Society's misguided fear of hydrogen; a result of oil corporation?

[TECSHARE]

I already explained in detail above why compressed gas fuels are more dangerous than liquid fuels such as gasoline. If you can't understand why fuel under pressure is more dangerous than fuel in liquid form at atmospheric pressure, then I do not know what to tell you.

[1713442131]

1713442131

[1713442131]

1713442131

[1713442131]

1713442131

[Spendulus]

.....
Of course, we're talking about compressed hydrogen rather than liquid hydrogen which doesn't have that whole freezing problem.

Yeah, I actually joined a local fuel cell coalition mailing list. I'm learning about cool applications with hydrogen through those streams. When I started this thread, I didn't. It turns out, there's public funding for these programs, so I might be able to suck off the tit of the masses of people I'm fooling into making the world a better place.

Hydrogen compared to gasoline, propane, or pretty much any other fuel shows it's much safer, especially if you look at the MSDS.

Spendulus, if you're done trolling and willing to learn more about the benefits (because you're nearly to the right path), I'd recommend you join a local coalition for the support of hydrogen.

Last month a friend of mine was woken up at 4am by fire trucks arriving to put out his neighbor's car fire. It seems the battery had exploded. No, we're not talking Tesla here, but a regular car. Now how do you think that might have happened?

[bluefirecorp_]

Hydrogen Hazards and Safety
Fire Hazard
Hydrogen is flammable and must be handled with care, just like other flammable substances. In order for hydrogen to ignite, it must be contained and combined with oxygen and an ignition source. If hydrogen is ignited, it burns off very quickly. It is very difficult for the naked eye to detect hydrogen burning, since it burns in the ultraviolet color range.

Burns
In order for hydrogen to turn into a liquid form, it must be cooled to at least minus 423 degrees Fahrenheit. If liquid hydrogen comes into contact with exposed skin, it can cause severe freeze burns. A freeze burn is similar to frostbite. In order to keep hydrogen cooled enough to keep it in a liquid state, it is stored in specialized container that are double-walled and heavily insulated. The chances of the liquid actually escaping and coming into contact with a person's skin are quite small.

Explosion
Hydrogen can explode, but only if it comes into contact with oxygen. Gasoline and propane, which are heavier gases than hydrogen, are more likely to explode. The fumes from each of these tend to stay close to the ground, which increases the likelihood of explosion. One famous explosion and fire associated with hydrogen is the destruction of the Hindenburg in 1937. Hydrogen was used to keep the giant airship in the air. For a number of years, it was thought that the hydrogen was to blame for the fire that broke out as the Hindenburg was coming in for a landing at the Lakehurst Naval Air Station in New Jersey. The entire ship was destroyed by flames in less than one minute.

More recent research has pointed to a different cause for the disaster, however. New evidence has shown that the fabric on the outside of the ship was coated with highly-flammable chemicals that were similar in composition to rocket fuel. An electrical discharge from a storm is now thought to be the true cause of ignition.

The Hindenburg disaster was responsible for the loss of 35 lives. Almost all of these were caused by the people involved jumping from the burning aircraft, as opposed to the fire itself. The hydrogen on board ignited, but the flames would have burned up and away from passengers. The hydrogen fire would have burned off very quickly.

Poisoning
Hydrogen is non-toxic and is not poisonous. Using hydrogen as a fuel source does not create fumes, pollute the atmosphere, or contribute to the global warming that is such a cause for concern today.If appropriate safety measures are taken, hydrogen hazards can be kept to a minimum. There are definite advantages to using hydrogen in industry as opposed to other, more flammable substances like gasoline or propane.

For those fear mongers out there, that's a list of most of the dangers of hydrogen. Let's pull up a couple more.

This doesn't mean that hydrogen shouldn't be treated with a healthy respect for its dangers, but in practice, these dangers are unlikely to be any greater than those of gasoline. In fact, with its rapid dispersal and tendency to rise, hydrogen could pose less of a threat than the fuels we use now.

