As an aside, I'm all in favour of windfarms in as much of the sea as possible, as they must prevent the worst sort of trawling. As well as act as mini reefsbjn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:07 amThe Dogger Bank windfarm is progressing apace. GE just signed the contracts to supply 190 13MW turbines, they have 220m rotors! That just for the first 2 of 3 phases, and will supply 2.5GW peak by 2026. Will Hinkley C even be finished by then?
The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Green peace was recently dumping huge boulders in the area to snag illegal trawlers. Hopefully this will put the buggers off and offer a haven for a range of wildlife.jimbob wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:39 pmAs an aside, I'm all in favour of windfarms in as much of the sea as possible, as they must prevent the worst sort of trawling. As well as act as mini reefsbjn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:07 amThe Dogger Bank windfarm is progressing apace. GE just signed the contracts to supply 190 13MW turbines, they have 220m rotors! That just for the first 2 of 3 phases, and will supply 2.5GW peak by 2026. Will Hinkley C even be finished by then?
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
The impact on fisheries has been noted by marine biologists (can dig out refs if that would be of interest), with effects including not only higher fish populations but increased cetacean and seabird densities too IIRC.
I think many fishing activities avoid wind farms, because of the difficulty of manoeuvring around all the windmills. And we're learning how to site, position and accessorise them so they don't chop up too many migrating birds and bats, so they're a decent net win for biodiversity.
Trawling should be banned everywhere. We don't raze entire habitats to the ground to hunt food anywhere else (apart from grouse moors, though they're shot more for entertainment than food production).
I think many fishing activities avoid wind farms, because of the difficulty of manoeuvring around all the windmills. And we're learning how to site, position and accessorise them so they don't chop up too many migrating birds and bats, so they're a decent net win for biodiversity.
Trawling should be banned everywhere. We don't raze entire habitats to the ground to hunt food anywhere else (apart from grouse moors, though they're shot more for entertainment than food production).
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Glad to hear that they've learnt something in the 25 years since Brent Spar, then.bjn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:50 pmGreen peace was recently dumping huge boulders in the area to snag illegal trawlers. Hopefully this will put the buggers off and offer a haven for a range of wildlife.jimbob wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:39 pmAs an aside, I'm all in favour of windfarms in as much of the sea as possible, as they must prevent the worst sort of trawling. As well as act as mini reefsbjn wrote: ↑Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:07 amThe Dogger Bank windfarm is progressing apace. GE just signed the contracts to supply 190 13MW turbines, they have 220m rotors! That just for the first 2 of 3 phases, and will supply 2.5GW peak by 2026. Will Hinkley C even be finished by then?
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
For clarity. I hope the windmills will put the buggers off.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Yup, there was the beautiful image I mentioned about the start of this forum:Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:01 amThe impact on fisheries has been noted by marine biologists (can dig out refs if that would be of interest), with effects including not only higher fish populations but increased cetacean and seabird densities too IIRC.
I think many fishing activities avoid wind farms, because of the difficulty of manoeuvring around all the windmills. And we're learning how to site, position and accessorise them so they don't chop up too many migrating birds and bats, so they're a decent net win for biodiversity.
Trawling should be banned everywhere. We don't raze entire habitats to the ground to hunt food anywhere else (apart from grouse moors, though they're shot more for entertainment than food production).
jimbob wrote: ↑Wed Dec 25, 2019 11:38 pmOne of my favourite papers from 2014.
