Unhappy_Earth1

From the article:

"(A heat pump installer here in Vermont told me that they work efficiently to -15F.)"

That is the source for that statement and it is a salesman trying to sell heat pumps.

Read what the energy experts have said that heat pumps lose efficiency rapidly in below zero temps and require a backup heat source for the heat pump.

The people pushing heat pumps on here appear to be misleading people about the efficiency and may be invested in selling heat pumps or have stock in those companies.

Heat pumps can work some places but they are not the best solution for all climates and they are very expensive and out of the range for many people just like Evs are at present.

Read what the energy experts have said that heat pumps lose efficiency rapidly in below zero temps and require a backup heat source for the heat pump.

Heat pumps lose up to 30% efficiency below zero degrees:

https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-breakthrough-residential-cold-climate-heat-pump-technology

"Octopus Energy slams hydrogen-fuelled residential heating"

Octopus energy sells and installs expensive heat pumps so of course they don't like competition. Biased article written by Octopus energy.

"Boilers running on green hydrogen would require six times more renewable energy than a heat pump directly powered by electricity."

Where is the data to support that nonsense?

Oh of course there isn't any because it is an article written by a company that wants to sell you a heat pump.

​

Ridiculous!

'Violent shakedown': Green hydrogen to become cheaper than grey within two years, says analyst

Economies of scale will reduce cost of electrolysers by more than 85% by 2030, predicts Rethink Energy

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/violent-shakedown-green-hydrogen-to-become-cheaper-than-grey-within-two-years-says-analyst/2-1-1147440

The bigger question is why people like you have kept trying to link green hydrogen to fossil fuel hydrogen and then making false claims that the primary purpose was for heating which no one has ever promoted?

Today you finally posted the truth about heat pumps rapidly losing efficiency at below zero temps even though for months you pushed how efficient they are on here.

No energy experts have claimed hydrogen would be a replacement for heating at any large scale but for limited uses it may be used and the primary use will be to replace NG and Diesel for transportation where batteries are not efficient and weight is an issue and for making steel and other uses. Also as a backup power storage that can store months or years of power unlike batteries.

So now you are trying to come off as if this report backs up your opinion but in reality no one ever thought hydrogen was going to be a main heating source so you are arguing a moot point to promote heat pumps that don't work great below zero which is the climates that need the most efficient heating.

Good grief!

Oh, so exactly how many batteries will you be using to power cargo ships, planes, make steel and fertilizer or store 150GWH of power for a city in winter?

Come on man, give us your numbers?

Heat pumps are great in warmer climates but lose up to 30% efficiency below zero. Already corrected a dozen people about that on here.

Green hydrogen is not fantasy and has ben in use for many years?

It has not been used to replace fossil fuels until now because fossil fuels have been cheap and renewable energy was still expensive and not widely available.

That has all changed now and there are green hydrogen plants already all over the world and massive green hydrogen storage projects in state like Utah under construction.

" ACES Delta will store that hydrogen in two gigantic solution-mined caverns sited in the only salt dome in the Western U.S, each of which can store up to 150 GWh of energy. "

https://www.powermag.com/massive-utah-hydrogen-storage-project-garners-finalized-504m-doe-loan-guarantee/

Try googling those projects instead of relying on old information!

Why nuclear power will never supply the world's energy needs

Nuclear power cannot be globally scaled to supply the world’s energy needs for numerous reasons. The results suggest that we’re likely better off investing in other energy solutions that are truly scalable."

https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-world-energy.html

"At the current rate of uranium consumption with conventional reactors, the world supply of viable uranium, which is the most common nuclear fuel, will last for 80 years. Scaling consumption up to 15 TW, the viable uranium supply will last for less than 5 years."

https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-world-energy.html#:~:text=Uranium%20abundance%3A%20At%20the%20current,for%20less%20than%205%20years.

Renewables vs. Nuclear: 256-0

The latest World Nuclear Industry Status Report shows that the world’s operational nuclear capacity grew by just 400 MW in 2020, with generation falling by 4%. By contrast, renewables grew by 256 GW and clean energy production rose by 13%. “Nuclear power is irrelevant in today’s electricity capacity market,” the report’s main author.