There's so much evidence that shows that hydrogen is safe and even possibly safer than our current fuel source.

It's crazy that people believe into the myth that "it's more dangerous than gasoline". I'm sure this myth is propagated by big oil.

If you have any issues with my "previous" sources (literally pulled off random .coms), here one from a .gov:

https://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/doe_h2_safety.pdf

[SaltySpitoon]

I use hydrogen fuel on a weekly basis anyway, and can say from personal experience, that the potential for danger is much higher. There are a lot of reasons why we don't use hydrogen commonly as a fuel now but.

Cons:
Proper materials for long term safe combustion are very expensive, its hard on equipment, when it burns you can't see the flame, its difficult to compress, it escapes through container walls

Pros:
Clean burning, water vapor as a byproduct, higher energy density.

As a matter of cost, its been getting cheaper to produce it. New technology that uses Nickle Oxide catalysts instead of Platinum lowered the cost to produce hydrogen gas, at least from water splitting. That said, it still requires that you put more energy into it than you are going to get out. I don't see the benefit over just keeping your electricity as electricity, except for specialized cases.

Rather than use the funds on researching and developing new ways to use hydrogen, I don't see why we wouldn't be better off finding new ways to store and use electricity, and then just generate clean energy from solar/wind/geothermal/hydro and call it good.

[bluefirecorp_]

Rather than use the funds on researching and developing new ways to use hydrogen, I don't see why we wouldn't be better off finding new ways to store and use electricity, and then just generate clean energy from solar/wind/geothermal/hydro and call it good.

We've been searching for the "next" super battery for ages. Honestly, the universe kinda already shows that hydrogen's a great fuel (at least for fusion).

Honestly, just because we have shitty catalyst now doesn't mean they we can't hit better energy conversion rates from and to electricity. Ideally, with perfect catalyst, you could convert nearly freely.

Instead of searching for that magic battery, I don't see why we don't search for the magic catalyst instead.

I use hydrogen fuel on a weekly basis anyway, and can say from personal experience, that the potential for danger is much higher. There are a lot of reasons why we don't use hydrogen commonly as a fuel now but.

Liquid or compressed? Also, have you ever had a dangerous incident with hydrogen? If so, can you describe how so?

From all the sources I've read, it is dangerous, but you'd be safer working with hydrogen than gasoline in a refinery.

[Spendulus]

Rather than use the funds on researching and developing new ways to use hydrogen, I don't see why we wouldn't be better off finding new ways to store and use electricity, and then just generate clean energy from solar/wind/geothermal/hydro and call it good.

We've been searching for the "next" super battery for ages. Honestly, the universe kinda already shows that hydrogen's a great fuel (at least for fusion).

Honestly, just because we have shitty catalyst now doesn't mean they we can't hit better energy conversion rates from and to electricity. Ideally, with perfect catalyst, you could convert nearly freely.

Instead of searching for that magic battery, I don't see why we don't search for the magic catalyst instead.

I use hydrogen fuel on a weekly basis anyway, and can say from personal experience, that the potential for danger is much higher. There are a lot of reasons why we don't use hydrogen commonly as a fuel now but.

Liquid or compressed? Also, have you ever had a dangerous incident with hydrogen? If so, can you describe how so?

From all the sources I've read, it is dangerous, but you'd be safer working with hydrogen than gasoline in a refinery.

You really need to be listening to people who have worked with hydrogen and stop believing you know something because you googled it. That's literally a way to get killed.

I already cited a battery explosion event, which is hydrogen.

[Spendulus]

You really need to be listening to people who have worked with hydrogen and stop believing you know something because you googled it. That's literally a way to get killed.

Ahaha, I'm amazed you're able to use a computer without killing yourself

No problem, get a job in a refinery and come back in a year or two and tell us about it.

[bluefirecorp_]

You really need to be listening to people who have worked with hydrogen and stop believing you know something because you googled it. That's literally a way to get killed.