https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fu ... 14)00749-0
the satellite tracks in figure 1 is beautiful
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Ah I remember reading that now. Super cool, thanks jimbob.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
-
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1513
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:22 pm
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
On a side note - would this interest anyone: ‘Perceptions of nuclear power – it’s not (just) about the science’
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Thanks for that. Don’t know if I’ll be able to make that time but I’ll try.FlammableFlower wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:51 pmOn a side note - would this interest anyone: ‘Perceptions of nuclear power – it’s not (just) about the science’
Back on the subject of hydrogen, we were talking earlier about a pressure tank for gaseous hydrogen because of an analogy with the Toyota Mirai. How about a cryogenic tank for liquid hydrogen? Yes it would be big, but insulation isn’t heavy. I’d have thought a ship might be capable of taking such a tank.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
We did already mention that a bit. NASA has lots of them, including new systemsGrumble wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:15 pmThanks for that. Don’t know if I’ll be able to make that time but I’ll try.FlammableFlower wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:51 pmOn a side note - would this interest anyone: ‘Perceptions of nuclear power – it’s not (just) about the science’
Back on the subject of hydrogen, we were talking earlier about a pressure tank for gaseous hydrogen because of an analogy with the Toyota Mirai. How about a cryogenic tank for liquid hydrogen? Yes it would be big, but insulation isn’t heavy. I’d have thought a ship might be capable of taking such a tank.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
I must have skipped over that part of the thread. That NASA system looks good, presumably it might make sense to use hydrogen to generate electricity to provide refrigeration rather than lose it to evaporation, if you were using it on a ship.dyqik wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:33 pmWe did already mention that a bit. NASA has lots of them, including new systemsGrumble wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:15 pmThanks for that. Don’t know if I’ll be able to make that time but I’ll try.FlammableFlower wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:51 pmOn a side note - would this interest anyone: ‘Perceptions of nuclear power – it’s not (just) about the science’
Back on the subject of hydrogen, we were talking earlier about a pressure tank for gaseous hydrogen because of an analogy with the Toyota Mirai. How about a cryogenic tank for liquid hydrogen? Yes it would be big, but insulation isn’t heavy. I’d have thought a ship might be capable of taking such a tank.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
bjn wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 4:38 pmH2 is just horrid stuff to use for any form of transportation fuel, it's hard to store, it's expensive to generate electrically and a pain to distribute/transport. I'm not buying it for any form of land transportation, and I have severe doubts about its utility in marine transportation.
A large container ship has something like 16,000 m^3 of fuel oil, which is roughly 16,000 tonnes. Assuming a fuel cell instead of burning the H2, and allowing fudge factors for differences in efficiency, you need about 5,000 tonnes of H2 to get the equivalent amount of energy spinning your propellers. Now if that is kept as liquid H2, it needs something like 3.5X the volume of your fuel oil, but you need to keep that liquid H2 at −252.87 °C. I don't see that working for weeks at sea.
I seem to have forgotten the first mention of liquid H2 in BJN’s post. The NASA refrigerated tank would seem to challenge the safety of the assumption bjn made there. It would be really interesting to see if anyone’s working on that.dyqik wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:33 pmWe did already mention that a bit. NASA has lots of them, including new systemsGrumble wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:15 pmon the subject of hydrogen, we were talking earlier about a pressure tank for gaseous hydrogen because of an analogy with the Toyota Mirai. How about a cryogenic tank for liquid hydrogen? Yes it would be big, but insulation isn’t heavy. I’d have thought a ship might be capable of taking such a tank.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Liquid hydrogen carrier.
The hydrogen in this case isn’t being used as a fuel by the ship, and it’s “only” going from Australia to Japan, but it will be interesting to see the results of the trials.
The hydrogen in this case isn’t being used as a fuel by the ship, and it’s “only” going from Australia to Japan, but it will be interesting to see the results of the trials.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
- Stephanie
- Stummy Beige
- Posts: 2902
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
- Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
I've fixed the quotes - I think some browsers seem to turn the post time id into a telephone number - so I just deleted that bit out and it sorted itGrumble wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:47 ambjn wrote: ↑Fri Sep 18, 2020 4:38 pmH2 is just horrid stuff to use for any form of transportation fuel, it's hard to store, it's expensive to generate electrically and a pain to distribute/transport. I'm not buying it for any form of land transportation, and I have severe doubts about its utility in marine transportation.
