2030 no new diesel vans. What's your plan?

[Gromett]

As Glenn points out it will be healthy for a mix of technologies to power future vehicles, I am not an EV/ Battery denier however:

You do know that both Battery and Hydrogen rely on electric? Green Hydrogen comes from electrolyses, which uses electric.
Hydrogen is simply the energy storage mechanism, not the power source. Battery vs Hydrogen is about the storage mechanism not the power source.

There is fairly compelling evidence Grommet that Hydrogen Trains (and Buss,) are coming and that Alstom along with Siemens (and others) have a part to play in this.

I have never said that there is no place for hydrogen in trains and busses. In fact I have said that along with shipping and planes are the probable best uses for it. My contention is that hydrogen has no part to play in cars, vans and trucks in the UK.

September 2020 Hydrogen Trains runs on UK Railway for the first time

An experimental prototype created by a university. Still a long way from a commercial product.

July 22nd 2020 Eversholt Rail and Alstom invest a further £1 million in Breeze hydrogen train programme

You do realise that Eversholt has also invested in Battery trains also and this is going live in the near future on the south west line? Still waiting for the purchase order for the hydrogen one.

Plans unveiled for new Multimillion pound hydrogen production plant in Scotland (£45 Million)

I have never said there is no need for hydrogen. In fact I predict we will see massive hydrogen shortages in the future as steel plants and shipping move across to it. Even ammonia producers (used in fertilisers) are going for green hydrogen.

January 27th 2021 Worlds First Hydrogen double deckers to start thier routes tomorrow in Aberdeen

A prototype, again I have never said there is no place for hydrogen. Remember this is a council paid for project it doesn't need to operate profitably.

Kittybrewster, Aberdeen: UK’s largest hydrogen vehicle refuelling station

And produces hydrogen on site, which is the only way to do it viably. 360KG a day. Enough to fill 57 Hyundai Nexo's but only if no buses pull in. Have you seen the size of the hydrolyser plant behind this 4 pump station?

There is a second one in Aberdeen see this?

Refuelling station launched as Aberdeen leads the way in hydrogen technology

Aberdeen’s second hydrogen refuelling station was officially opened today [Monday, 27 February] along with the launch of a fleet of 10 hydrogen fuelled Toyota Mirai cars. Aberdeen City Council’s lead member for hydrogen, Councillor Barney Crockett was joined by Toyota GB President and Managing...

news.aberdeencity.gov.uk

Only capable of producing 160KG a day (25 nexo's filled) and cost £2.6M to build. Again mainly funded by the council.

I cannot find out how much they are charging for the hydrogen?

Now let's compare the UK's largest hydrogen station funded by a council to the UK's largest battery charging station fully privately funded.
https://www.gridserve.com/braintree-overview/

Prior to Lithium no one was interested in EV's, Battery vehicles just would not sell so yes it was impossible unless it was a milk float!

You say no one was interested? Then how come there was more demand than GM could supply for the EV1 back in 1996? The problem with EV's was not mainly the battery it was that manufacturers produced crappy cars that looked weird like the G-Wiz.

 

[Coolcats]

You do know that both Battery and Hydrogen rely on electric? Green Hydrogen comes from electrolyses, which uses electric.
Hydrogen is simply the energy storage mechanism, not the power source. Battery vs Hydrogen is about the storage mechanism not the power source.


I have never said that there is no place for hydrogen in trains and busses. In fact I have said that along with shipping and planes are the probable best uses for it. My contention is that hydrogen has no part to play in cars, vans and trucks in the UK.


An experimental prototype created by a university. Still a long way from a commercial product.


You do realise that Eversholt has also invested in Battery trains also and this is going live in the near future on the south west line? Still waiting for the purchase order for the hydrogen one.


I have never said there is no need for hydrogen. In fact I predict we will see massive hydrogen shortages in the future as steel plants and shipping move across to it. Even ammonia producers (used in fertilisers) are going for green hydrogen.


A prototype, again I have never said there is no place for hydrogen. Remember this is a council paid for project it doesn't need to operate profitably.