Ahaha, I'm amazed you're able to use a computer without killing yourself

No problem, get a job in a refinery and come back in a year or two and tell us about it.

Fuck dying working with oil. That's how you get killed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_gas_and_oil_production_accidents_in_the_United_States

All the deaths.

I actually tried research death for hydrogen and got a french link of accidents dating back to the 1980s:

Thus, 25 mortal accidents involving hydrogen including 5 French accidents (ARIA 169, 170, 176, 3512 and 7956) are
recorded in the ARIA database and constitute 12 % of the studied sample. These accidents have resulted in 80
deaths including 9 in France.

80 deaths due to hydrogen total.

[Spendulus]

You really need to be listening to people who have worked with hydrogen and stop believing you know something because you googled it. That's literally a way to get killed.

Ahaha, I'm amazed you're able to use a computer without killing yourself

No problem, get a job in a refinery and come back in a year or two and tell us about it.

Fuck dying working with oil. That's how you get killed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_gas_and_oil_production_accidents_in_the_United_States

All the deaths.

I actually tried research death for hydrogen and got a french link of accidents dating back to the 1980s:

Thus, 25 mortal accidents involving hydrogen including 5 French accidents (ARIA 169, 170, 176, 3512 and 7956) are
recorded in the ARIA database and constitute 12 % of the studied sample. These accidents have resulted in 80
deaths including 9 in France.

80 deaths due to hydrogen total.

lol....

So you don't want to work in MAKING hydrogen, which is steam reforming with methane. You just want to use it? Or is there GOOD hydrogen and BAD hydrogen, like GOOD being made from water and BAD being made from fossil fuels?

Because we sure wouldn't want to have the BAD stuff, right?

[TECSHARE]

You really need to be listening to people who have worked with hydrogen and stop believing you know something because you googled it. That's literally a way to get killed.

Ahaha, I'm amazed you're able to use a computer without killing yourself

No problem, get a job in a refinery and come back in a year or two and tell us about it.

Fuck dying working with oil. That's how you get killed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_gas_and_oil_production_accidents_in_the_United_States

All the deaths.

I actually tried research death for hydrogen and got a french link of accidents dating back to the 1980s:

Thus, 25 mortal accidents involving hydrogen including 5 French accidents (ARIA 169, 170, 176, 3512 and 7956) are
recorded in the ARIA database and constitute 12 % of the studied sample. These accidents have resulted in 80
deaths including 9 in France.

80 deaths due to hydrogen total.

Hey, did you know that owning a pool increases your chances of drowning? Owning a car increases your chances of getting in an auto accident. Also owning more than 2 functional brain cells increases your chances of understanding the more commonly used it is the more deaths there will be, and that is not a valid indicator of the safety of the technology.

[SaltySpitoon]

I use hydrogen fuel on a weekly basis anyway, and can say from personal experience, that the potential for danger is much higher. There are a lot of reasons why we don't use hydrogen commonly as a fuel now but.

Liquid or compressed? Also, have you ever had a dangerous incident with hydrogen? If so, can you describe how so?

From all the sources I've read, it is dangerous, but you'd be safer working with hydrogen than gasoline in a refinery.

I generate my own hydrogen with water splitting, compress it to a low working pressure, under 2 million Pa, and burn it. I do not store it, I use it as soon as I produce it, for a few reasons. One, I can't store it, hydrogen atoms are small, and they slip through solid objects. Two, while storing any compressed gas is typically not the safest thing, its far more difficult to find hydrogen gas leaks than a more common odorized fuel. If the propane line on your gas stove springs a leak, you smell it and know there is a gas leak. In that case, don't light any open flames, turn off the gas, and get some ventilation going. No big deal. With hydrogen you don't know until its too late.

The issues I've personally come in contact with are burn hazards, and backfire. As I mentioned, burning hydrogen, there is no flame that you can see. If there is a hydrogen fire somewhere, you might not even know if other things around it aren't catching on fire. On that note, I'll mention that you need to wear protective eye wear to protect from radiation. The second one that I've dealt with somewhat frequently is startling, but not dangerous since I don't compress it much, is backfire. I use flashback arrestors in my torch lines, but I've had condensation accumulate in my fuel lines, dampen the arrestors, and then have a little explosion blow the hoses off of my generator a few times.