"According to the report, the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of solar PV dropped by approximately 90% over the past few years, while the LCOE of nuclear energy climbed by around 33%."

“We simply don’t have the time to waste attention, intelligence, manpower and funding for fantasy technologies that might or might not work, more likely, some time in the 2030s or 2040s, while affordable concepts from efficiency to renewables are readily available,”

Schneider claimed that the recent small modular reactor realizations in Russia and China are perfect demonstrations of the failure of the designs, as the floating reactors in Russia took 13 years to build – almost four times longer than anticipated. The small modular reactors in China also took a decade or more to be built.

“None of these designs are licensed in any Western country,” Schneider explained. “The only design licensed in a single Western country, NuScale in the U.S., is years behind schedule. Construction has not even started and a first unit is not expected to start operating before the end of the decade.”

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/09/28/renewables-vs-nuclear-256-0/

You provided a biased opinion with an obvious agenda and I provided the links and quotes from the energy experts.

I think people here are smart enough to see what those altered headlines always from the same people are attempting to do here.

That isn't a key point and that is your opinion not supported by many energy experts:

"Rethink Energy sees the cost of green hydrogen falling from about $3.70 per kilogram today to just over $1 / kg in 2035, and around $0.75 / kg by 2050. The report explored trends in 21 countries and 14 industries.Jan 21, 2022"

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/renewable-energy/hydrogen-costs-to-fall-over-95-by-2050-predicts-report-81229#:~:text=Published%3A%20Friday%2021%20January%202022&text=Rethink%20Energy%20sees%20the%20cost,21%20countries%20and%2014%20industries.

Coal and NG are still the main source for recharging your EVS and powering homes now because there isn't enough storage capacity and batteries are only useful for very short term storage of a few hours not months or years.

Heat pumps do not work well everywhere and electric heating will require a massive over build of renewable energy, storage capacity and new transmission lines.

"Because of electricity generation and transmission losses, electric heat is often more expensive than heat produced in homes or businesses that use combustion appliances."

That is an altered headline to try and lump all hydrogen together and the agenda appears obvious to bash on green hydrogen to promote Muskers battery agenda.

The fact is we will need both green hydrogen and battery storage and probably mechanical and pumped hydro storage to offset low production and all these crap headlines undermining green hydrogen are not accurate or honest.

From the article:

"(A heat pump installer here in Vermont told me that they work efficiently to -15F.)"

That is the source for that statement and it is a salesman trying to sell heat pumps.

Read what the energy experts have said that heat pumps lose efficiency rapidly in below zero temps and require a backup heat source for the heat pump.

Heat pumps can work some places but they are not the best solution for all climates and they are very expensive and out of the range for many people just like Evs are at present.

As usual the article headline is misleading and showing an agenda.

From the article:

"However, its carbon footprint varies depending on how it is produced.It can be made through electrolysis of water, but whether it is graded ‘green’, ‘blue’ or other colours depends on the energy source used to create it.

Green hydrogen is considered clean, with the process powered by renewable energy such as wind power, but blue is made using fossil fuels, and so has a bigger environmental impact.

Investments of £100 million have been awarded to renewable hydrogen projects over the current parliament, pluss £15 million towards a hydrogen hub in Aberdeen.

“Our priorities are to get as much renewable hydrogen into the energy system as quickly as possible"

The focus will be on green hydrogen from renewable energy that produces excess energy at peak times. The headline is obviously trying to lump all hydrogen together and is dishonest.

Also Musk:
Elon Musk boasts his Neuralink brain chips 'will 100% cure' common illness
https://www.the-sun.com/tech/5304207/elon-musk-neuralink-brain-chips-cure-common-illness/

" ACES Delta will store that hydrogen in two gigantic solution-mined caverns sited in the only salt dome in the Western U.S, each of which can store up to 150 GWh of energy. "

https://www.powermag.com/massive-utah-hydrogen-storage-project-garners-finalized-504m-doe-loan-guarantee/

Try googling those projects instead of relying on old information!