And produces hydrogen on site, which is the only way to do it viably. 360KG a day. Enough to fill 57 Hyundai Nexo's but only if no buses pull in. Have you seen the size of the hydrolyser plant behind this 4 pump station?

There is a second one in Aberdeen see this?

Refuelling station launched as Aberdeen leads the way in hydrogen technology

Aberdeen’s second hydrogen refuelling station was officially opened today [Monday, 27 February] along with the launch of a fleet of 10 hydrogen fuelled Toyota Mirai cars. Aberdeen City Council’s lead member for hydrogen, Councillor Barney Crockett was joined by Toyota GB President and Managing...

news.aberdeencity.gov.uk

Only capable of producing 160KG a day (25 nexo's filled) and cost £2.6M to build. Again mainly funded by the council.

I cannot find out how much they are charging for the hydrogen?

Now let's compare the UK's largest hydrogen station funded by a council to the UK's largest battery charging station fully privately funded.
https://www.gridserve.com/braintree-overview/




You say no one was interested? Then how come there was more demand than GM could supply for the EV1 back in 1996? The problem with EV's was not mainly the battery it was that manufacturers produced crappy cars that looked weird like the G-Wiz.

Your so negative Grommet with evidence that industry does have an interest in Hydrogen yet you poor cold water on every aspect and yet the market is developing. Most early developments are funded from seeding money the project in Aberdeen has had funding from the EU ( its a bit like the Romans what have the EU ever done for us).

So lets pick this up again when the world of Hydrogen expands and gets a little further with its development rather than keep banging on about 'it cannot work due to Physics. Clearly people who are in this industry are scientists and engineers who have carried out the physics understand the cost limitations yet believe this is one of the technologies for the future.

You may just get a Hydrogen powered MoHo yet

There is just one question, if your view and argument on why Hydrogen is so economically unviable why is investment being made in to this Technology, in terms of Hydrogen plants Bus and Train? let alone Gas Boilers being manufactures ready to accept Hydrogen ? These companies are not employing stupid people.

 

[Gromett]

Your so negative Grommet with evidence that industry does have an interest in Hydrogen yet you poor cold water on every aspect and yet the market is developing. Most early developments are funded from seeding money the project in Aberdeen has had funding from the EU ( its a bit like the Romans what have the EU ever done for us).

I don't pour cold water on every aspect. This conversation has always been about cars, vans and lorries in this country. It is you in an attempt to move away from this point that keeps going onto other things like trains and buses.
I pour cold water on cars, vans and trucks in this country based on economics backed by physics. You refuse to accept this which is your right. But rather than just disagreeing with me you keep going off on massive tangents and trying to misrepresent my position.

I have never said trains, ships or planes are uneconomic for hydrogen, in some cases hydrogen is the best answer and the research on fuel cells for these use cases are valid and valuable.

So lets pick this up again when the world of Hydrogen expands and gets a little further with its development rather than keep banging on about 'it cannot work due to Physics. Clearly people who are in this industry are scientists and engineers who have carried out the physics understand the cost limitations yet believe this is one of the technologies for the future.

You keep misrepresenting what I am saying. I am very very specific when saying that due to the economics based on physics cars, vans and trucks in this country will not be hydrogen based in the future. No doubt there will be government and council run projects with limited scope.
Physics does not bar the use of hydrogen in cars and I have never said it does. You make me angry when you misrepresent me like that. I have never said "It cannot work due to Physics". NEVER!!!

I have said that it is uneconomic for cars, vans and light trucks based on the limitations set by physics. Saying it is uneconomic is not the same as saying it cannot work. Do you not get this distinction?

You may just get a Hydrogen powered MoHo yet

Not in this country we won't. Would you buy one now if they were available? Considering there are few filling stations? I take that as a no. So if no one will buy them based on this, why would any company invest in a nationwide network of filling stations. This is not physics this is economics and you still haven't come up with an answer.

There is just one question, if your view and argument on why Hydrogen is so economically unviable why is investment being made in to this Technology, in terms of Hydrogen plants Bus and Train? let alone Gas Boilers being manufactures ready to accept Hydrogen ? These companies are not employing stupid people.

