Old K says every week – talk about things in the petrochemical design industry. Post 32: Talking about hydrogen energy
Thread Content
This post was last edited by henglinkou on 2021-1-22 at 11:31. Old K’s weekly series – Talks about things in the petrochemical design industry, Post 32: Talking about hydrogen energy. The purpose of this post is to invite experts and enthusiasts in the field of hydrogen energy to participate in the discussion, so that everyone can gain a comprehensive and detailed understanding of knowledge related to hydrogen energy. Indeed, there are currently some people who use hydrogen energy as a pretext, with the actual aim of making money or obtaining subsidies. Some time ago, there was a lot of talk about hydrogen-powered vehicles in Nanyang, Henan, which reminded people of the concept of turning water into oil in the 1980s and 1990s. At that time, most of those making decisions came from a wartime era and lacked knowledge in mathematics, physics, and chemistry; it’s understandable that they were deceived. Today, however, most decision-makers have received a higher education, so it’s somewhat hard to understand why they would be deceived – perhaps it’s out of considerations of interest, and they do it on purpose despite knowing the truth. The invention of the steam engine and electricity propelled humanity’s Industrial Revolution into high gear. Industrial development brought about material prosperity, but it also led to unprecedented crises, including the depletion of fossil fuels, environmental pollution, and a significant increase in CO2 emissions. In recent decades, humanity has had to actively seek new energy sources and ways to improve the environment, leading to the rapid development of various new energy sources and environmental protection measures such as nuclear energy, hydroelectric power, tidal power, waste-to-energy systems, wind energy, biomass energy, solar energy, photovoltaic power generation, electric vehicles, and hydrogen energy. Hydrogen energy is a secondary form of energy; in a broad sense, it does not belong to the category of renewable energy. Just as we refer to electric vehicles as new energy vehicles because they differ from traditional gasoline-powered vehicles, electricity itself is not considered a renewable energy source. Since hydrogen energy is a secondary energy source, its energy efficiency in use is necessarily lower than that of the fossil fuels and electricity that serve as its source. The advantage of hydrogen energy is that it is the cleanest form of energy; during its use, there are no emissions of pollutants or CO2, with water being the only substance emitted. The original intention of using hydrogen energy was to reduce environmental pollution and carbon emissions. However, pollutants and CO2 are also emitted during the production, storage, and transportation of hydrogen. To determine whether a certain hydrogen production method belongs to a clean energy production system, consider the example below. For example, for a unit mass of hydrogen, assume that the effective energy generated by its use is E1. The energy consumed per unit mass of hydrogen during its production, storage, and transportation is E2, while the amounts of pollutants and CO2 emitted are m1 and M1 respectively. If the same energy source is used directly for hydrogen production, then the amounts of pollutants and CO2 emitted when an effective energy of E1 is produced are m2 and M2 respectively. If m1 is greater than or equal to m2 and M1 is greater than or equal to M2, it indicates that this method of producing hydrogen does not constitute a clean energy production system. The production methods for hydrogen can be summarized in the table below: Hydrogen production method; Whether it is a clean energy production system (personal opinion). Hydrogen production from natural gas: No; from coal: No; from petroleum fuels: No; from methanol: No; from industrial by-products: Yes; Hydrogen production through electrolysis using electricity generated from fossil fuels: No (hydrogen production using off-peak electricity – uncertain); Hydrogen production through nuclear power: Yes; through hydroelectric power: Yes; through solar power: Uncertain, as the production of materials for solar panels requires a lot of energy (hydrogen production using off-peak electrolysis: Yes); through wind power: Yes (hydrogen production using off-peak electrolysis: Yes); through biomass power: Uncertain (hydrogen production using off-peak electrolysis: Yes). Tip: You can search on the website’s search engine for “Lao K’s Weekly Updates – Insights into the petrochemical design industry” to view previous posts
Currently, many design institutes are conducting research on the development and utilization of industries related to hydrogen energy.