Now I'm sure there are ways to mitigate backfire with a lot more certainty, but the fact that I have an issue with it, even with safety gear in place is a little alarming. We trust brain dead morons with fueling up their cars at a gas station. I think we'd have a lot more accidents with hydrogen in the hands of the general public.

[Spendulus]

....We trust brain dead morons with fueling up their cars at a gas station. I think we'd have a lot more accidents with hydrogen in the hands of the general public.

But that's a feature not a bug! We'd have as a result a happy society with fewer morons!

[bluefirecorp_]

I use hydrogen fuel on a weekly basis anyway, and can say from personal experience, that the potential for danger is much higher. There are a lot of reasons why we don't use hydrogen commonly as a fuel now but.

Liquid or compressed? Also, have you ever had a dangerous incident with hydrogen? If so, can you describe how so?

From all the sources I've read, it is dangerous, but you'd be safer working with hydrogen than gasoline in a refinery.

I generate my own hydrogen with water splitting, compress it to a low working pressure, under 2 million Pa, and burn it. I do not store it, I use it as soon as I produce it, for a few reasons. One, I can't store it, hydrogen atoms are small, and they slip through solid objects. Two, while storing any compressed gas is typically not the safest thing, its far more difficult to find hydrogen gas leaks than a more common odorized fuel. If the propane line on your gas stove springs a leak, you smell it and know there is a gas leak. In that case, don't light any open flames, turn off the gas, and get some ventilation going. No big deal. With hydrogen you don't know until its too late.

The issues I've personally come in contact with are burn hazards, and backfire. As I mentioned, burning hydrogen, there is no flame that you can see. If there is a hydrogen fire somewhere, you might not even know if other things around it aren't catching on fire. On that note, I'll mention that you need to wear protective eye wear to protect from radiation. The second one that I've dealt with somewhat frequently is startling, but not dangerous since I don't compress it much, is backfire. I use flashback arrestors in my torch lines, but I've had condensation accumulate in my fuel lines, dampen the arrestors, and then have a little explosion blow the hoses off of my generator a few times.

Now I'm sure there are ways to mitigate backfire with a lot more certainty, but the fact that I have an issue with it, even with safety gear in place is a little alarming. We trust brain dead morons with fueling up their cars at a gas station. I think we'd have a lot more accidents with hydrogen in the hands of the general public.

Ah, so you're doing hobbist hydrogen projects more than anything. I've read stories about low-pressure hydrogen.

The thing with hydrogen leaks is they're only dangerous in enclosed spaces. Hydrogen rapidly dissipates (as it just floats upwards); so leaks aren't really an issue unless there is flame nearby or if it's enclosed.

In some states, we don't allow brain dead morons even to pump their own gasoline...

[SaltySpitoon]

Ah, so you're doing hobbist hydrogen projects more than anything. I've read stories about low-pressure hydrogen.

The thing with hydrogen leaks is they're only dangerous in enclosed spaces. Hydrogen rapidly dissipates (as it just floats upwards); so leaks aren't really an issue unless there is flame nearby or if it's enclosed.

In some states, we don't allow brain dead morons even to pump their own gasoline...

Well, its a bit beyond hobbyist, but its not industrial production. Saying leaks are only dangerous around flames or enclosed spaces is a not very helpful condition to place, considering we are talking about fuel gases around flames/combustion.

I don't recall why, but I was under the impression that fuel gases that are lighter than air pose some additional risk, such as acetylene, from when I was researching propane vs acetylene fuel sources. I mostly only work with Propane and Hydrogen though, so I can't recall the finer details of acetylene at the moment.