I have never said hydrogen is economically unviable in the absolute. I have been and will continue to be specific that it is economically unviable in cars, vans and lorries in this country. Gas boilers in this country also won't be run on 100% hydrogen. There is no national hydrogen distribution network and the current natural gas one is unsuitable for 100% hydrogen. The cost to run a new hydrogen gas network is prohibitive. All that the current hydrogen experiments can do is reduce our natural gas usage which isn't a bad thing.

 

[Coolcats]

I don't pour cold water on every aspect. This conversation has always been about cars, vans and lorries in this country. It is you in an attempt to move away from this point that keeps going onto other things like trains and buses.
I pour cold water on cars, vans and trucks in this country based on economics backed by physics. You refuse to accept this which is your right. But rather than just disagreeing with me you keep going off on massive tangents and trying to misrepresent my position.

I have never said trains, ships or planes are uneconomic for hydrogen, in some cases hydrogen is the best answer and the research on fuel cells for these use cases are valid and valuable.


You keep misrepresenting what I am saying. I am very very specific when saying that due to the economics based on physics cars, vans and trucks in this country will not be hydrogen based in the future. No doubt there will be government and council run projects with limited scope.
Physics does not bar the use of hydrogen in cars and I have never said it does. You make me angry when you misrepresent me like that. I have never said "It cannot work due to Physics". NEVER!!!

I have said that it is uneconomic for cars, vans and light trucks based on the limitations set by physics. Saying it is uneconomic is not the same as saying it cannot work. Do you not get this distinction?


Not in this country we won't. Would you buy one now if they were available? Considering there are few filling stations? I take that as a no. So if no one will buy them based on this, why would any company invest in a nationwide network of filling stations. This is not physics this is economics and you still haven't come up with an answer.


I have never said hydrogen is economically unviable in the absolute. I have been and will continue to be specific that it is economically unviable in cars, vans and lorries in this country. Gas boilers in this country also won't be run on 100% hydrogen. There is no national hydrogen distribution network and the current natural gas one is unsuitable for 100% hydrogen. The cost to run a new hydrogen gas network is prohibitive. All that the current hydrogen experiments can do is reduce our natural gas usage which isn't a bad thing.

A change from any form of energy to another is always a cost be it from coal to gas and Oil or nuclear power to wind and solar. Why would Hydrogen production be any different an argument in economic terms Once Hydrogen generation is installed those who own the production facilities will look for an outlet to sell to be it a home boiler a train bus truck or car. It takes time

 

[SpeedyDux]

The achilles heel in this rush to replace diesel vans with fully elecric ones is going to be the delay in installing all the necessary additional electricity distribution and charging infrastructure. You can't install chargers in isolation and we will be competing for limited availability with all the delivery vans.

In my mind the biggest question is: What will the effect of this infrastruture lag be on all-electric motorhomes, and the way we might expect to be able to use them in reality? How will we get by in remote areas, or on campsites with 16 amp or even 6 amp EHU?

I hope the answer doesn't tilt the balance back in favour of tugging caravans with big BEV cars.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Spriddler]

Saudi Arabia's petroleum sector accounts for roughly 87% of their budget revenues, 90% of export earnings, and 42% of GDP. 88% of electricity generation is oil powered and consumes 18% of its own oil production.
(Wiki).

Sheiks must be getting twitchy.

 

[Coolcats]

Saudi Arabia's petroleum sector accounts for roughly 87% of their budget revenues, 90% of export earnings, and 42% of GDP. 88% of electricity generation is oil powered and consumes 18% of its own oil production.
(Wiki).

Sheiks must be getting twitchy.

It would be interesting to know what % of the oil pulled out of the ground goes to other products other than petrol and diesel and how are they going to dispose of the petrol/diesel that comes from the refining when extracting oil for those other prodiucts (assuming there will be a waste product)

 

[Coolcats]

I have never said hydrogen is economically unviable in the absolute. I have been and will continue to be specific that it is economically unviable in cars, vans and lorries in this country. Gas boilers in this country also won't be run on 100% hydrogen. There is no national hydrogen distribution network and the current natural gas one is unsuitable for 100% hydrogen. The cost to run a new hydrogen gas network is prohibitive. All that the current hydrogen experiments can do is reduce our natural gas usage which isn't a bad thing.

