• Hypx@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 days ago

    just use excess electricity to make hydrogen. This actually solves the intermittency problem, among many other things that will require hydrogen in order to reach zero emissions.

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 days ago

      People are going with batteries and demand-shifting first because they’re more cost-effective when it comes to dealing with a few hours of storage. Hydrogen storage is mostly a contender for longer-durarion storage

      • Hypx@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        For a few hours, yes, but that will make up a small percentage of total energy stored. To really solve the intermittency problem, you will need large scale energy storage.

        • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          You do need some amount of long-duration storage, with the amount depending on how generation diversity and how much clean firm generation you have, but we are still in the early stages of it.

          • Hypx@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 days ago

            The more renewable energy you have, the more you need long-duration energy storage. You cannot reach 100% renewable energy without huge amounts of it.

            • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 days ago

              Depends a lot on where. Places with a lot of both wind and solar need a lot less than those with only one, or with big seasonal heating needs. Way more to say about this than can fit in a comment

              • Hypx@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 days ago

                If you adopt hydrogen for energy storage, you no longer have to worry about “where.” You have a solution that is nearly geographically independent.

                • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  Not really; there are real reasons people don’t want large-scale storage near populated areas, and it’s more expensive than avoiding the need for long-duration storage, and burning it (if you don’t store the oxygen, which raises costs even more) produces lung-damage nitrogen oxides. So there’s a lot of reasons to minimize the need for hydrogen as much as possible.