Another thing I thought reading back at your posts. You said Hydrogen Refineries are safer than Gasoline refineries. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that since I don't know if they are actually safer, or if there are just 1000x more oil refineries than hydrogen refineries. But to the point about brain dead people pumping or not being allowed to pump their own gas. People working in refineries are rigorously trained on all aspects of safety. Their equipment is top of the line, they pay attention to hazard details that others wouldn't know about, or might not have the safety equipment mandated by OSHA or whoever.

I hesitate to say that anything is more dangerous than something else. How do you say, whats more dangerous, a duck or a barbed wire fence? It really depends on the situation. The same is true of any fuel. I guess my position on the matter is that gasoline is more idiot proof than hydrogen. If you want to be safe with gasoline, you don't put it in the oven, don't throw a match at it, and if you smell it or see it leaking out, you do something about it that isn't throwing a match at it. Hydrogen is less intuitive, and I think there is more room for mistakes to be made. I know all of the safety protocols, I follow a pretty strict safety routine, like that guy you all know that actually checks and adjusts their car mirrors every time before they start driving, yet I still run into somewhat hazardous situations. I'm confident I wont blow up, but I'm also purposely limiting my risk exposure by not allowing another variable of pressure potential energy along with my chemical potential energy.

Individuals aside, As soon as we have hydrogen for consumer applications, we now have to trust Toyota hydrogen combustion engines, *shudders* Chevy hydrogen combustion engines. Weird chinese off brand $50 leaf blowers hydrogen combustion engines, etc. That's why I think its better to skip hydrogen fuel development research and just stick with a more sure thing. We've been searching for that magic battery for years now, we haven't found it, but battery technology is getting better. I think it'd be cheaper and safer to get closer and closer to that magic battery than to engineer "pretty" safe hydrogen appliances.

[Spendulus]

..., its better to skip hydrogen fuel development research and just stick with a more sure thing. We've been searching for that magic battery for years now, we haven't found it, but battery technology is getting better. I think it'd be cheaper and safer to get closer and closer to that magic battery than to engineer "pretty" safe hydrogen appliances.

+++

It's worth looking at Ford and Chevrolet. Chev became "gov motors", all the know-it-all greenies went in, forced them to make the puke-worthy Volt.

Ford stayed independent, kept improving the internal combustion engine, now has a F150 for sale that gets 30 mpg.

Pretty cool, right?

[bluefirecorp_]

Individuals aside, As soon as we have hydrogen for consumer applications, we now have to trust Toyota hydrogen combustion engines, *shudders* Chevy hydrogen combustion engines. Weird chinese off brand $50 leaf blowers hydrogen combustion engines, etc. That's why I think its better to skip hydrogen fuel development research and just stick with a more sure thing. We've been searching for that magic battery for years now, we haven't found it, but battery technology is getting better. I think it'd be cheaper and safer to get closer and closer to that magic battery than to engineer "pretty" safe hydrogen appliances.

I'm not sure anyone's petitioning for hydrogen combustion when hydrogen fuel cell is so much safer. No flame = safer to work with.

[bones261]

Why do people fear hydrogen so much? It's literally safer than gasoline. It may seem that several myths were spread throughout the public (probably by big-oil).

Perhaps the dangers are a bit overinflated. But we do have a rather dramatic example of how hydrogen could be dangerous.

[SaltySpitoon]

Individuals aside, As soon as we have hydrogen for consumer applications, we now have to trust Toyota hydrogen combustion engines, *shudders* Chevy hydrogen combustion engines. Weird chinese off brand $50 leaf blowers hydrogen combustion engines, etc. That's why I think its better to skip hydrogen fuel development research and just stick with a more sure thing. We've been searching for that magic battery for years now, we haven't found it, but battery technology is getting better. I think it'd be cheaper and safer to get closer and closer to that magic battery than to engineer "pretty" safe hydrogen appliances.

I'm not sure anyone's petitioning for hydrogen combustion when hydrogen fuel cell is so much safer. No flame = safer to work with.

I may have a misunderstanding of hydrogen fuel cells, isn't hydrogen driven through a catalytic converter and combusted?