I recognise I am annoying and do apologise however, Hydrogen is coming.....

Wocester-Bosch = 100% Hydrogen Boiler

Now I know the following is Marketing but actually he makes a good point, just think of all that Copper and steel in our homes for central heating.

The experts view​

"The development of hydrogen-fired boilers will mean millions of existing heating systems in our homes can be saved, rather than the entire system needing to be replaced.

“The beauty of hydrogen as an alternative to natural gas is that as well as water as a by-product, we have already solved issues such as visible flame burn using a UV cell. The gas network is also in place, so homeowners won’t experience any major infrastructure disruption.”

“With fully developed prototypes, various trials planned and many heating engineers and manufacturers in agreement that this could be a viable solution to decarbonise heating and hot water, we are hopeful that the future will be hydrogen.”

Martyn Bridges - Director of Technical Communication and Product Management


The following Video says that changing the Gas distribution network to Hydrogen is Feasible

 

[Spriddler]

It would be interesting to know what % of the oil pulled out of the ground goes to other products other than petrol and diesel and how are they going to dispose of the petrol/diesel that comes from the refining when extracting oil for those other prodiucts (assuming there will be a waste product)

I expect a lot of it is used in the production of plastics which are also being targeted in the environmental clean-up initiatives.
On the other hand many of us have part of our pensions funded by profits from investments in oil and its derivatives which is a bit of a worry.

 

[domf]

Or possibly from 2025 according to this:

Euro 7 - a ban on internal combustion engines by the back door?

https://www.euractiv.com/section/alternative-renewable-fuels/news/eu-plotting-ban-on-internal-combustion-engine-as-of-2025-industry/ Interesting read....

www.motorhomefun.co.uk

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[SpeedyDux]

Or possibly from 2025 according to this:

Euro 7 - a ban on internal combustion engines by the back door?

https://www.euractiv.com/section/alternative-renewable-fuels/news/eu-plotting-ban-on-internal-combustion-engine-as-of-2025-industry/ Interesting read....

www.motorhomefun.co.uk

Of course it makes total sense to allow the loons in Brussels who screwed up their Covid vaccine strategy to carry on with such extreme emissions policy-making.

 

[Coolcats]

I expect a lot of it is used in the production of plastics which are also being targeted in the environmental clean-up initiatives.
On the other hand many of us have part of our pensions funded by profits from investments in oil and its derivatives which is a bit of a worry.

Oh err had not considered the pension part although I do hope the fund managers find alternatives.

 

[joe and sue]

It would be interesting to know what % of the oil pulled out of the ground goes to other products other than petrol and diesel and how are they going to dispose of the petrol/diesel that comes from the refining when extracting oil for those other prodiucts (assuming there will be a waste product)

How about developing an engine of some sort to burn it super efficiently, and with minimal emissions !!

 

[Coolcats]

How about developing an engine of some sort to burn it super efficiently, and with minimal emissions !!

Sounds like a perfect solution to me

 

[Gromett]

How about developing an engine of some sort to burn it super efficiently, and with minimal emissions !!

You don't think they have tried? The auto manufacturers would have done this years ago if it was possible.
That is why ICE engines have become so complex with adblu, catalysts and EGR's just to give 3 examples.

There is the law of diminishing returns. Each process takes energy reducing the efficiency of the engine and each step forward costs more than the last.

But there is no way I know of to prevent CO2 emissions. CO2 is the end result of the chemical reaction in a petrol or diesel engine. Unless you store it you have to emit it. We would have to carry a tank around to store the CO2 and then when refuelling pay to have the CO2 taken from the storage tank. This extra weight would reduce fuel efficiency further and we would still have to work out how to deal with all that CO2.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gromett]

I recognise I am annoying and do apologise however, Hydrogen is coming.....

Wocester-Bosch = 100% Hydrogen Boiler

Now I know the following is Marketing but actually he makes a good point, just think of all that Copper and steel in our homes for central heating.

