Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner

41 - 60 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
Sorry to get philosophical but... If you look at how capitalism works. Lots of people set up lots of businesses trying to offer the same service. Though talent, hard work and just plain luck one of these businesses will jump ahead of the others in some way. While another will take a jump forward in some other way. It is this diversity that means rapid progress is made. To achieve this diversity you need lots of failures. So while BEVs appear to be making greater progress, the hydrogen fuel cell developers are part of that drive to create even better solutions. Either BEVs win and the fuel cell becomes a side note or the other way around, but for progress, both have to be tried.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
317 Posts
When hydrogen is made from excess wind energy then I think it will make progress, they pay for turbines not to spin so its better to pay for them to spin and make something useful which for HGVs hydrogen is
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,779 Posts
When hydrogen is made from excess wind energy then I think it will make progress, they pay for turbines not to spin so its better to pay for them to spin and make something useful which for HGVs hydrogen is
They pay wind not to generate because it is cheaper to do this than for the fossil alternatives.

Now why do we think that would be the case? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
When hydrogen is made from excess wind energy then I think it will make progress, they pay for turbines not to spin so its better to pay for them to spin and make something useful which for HGVs hydrogen is
I'm not sure we'll ever get to that point. We're currently at 23GW of Wind, we've had quite low production this week circa 5GW.

Imagine the fluctuations we'd see in Hydrogen prices if we were dependent on such a variable source.

Nuclear over-capacity is a far better idea...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
317 Posts
I'm not sure we'll ever get to that point. We're currently at 23GW of Wind, we've had quite low production this week circa 5GW.

Imagine the fluctuations we'd see in Hydrogen prices if we were dependent on such a variable source.

Nuclear over-capacity is a far better idea...
true but as wind turbines multiply like growing corn I think the situation will change and I have heard that one arm is being dedicated to Hydrogen? Google feed last month I think
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
669 Posts
The Hydrogen fuel cell has an efficiency of around 40% and the electrolysis process also around 40% so a combined efficiency of 16% (not that an ICE is particularly efficient nor the refining process). Local electrolysis units using off peak “green” electricity might make sense for, say, a large bus or lorry depot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,032 Posts
Local electrolysis units using off peak “green” electricity might make sense for, say, a large bus or lorry depot.
I suspect that these will operate centrally with contracts to sink surplus power, and be paid for it. It could happen at a bus depot, but the grid would depend on the utility being there and being able to meet its contractual obligations, so it would need additional local storage, transport, bulk storage etc.

There's nothing to stop countries nearer the equator producing hydrogen and shipping it here in bulk carriers. They could even be hydrogen powered. It would be great to have energy suppliers who are competing in the market place, rather than selling a resource over which they have monopoly control (Putin, Shiekh Yermoney etc).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
820 Posts
It's quite rare to see more than 11 GW of wind generation in the UK even on windy days when Ireland or Northern Ireland have nearly 100% of output from their wind turbines which makes me think that many of them are feathered off. In the UK we don't have a huge amount of pumped water storage or batteries at the moment so there can be lots of spare energy that could be used. Would it be economic to only run Hydrogen generating electrolysers when we have excess renewable energy? Presumably there would be quite a lot of capital expenditure to set up an electrolyser. There's a small plant in the Orkney's, Where hydrogen is made on one of the islands from excess energy and shipped in tanks to another where fuel cells provide energy to their grid. I've no idea if it's economic. Presumably the excess energy would have to be very cheap to cover the conversion losses and the capital cost of the system.

Using the hydrogen for road transport might be more sensible as you can sell it at a higher price than putting it back into the grid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
I think that the 11GW figure only refers to transmission connected wind farms, there is also a significant amount of embedded wind, which is counted as negative demand...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Discussion Starter #53
It is generation connected to a dnos distribution network rather than ngcs transmission network. This means that to the transmission network it looks like gsp group demand is dropping rather than generation is increasing to meet demand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,827 Posts
It is generation connected to a dnos distribution network rather than ngcs transmission network. This means that to the transmission network it looks like gsp group demand is dropping rather than generation is increasing to meet demand.
I think you mean it's not connected to the national grid. The power is used by the owners so they pull less from the national grid?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Discussion Starter #55
I think you mean it's not connected to the national grid. The power is used by the owners so they pull less from the national grid?
No I meant what I wrote, it is connected to (one of the) a distribution network (hence it is embedded), not the transmission network. Some turbines power may indeed be used by the owners, there are also small windfarms with no appreciable demand other a tiny bit of site load to run the scada stuff etc), these sites have export meters and the owners will have power purchase agreements in place(where someone is buying the power from them), but due to the position of the metering, sites like bmreports or gridwatch (which really just republishes bmreports data) don't show these embedded assets as generation, they report that the demand for power is low(er) than it would have been had these assets not been running. This is getting a long way from hydrogen buses though, I have in the past thought that sinking surplus power into electrolysis to make hydrogen was a good idea, as time goes by I increasingly think that large scale batteries offering frequency response services are a better idea. Maybe I'm wrong, probably there's room for both, but using hydrogen to propel buses seems to be about the least efficient possible use of the power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,589 Posts
It is generation connected to a dnos distribution network rather than ngcs transmission network. This means that to the transmission network it looks like gsp group demand is dropping rather than generation is increasing to meet demand.
nothing like putting things in layman’s terms eh ;)

the biggest issue won’t he national grid is lack of storage / buffering - i find that a bit ridiculous as battery storage to smooth the supply vs very up and down demand has been around since electricity generation was a common thing - ie when I was looking round a big country house recently. It’s electricity was produced by a water wheel and lots of lead acid batteries were used to smooth the supply to the main house

JJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,827 Posts
No I meant what I wrote, it is connected to (one of the) a distribution network (hence it is embedded), not the transmission network. Some turbines power may indeed be used by the owners, there are also small windfarms with no appreciable demand other a tiny bit of site load to run the scada stuff etc), these sites have export meters and the owners will have power purchase agreements in place(where someone is buying the power from them), but due to the position of the metering, sites like bmreports or gridwatch (which really just republishes bmreports data) don't show these embedded assets as generation, they report that the demand for power is low(er) than it would have been had these assets not been running. This is getting a long way from hydrogen buses though, I have in the past thought that sinking surplus power into electrolysis to make hydrogen was a good idea, as time goes by I increasingly think that large scale batteries offering frequency response services are a better idea. Maybe I'm wrong, probably there's room for both, but using hydrogen to propel buses seems to be about the least efficient possible use of the power.
So in plain English you mean they don't report their generation back to the national grid, they just run their meters backward and the grid sees it the same way as domestic solar, some meter reading negative?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Discussion Starter #58
I'm going to say close enough, the metering records power leaving the site boundary, it doesn't run backwards, but the key thing is that in real-time NGC see only an aggregated group (of which which these embedded generators form a component). The solar situation is even worse as it's not properly metered at all in many cases, but please let's not open that can of worms. I fear we are already going down a rabbit hole here! I was only trying to explain that there is more than 12GW (the largest number reported on bmreports give or take) of nameplate wind generation in the UK.
I forget not everyone has the joy of dealing with these arrangements every day, so must apologise for being a pedant... Back to hydrogen buses/best use of surplus power?
 
41 - 60 of 60 Posts
Top