I think your logic is incorrect. Pollution control shouldn’t be measured based on the total amount of pollutants generated; rather, it should be determined by the total amount of pollutants emitted in an uncontrolled manner. If the pollutants released during the production of hydrogen from fossil fuels are effectively controlled, and the hydrogen produced does not cause any pollution when used, then this represents a significant improvement over the pollution caused by the uncontrolled emissions that occur when fossil fuels are burned by consumers. The same applies to battery-powered vehicles. I don’t understand why so many idiots question the fact that power generation causes pollution, thus arguing that using electricity is not environmentally friendly. If power plants manage environmental protection properly, electric vehicles do not cause pollution, and the centralized handling of batteries also does not result in pollution; thus, compared to the large amounts of emissions from cars, it is much cleaner.
The failure of the water-hydrogen new energy project stems from a lack of awareness regarding confidentiality and inadequate management skills; it should have been a secret scheme to steal subsidies, with all the necessary documents covered up before pretending to make things public – that way everyone could get their share of the money. As a result of poor internal management, irresponsible media outlets published exaggerated positive reports that exposed the matter; what was fake remained fake, and those who didn’t receive any money became dissatisfied
First of all, thank you for your participation. Hydrogen energy was introduced primarily to reduce carbon emissions, and secondly to lessen air pollution. When producing hydrogen using fossil fuels, CO2 is emitted during the production process, resulting in pollution (including uncontrolled emissions). Although the use of hydrogen itself does not involve any carbon emissions or pollution, such emissions already occur during the earlier hydrogen production stage.
I feel that carbon dioxide emissions are a lie, and there’s no solution to them either. Producing hydrogen by burning fossil fuels is more conducive to reducing air pollution compared to burning gasoline
When other forms of energy are converted into hydrogen or electrical energy, their utilization rate decreases. The advantage is that the resulting pollutants can be treated on a large scale in a centralized manner; all the additional energy consumed is used for environmental protection purposes. It is definitely possible to achieve cleanliness, environmental protection, and pollution reduction; it’s just that at this stage, we can’t afford the economic costs involved. The use of electric/hydrogen energy routes is promising, provided that the various supporting technologies keep up and can help reduce the environmental and economic costs associated with such approaches
In terms of controlling pollutants (sulfides and nitrogen oxides), it is certainly more beneficial to the environment to centrally control and recover these pollutants at their sources. However, current environmental requirements for petroleum products are extremely stringent; thus, during their production, it’s also necessary to centrally treat and recover any pollutants generated. Nevertheless, compared to hydrogen energy, there will still be emissions of pollutants from the end-use phase of petroleum products； In terms of carbon emission reduction (of CO2), if there is no carbon sequestration or recycling in the process of producing hydrogen energy (a technology that is not yet widely used commercially), I believe there is not much difference in carbon emissions between the production stage and the usage stage.
Stocks related to hydrogen energy were highly sought after internationally in 2013/2014, and the **annual work report for 2019** also called for efforts to develop facilities for charging and hydrogen refueling. My opinion is similar to that of the original poster; **the work report is based on some representative proposals or suggestions. As for some representatives, it’s unclear whether they truly represent the people, or environmental protection, or certain interest groups. After all, many “experts” are already “supported” by companies. It’s not appropriate to go into detail on this topic. From an environmental perspective, the use of hydrogen alone is inevitably green. However, the process of producing hydrogen, at least at the current stage, still has more disadvantages than advantages. Whether it’s the economic benefits of production or the waste of waste heat, and so on. Low-cost options are polluting, while high-cost devices are expensive; there are trade-offs in both cases. Achieving efficient and low-energy hydrogen production is a long journey. There is only one difference: biomass power generation, whether through direct combustion or gasification, is not worth the effort; it’s merely driven by policies and the allure of subsidies.
A gentleman stays away from kitchens and cooking areas; things that are dirty should not be left in the city where the officials reside
The summary is excellent! Go to other cities to produce hydrogen. It’s sufficient to use hydrogen only within the jurisdiction of the officials.