The experts view​

"The development of hydrogen-fired boilers will mean millions of existing heating systems in our homes can be saved, rather than the entire system needing to be replaced.

“The beauty of hydrogen as an alternative to natural gas is that as well as water as a by-product, we have already solved issues such as visible flame burn using a UV cell. The gas network is also in place, so homeowners won’t experience any major infrastructure disruption.”

“With fully developed prototypes, various trials planned and many heating engineers and manufacturers in agreement that this could be a viable solution to decarbonise heating and hot water, we are hopeful that the future will be hydrogen.”

Martyn Bridges - Director of Technical Communication and Product Management


The following Video says that changing the Gas distribution network to Hydrogen is Feasible

From a company who makes boilers and other gas products. They are fighting for their survival. Gas boilers are practical, economic and available. On that there can be no debate.

However, upgrading our gas network to work with hydrogen would be prohibitively expensive.

This article is published on a green website that is pro pretty much everything in the green sphere. It is written by a chemical engineer with 30 years experience and is not marketing Wabbity.

Is Hydrogen The Best Option To Replace Natural Gas In The Home? Looking At The Numbers - CleanTechnica

There's been a lot of talk recently about hydrogen as a replacement for natural gas. The scheme is to gradually add H2 to the natural gas grid, with the H2 being made from water using "excess" renewable electricity when it's available.

cleantechnica.com

But let's say for instance we do pay to have the gas network upgraded to hydrogen and EVERYONE upgrades their boiler to run on hydrogen...
Where is the hydrogen going to come from?

 

[Coolcats]

From a company who makes boilers and other gas products. They are fighting for their survival. Gas boilers are practical, economic and available. On that there can be no debate.

However, upgrading our gas network to work with hydrogen would be prohibitively expensive.

This article is published on a green website that is pro pretty much everything in the green sphere. It is written by a chemical engineer with 30 years experience and is not marketing Wabbity.

Is Hydrogen The Best Option To Replace Natural Gas In The Home? Looking At The Numbers - CleanTechnica

There's been a lot of talk recently about hydrogen as a replacement for natural gas. The scheme is to gradually add H2 to the natural gas grid, with the H2 being made from water using "excess" renewable electricity when it's available.

cleantechnica.com

But let's say for instance we do pay to have the gas network upgraded to hydrogen and EVERYONE upgrades their boiler to run on hydrogen...
Where is the hydrogen going to come from?

You do make me chuckle Grommet,

Three problems with the link

1) It is a US publication,
2) I cant seem to find the authors name as it says "Guest contributor"
3) I will take the link with a pinch of salt as a reliable source the website states: "Copyright © 2021 CleanTechnica. The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by and do not necessarily represent the views of CleanTechnica, its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries"

Every company is up for survival what do you expect them to do? You stated that Boilers will not run 100% on Hydrogen, the Manufacturers are clear they have Boilers that are 100% Hydrogen capable. It is said that the Gas network cannot support Hydrogen which is true in its current state. It is commented that it would be too expensive, the conversion from Coal to Natural gas back in the 70's was £100M Given CPI that £100 Million is now £1,356.72 (£1.4 B). So my guess is there is a good argument for a Hydrogen investment for the future.

Whilst these are largish numbers the UK defence budget for 18/19 was £38 Billion, 19/20 £39 Billion and £41 Billion by 20/21

As a county we went from Coal Gas to Natural Gas, there was a huge national campaign to ensure every house in the country was converted, Hob, Oven and Boiler no reason why this could not be done with Hydrogen area by area.

The global race to produce hydrogen offshore​

Money is being poured in to Hydrogen production..........so when we have the supply for this stuff the manufactures will want to sell it, they will want a distribution network, and they will want it consumed. So when there is an abundance of Hydrogen it will be used in Boilers, Trucks, MoHo's Cars, lawn mowers and whatever else we need to fuel

 

[Gromett]

Three problems with the link

1) It is a US publication,

AND? The Science doesn't change. There may be small differences in things like the materials we use for pipes. But the rest is perfectly valid world wide.