I take that back, I was mistaken about how the energy was captured, its not thermal its creating current from the splitting of H2 gas and separating the electrons off. In this case, how is that any different than just using batteries? I suppose the only benefit would be "charge" time where you just refill the hydrogen rather than recharging a battery in its place. It'd still be far less energy efficient than just using batteries.  If we make the splitting process more efficient and it takes 1.1 joules to get 1 joule worth of hydrogen. Then you get a 50% efficiency from the fuel cell, wouldn't you have been better off just taking that 1.1 joules, putting it into a battery at negligible loss, and running a 80% efficient electric motor?

I'm all for clean energy, I'm particularly pro nuclear, but I'd be perfectly content if we increased our solar/wind/hydro/tidal/geothermal power instead. I'm not "against" hydrogen. I just don't think its a practical option.

[bluefirecorp_]

I may have a misunderstanding of hydrogen fuel cells, isn't hydrogen driven through a catalytic converter and combusted?

I take that back, I was mistaken about how the energy was captured, its not thermal its creating current from the splitting of H2 gas and separating the electrons off. In this case, how is that any different than just using batteries? I suppose the only benefit would be "charge" time where you just refill the hydrogen rather than recharging a battery in its place. It'd still be far less energy efficient than just using batteries.  If we make the splitting process more efficient and it takes 1.1 joules to get 1 joule worth of hydrogen. Then you get a 50% efficiency from the fuel cell, wouldn't you have been better off just taking that 1.1 joules, putting it into a battery at negligible loss, and running a 80% efficient electric motor?

I'm all for clean energy, I'm particularly pro nuclear, but I'd be perfectly content if we increased our solar/wind/hydro/tidal/geothermal power instead. I'm not "against" hydrogen. I just don't think its a practical option.

Batteries aren't very energy dense. It takes hundreds of kg of batteries to equal the same amount of energy as a tank of compressed hydrogen.

Batteries are about 10x more expensive than hydrogen tank / fuel cell combination (per kwh). Fuel cells have more durability than li-ion batteries (so longer lifetimes without having to replace the systems).


Technically, fuel cells can get up to 60% currently. As we find better catalyst for PEM fuel cells, it's theoretically possible to hit 95-99.99%.

Both technologies do use an electric motor, so that drive-train remains the same, allowing you to take advantage of features such as regenerative braking.

The problem really with batteries is the energy density... there's absolutely no way you're going to be able to compete with a battery (or capacitor) against compressed hydrogen in terms of energy / weight.

If we had magic super batteries, I'd say "sure, let's skip the step of hydrogen", but we've been working with battery technology for like 2000 years. While battery energy technology is getting better and better, it's not even close to the energy density than compressed hydrogen gives.

--

I think hydrogen is the best solution going forward, as it requires way less resources to create the hydrogen tank and PEM fuel cell than what it takes to make a li-ion battery. Also, production of hydrogen can be done cleanly with a nuclear reactor (steam biproduct -> hydrogen instead of massive cooling towers to reclaim water).

Hydrogen can be used in many applications... cars, boats, and even planes. There's no way we're going to be able to fly a jet with batteries. Batteries are just simply too heavy for the energy they hold.

Why do people fear hydrogen so much? It's literally safer than gasoline. It may seem that several myths were spread throughout the public (probably by big-oil).

Perhaps the dangers are a bit overinflated. But we do have a rather dramatic example of how hydrogen could be dangerous.

Perhaps you should read the wikipedia article. Most individuals died from jumping. Out of the 85 people onboard, only 35 people died. And there's no evidence anyone died due to the hydrogen. This thread covered the hindenburg hydrogen myth several times now... which shows you hadn't read before posting.

[Spendulus]

....

Perhaps you should read the wikipedia article. Most individuals died from jumping. Out of the 85 people onboard, only 35 people died. And there's no evidence anyone died due to the hydrogen. .....

So when a car veers off the road on a mountain, the people die from falling, not from a traffic accident. Really?