission are not affected.

Holy crap, Fred’s a pornographer! This explains so much. Or rather I hope it does because otherwise I cannot make heads or tales of it.

Regardless of the system, there must be power loss. I would guess substantially more than a tiny bit–in other words, no way this works at 100%.

Yes and no. I presume that the 100% efficiency applies to the actual electrolysis. IIRC, the efficiency of electrolysis is measured by a ratio between number of water molecules lysed and the theoretical largest number of water molecules that a given unit of electricity could split.

The total system has losses of course, the wires, the fuel cells etc but if you can approach very close to the theoretical optimum for electrolysis then you can call it 100% for public consumption.

Now I get it. You have sworn a solemn oath to use every known argumentative fallacy in your blog comments, haven’t you?

It could also mute the people concerned with AGW. So, it’s all good.

Fundamental to the laws is that it is an impossibility to get as much energy out of a system than you put in. Entropy increases.

Regardless of the system, there must be power loss. I would guess substantially more than a tiny bit–in other words, no way this works at 100%.

“Entropy increases, that’s the essence of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and I’ve never heard a truer word spoken” — The Doctor (#4).

Yes, I agree the emphasis on solar power is annoying. Being able to store electricity as hydrogen would be a big boost to all electricity production. For example, long distance electricity transmission is theoretically more efficient using hydrogen gas lines.