2) I cant seem to find the authors name as it says "Guest contributor"

Right at the top of the actual it has this;

3) I will take the link with a pinch of salt as a reliable source the website states: "Copyright © 2021 CleanTechnica. The content produced by this site is for entertainment purposes only. Opinions and comments published on this site may not be sanctioned by and do not necessarily represent the views of CleanTechnica, its owners, sponsors, affiliates, or subsidiaries"

And? It is a serious source of all things green. They have a lot of science and engineering contributors. This is a standard style disclaimer in the US.

Every company is up for survival what do you expect them to do? You stated that Boilers will not run 100% on Hydrogen, the Manufacturers are clear they have Boilers that are 100% Hydrogen capable. It is said that the Gas network cannot support Hydrogen which is true in its current state. It is commented that it would be too expensive, the conversion from Coal to Natural gas back in the 70's was £100M Given CPI that £100 Million is now £1,356.72 (£1.4 B). So my guess is there is a good argument for a Hydrogen investment for the future.

I actually said this.

Gas boilers in this country also won't be run on 100% hydrogen

Might be a subtle difference. I didn't say gas boilers can't be run on hydrogen full stop. I said in this country they won't. Can't and won't are two different words and the caveat of in this country is important.

As a county we went from Coal Gas to Natural Gas, there was a huge national campaign to ensure every house in the country was converted, Hob, Oven and Boiler no reason why this could not be done with Hydrogen area by area.

Coal gas was a combination of methane, hydrogen, ethane and a few other elements. Moving from that to methane (natural gas) is simple. Moving from natural gas to pure hydrogen is not.
It is not the converting of hob, oven and boiler that is the issue, it is the production and distribution of green hydrogen that is the problem for the reasons covered in the article I linked.

The global race to produce hydrogen offshore​

Money is being poured in to Hydrogen production..........so when we have the supply for this stuff the manufactures will want to sell it, they will want a distribution network, and they will want it consumed. So when there is an abundance of Hydrogen it will be used in Boilers, Trucks, MoHo's Cars, lawn mowers and whatever else we need to fuel

Money is indeed being poured into hydrogen production, but that is not the issue. The cost of production will remain high for quite some time and it will go into systems where there is no other choice such as steel, ammonia and cement production. Ships and long distance trucking (in other countries) will also be a priority. In the meantime trucks, moho's cars and lawnmowers in this country will move to batteries.

We will need 3 x as much electric to go with hydrogen and that is not going to happen for a very, very, very long time if ever.

 

[Wabs]

Then you will have the weight issue,,these electric batteries aren’t going to be light,that will affect the overall weight of the vehicle,,,

 

[SpeedyDux]

I hope we can all agree that the proposal to replace natural gas with hydrogen as fuel for domestic CH boilers is crazy, impractical, too expensive, as well as dangerous.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[SpeedyDux]

Then you will have the weight issue,,these electric batteries aren’t going to be light,that will affect the overall weight of the vehicle,,,

There are calls to raise the 3.5 tonne MTPLM limit to 4.25 tonne. We shall wait and see.

 

[Coolcats]

I hope we can all agree that the proposal to replace natural gas with hydrogen as fuel for domestic CH boilers is crazy, impractical, too expensive, as well as dangerous.

Here is a question, if Boiler manufactures are making Hydrogen Boilers why is it Crazy? surely it is less crazy than burning Gas and adding to Global warming, which will ultimately be a mass extinction for humans?

If wind Turbines generate Hydrogen with energy that would otherwise be discarded is that not a positive thing?

Gas and Petrol are highly dangerous, you get the odd house explosion and car going up in flames but no one says its crazy to use.

 

[Coolcats]

AND? The Science doesn't change. There may be small differences in things like the materials we use for pipes. But the rest is perfectly valid world wide.


Right at the top of the actual it has this;
View attachment 470391


And? It is a serious source of all things green. They have a lot of science and engineering contributors. This is a standard style disclaimer in the US.


I actually said this.

Might be a subtle difference. I didn't say gas boilers can't be run on hydrogen full stop. I said in this country they won't. Can't and won't are two different words and the caveat of in this country is important.