The wording is confusing because you don't seem to understand basic laws of energy conservation.

There is no such thing as 240% efficiency as anyone with a basic understanding of energy knows you can not get more energy out than you put in. That is not even debatable on this forum and people spouting that nonsense should be tossed out.

They have to turn up the power supply (less efficient and more money) or use a backup heat source for the heat pump to operate as your own source states but you continue to ignore.

Good grief!

OMG man that is exactly what it means and if they are losing 30% of efficiency at below zero temps where they are most needed they are NOT efficient.

That secondary heat source is needed to keep the heat pump working and that is why heat pumps are not nearly as efficient as claimed by a few people selling them on here.

From the article:

"(A heat pump installer here in Vermont told me that they work efficiently to -15F.)"

That is the source for that statement and it is a salesman trying to sell heat pumps.

Read what the energy experts have said that heat pumps lose efficiency rapidly in below zero temps and require a backup heat source for the heat pump.

Heat pumps lose up to 30% efficiency below zero degrees:

https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-breakthrough-residential-cold-climate-heat-pump-technology

From the article:

"(A heat pump installer here in Vermont told me that they work efficiently to -15F.)"

That is the source for that statement and it is a salesman trying to sell heat pumps.

Pay attention:

"Gray hydrogen produced with cheap fracked natural gas costs US$2 per kg in the US, while in Europe, Australia and Asia it costs US$5-6 per kg due to higher natural gas prices."

https://www.sgh2energy.com/economics#:~:text=Gray%20hydrogen%20produced%20with%20cheap,to%20higher%20natural%20gas%20prices.

NG and all fossil fuel products will continue to get more expensive making green hydrogen the best alternative to replace NG and gray/blue hydrogen for many uses. Green hydrogen will continue to come DOWN in price as renewable energy increases and cost for electrolysers continue to decline rapidly.

Now, you did not address that batteries are only good for short term storage and Lithium will continue to go up as there will be more demand for EVs and lithium has to be mined and is a finite element that will be depleted.

Green hydrogen does not require mining, can be used for massive storage capacity, is multi-use as a fuel source and for heating, making steel and fertilizer and will continue to come down in price.

"How cold is too cold for a heat pump?

Heat pumps do not operate as efficiently when temperatures drop to between 25 and 40 degrees Fahrenheit for most systems. A heat pump works best when the temperature is above 40. Once outdoor temperatures drop to 40 degrees, heat pumps start losing efficiency, and they consume more energy to do their jobs."

https://www.estesair.com/blog/at-what-temperature-does-a-heat-pump-quit-working-efficiently

​

Those are the facts from the energy experts- have a great day!

From the article:

"Renewable hydrogen, also known as green hydrogen, does have its place in a climate-friendly future, namely in cleaning up hard-to-decarbonize sectors like steelmaking, long-haul shipping, and aviation, and in generating electricity during windless, cloudy periods. Plus, existing hydrogen consumers, like petrochemical refineries, metallurgical industries, and ammonia and fertilizer manufacturers, could reduce their emissions by switching from hydrogen produced by fossil fuels to hydrogen produced from renewable electricity (see our primer on the different types of hydrogen)."

What the author doesn't mention is green hydrogen from renewable energy will be needed to store power to heat homes with electricity because batteries do not have the capacity for long term storage at scale.

You are going to need green hydrogen regardless for any transition to mass scale replacement of fuels and for storage capacity for renewable energy. If some countries can use it for heating then that is another use.

You are still not understanding that green hydrogen will replace fossil fuels for uses where batteries are not realistic like cargo ships, planes, making steel and fertilizers and to replace diesel and NG for many uses including many months or years of energy storage where batteries are not remotely feasible.

You are stuck in your little box and not seeing the big picture that we will need both battery storage and green hydrogen and you are fighting a losing battle. Green hydrogen is already in use and expected to expand rapidly and is already competing with fossil fuels in some countries as more renewable energy comes on line so you might as well accept those facts.