Coal gas was a combination of methane, hydrogen, ethane and a few other elements. Moving from that to methane (natural gas) is simple. Moving from natural gas to pure hydrogen is not.
It is not the converting of hob, oven and boiler that is the issue, it is the production and distribution of green hydrogen that is the problem for the reasons covered in the article I linked.


Money is indeed being poured into hydrogen production, but that is not the issue. The cost of production will remain high for quite some time and it will go into systems where there is no other choice such as steel, ammonia and cement production. Ships and long distance trucking (in other countries) will also be a priority. In the meantime trucks, moho's cars and lawnmowers in this country will move to batteries.

We will need 3 x as much electric to go with hydrogen and that is not going to happen for a very, very, very long time if ever.

As you can see over the past couple of days, I have provided a lot of evidence Industry is interested in Hydrogen. A lot of money is being poured in to the R&D

The web page you provided is American (cultural differences can apply in science, just ask any researcher), Paul Martin as far as I can see is retired, that does not mean he does not have expertise but may not be involved in the latest green energy initiatives. the site is not an academic one and states as such so it does give a level of artistic licence for any article, I am not saying its right or wrong just how it is.

Grommet said:
Might be a subtle difference. I didn't say gas boilers can't be run on hydrogen full stop. I said in this country they won't. Can't and won't are two different words and the caveat of in this country is important.

However it seems they are: "Some 300 homes in Fife will be fitted with free hydrogen boilers, heaters and cooking appliances to be used for more than four years in the largest test of whether zero carbon hydrogen, made using renewable energy and water, could help meet Britain’s climate goals". The article says that if successful up to 1000 homes will be powered by Hydrogen


lets have some positivity for Hydrogen its green clean and looks like it has a place in Transport and other energy requirements in the home.

 

[Gromett]

However it seems they are: "Some 300 homes in Fife will be fitted with free hydrogen boilers, heaters and cooking appliances to be used for more than four years in the largest test of whether zero carbon hydrogen, made using renewable energy and water, could help meet Britain’s climate goals". The article says that if successful up to 1000 homes will be powered by Hydrogen

A tiny small scale experiment does not equate to a national solution. Scotland is actually a place where it does have a place as a local energy source. A small scale wind/tidal system to generate electric for a remote settlement with any excess being stored 1st in a battery and once that is full used to electrolyse water into hydrogen and stored for heating makes massive sense. But for the bulk of the UK not so much.

lets have some positivity for Hydrogen its green clean and looks like it has a place in Transport and other energy requirements in the home.

I have never said that Hydrogen doesn't have a place in transport. In fact I have said the opposite multiple times but you never listen. Hydrogen will not replace natural gas as much as the national network and fossil fuel companies wish it to be so.

 

[Coolcats]

A tiny small scale experiment does not equate to a national solution. Scotland is actually a place where it does have a place as a local energy source. A small scale wind/tidal system to generate electric for a remote settlement with any excess being stored 1st in a battery and once that is full used to electrolyse water into hydrogen and stored for heating makes massive sense. But for the bulk of the UK not so much.


I have never said that Hydrogen doesn't have a place in transport. In fact I have said the opposite multiple times but you never listen. Hydrogen will not replace natural gas as much as the national network and fossil fuel companies wish it to be so.

It may be Tiny but everything has a starting point and 100% Hydrogen, East Anglia also has wind turbines so going back to the link I placed earlier they could also produce Hydrogen rather than wasting the energy they cannot sell when demand is low.

The more I look the more activity there is around Hydrogen, there is more possibility this will be a common feel for the future than not. I would be quite happy if Truma had a Hydrogen unit to warm my MoHo along with the Hob being powered by Hydrogen and who knows what may happen in the future with combined Diesel/ Hydrogen hybrid engines that may help the longevity for our MoHo's

Also just think if all the Gas engineers and fitters wouldn't it be great if Hydrogen gave those guys a future as well

Gas grid companies plot course to Britain’s first hydrogen town​

Gas Goes Green: Britain's Hydrogen Network Plan Report​

Edited to add

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Gromett]

East Anglia also has wind turbines so going back to the link I placed earlier they could also produce Hydrogen rather than wasting the energy they cannot sell when demand is low.

Or they could install grid scale storage using Flow batteries. They would get more money back for their investment if they did.

 

[glenn2926]

Any way of having choice re ones fuel source must be good for competition. Having only one whatever that one maybe is not good at all . Surely if we ended up with only one option (it’s looking like electric) the monopolies commission would have something to say about it.
Otherwise we’ll be held to ransom re price. They could literally charge whatever they wish and it’s pay or don’t cook, heat your home, drive your car etc.

 

[Coolcats]

Or they could install grid scale storage using Flow batteries. They would get more money back for their investment if they did.

"Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon chair in geoenergy, carbon capture and storage at Durham University, adds that the real question is whether it is cost-effective to set up such equipment at scale. Proponents, unsurprisingly, argue it is - but with energy systems the proof is only ever in the pudding. Ultimately, Prof Gluyas says a mix of different technologies and approaches will be needed for countries like the UK to be carbon neutral."

You see Grommet, there are multiple perspectives, Flow Batteries just like Hydrogen have a place

 

[SpeedyDux]

Here is a question, if Boiler manufactures are making Hydrogen Boilers why is it Crazy? surely it is less crazy than burning Gas and adding to Global warming, which will ultimately be a mass extinction for humans?

If wind Turbines generate Hydrogen with energy that would otherwise be discarded is that not a positive thing?

Gas and Petrol are highly dangerous, you get the odd house explosion and car going up in flames but no one says its crazy to use.

Leaving aside the global warming issue on which we will have to disagree, my recent experience of gas boilers is that they are shoddy and unreliable. I've had valve failures that should not have happened. They may be just about safe enough for burning natural gas, though when there's an explosion you won't find there's much left of your home. IMO the industry needs at least an order of magnitude improvement to make new hydrogen-fired domestic boilers 100% reliable and safe. Next, the currently installed gas mains and pipes ... best stick with natural gas.

Cars catching fire spontaneously is relatively common. Mk2 Zafiras were notorious. Cars are easy to set on fire; this is a popular pastime in parts of France especially on New Year's Eve. Again, should we assume that this industry is capable of making hydrogen-powered ICE cars that can't catch fire, won't leak hydrogen, and can be serviced by morons without becoming a public hazard. Seems unlikely to me.

 

[Coolcats]

Leaving aside the global warming issue on which we will have to disagree, my recent experience of gas boilers is that they are shoddy and unreliable. I've had valve failures that should not have happened. They may be just about safe enough for burning natural gas, though when there's an explosion you won't find there's much left of your home. IMO the industry needs at least an order of magnitude improvement to make new hydrogen-fired domestic boilers 100% reliable and safe. Next, the currently installed gas mains and pipes ... best stick with natural gas.

Cars catching fire spontaneously is relatively common. Mk2 Zafiras were notorious. Cars are easy to set on fire; this is a popular pastime in parts of France especially on New Year's Eve. Again, should we assume that this industry is capable of making hydrogen-powered ICE cars that can't catch fire, won't leak hydrogen, and can be serviced by morons without becoming a public hazard. Seems unlikely to me.

Thats interesting however:

"Ultimately, hydrogen is no more or less dangerous than other flammable fuels including natural gas and gasoline. In some cases, what makes hydrogen different from those hydrocarbon fuels actually leads to it having greater safety benefits over gasoline and natural gas."

Green hydrogen benefits aside, one of the common myths that lead to some questioning H2 safety is the notorious Hindenburg disaster, which occurred in New Jersey, back in 1937.

After decades long debate and research, it is now believed that while the German passenger airship was docking during an electrical storm on the fateful day of the explosion, an electrical discharge from the clouds ignited the skin of the airship. This resulted in the ship’s hydrogen bags igniting.

However, what caused the large and deadly fire was not the hydrogen, which burned rapidly and safely above the ship’s occupants, but the dark iron oxide and reflective aluminum paint that coated the ship’s surface. Those components were highly flammable and burned at a high energetic rate once they caught fire.

I thought this Video was interesting partially the comment about "inside the rear window the temperature rose only 13 degrees"

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}