A large container ship has something like 16,000 m^3 of fuel oil, which is roughly 16,000 tonnes. Assuming a fuel cell instead of burning the H2, and allowing fudge factors for differences in efficiency, you need about 5,000 tonnes of H2 to get the equivalent amount of energy spinning your propellers. Now if that is kept as liquid H2, it needs something like 3.5X the volume of your fuel oil, but you need to keep that liquid H2 at −252.87 °C. I don't see that working for weeks at sea.I seem to have forgotten the first mention of liquid H2 in BJN’s post. The NASA refrigerated tank would seem to challenge the safety of the assumption bjn made there. It would be really interesting to see if anyone’s working on that.dyqik wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:33 pmWe did already mention that a bit. NASA has lots of them, including new systemsGrumble wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 5:15 pmon the subject of hydrogen, we were talking earlier about a pressure tank for gaseous hydrogen because of an analogy with the Toyota Mirai. How about a cryogenic tank for liquid hydrogen? Yes it would be big, but insulation isn’t heavy. I’d have thought a ship might be capable of taking such a tank.
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Thanks Stephanie, bit of an obscure one that.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Here’s a better link that includes stuff about the infrastructure at either end of the trip as well as the carrier itself.Grumble wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:53 amLiquid hydrogen carrier.
The hydrogen in this case isn’t being used as a fuel by the ship, and it’s “only” going from Australia to Japan, but it will be interesting to see the results of the trials.
https://hydrogenenergysupplychain.com/category/news/
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
From your link:Grumble wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:53 amLiquid hydrogen carrier.
The hydrogen in this case isn’t being used as a fuel by the ship, and it’s “only” going from Australia to Japan, but it will be interesting to see the results of the trials.
contradiccting the claim that this will reduce carbon emissions.The carrier will transport to Japan hydrogen produced in Australia from cheap coal ...
- Little waster
- After Pie
- Posts: 2385
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:35 am
- Location: About 1 inch behind my eyes
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
That would Shirley depend on whether it was coupled with some form of CCS.bmforre wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 5:43 pmFrom your link:Grumble wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:53 amLiquid hydrogen carrier.
The hydrogen in this case isn’t being used as a fuel by the ship, and it’s “only” going from Australia to Japan, but it will be interesting to see the results of the trials.contradiccting the claim that this will reduce carbon emissions.The carrier will transport to Japan hydrogen produced in Australia from cheap coal ...
I assume it is easier to recapture carbon at the production site than it would be to do it to a diesel-powered ship on the open seas.
This place is not a place of honor, no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here, nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Carbon capture and storage in Australia
There are no currently-operating large-scale CCS projects in Australia, although the Gorgon gas project will qualify when it is fully operational. Despite multiple CCS demonstration projects at Australian coal-fired power stations, none of Australia's coal plants are currently capturing CO2
or have a time frame for doing so. Australian Treasury modelling finds that CCS is not expected to be commercially viable until the 2030s.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Absolutely, I’m not really a fan of hydrogen production from fossil fuels in terms of green power, and that is almost all hydrogen currently. I’m more interested in the tank and transporting liquid hydrogen at sea.bmforre wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 5:43 pmFrom your link:Grumble wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:53 amLiquid hydrogen carrier.
The hydrogen in this case isn’t being used as a fuel by the ship, and it’s “only” going from Australia to Japan, but it will be interesting to see the results of the trials.contradiccting the claim that this will reduce carbon emissions.The carrier will transport to Japan hydrogen produced in Australia from cheap coal ...
I believe the suggestion by proponents is that excess power from wind or solar could be used for electrolysis to produce green hydrogen.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
The main thing with hydrogen is that it's the equivalent of battery technology, not power generation technology - it's a storage and transmission technology. It helps in the same ways as electric cars and battery development, in that it allows centralization of power generation. You still need to do the modal shift at the generation end, whether that's CCS, change of source, etc.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Exactlydyqik wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:19 pmThe main thing with hydrogen is that it's the equivalent of battery technology, not power generation technology - it's a storage and transmission technology. It helps in the same ways as electric cars and battery development, in that it allows centralization of power generation. You still need to do the modal shift at the generation end, whether that's CCS, change of source, etc.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
It could be a good way of using up excess wind power output from stormy winter nights, especially as electrolysis plants would probably cope pretty well with fluctuating supply.jimbob wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:45 pmExactlydyqik wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:19 pmThe main thing with hydrogen is that it's the equivalent of battery technology, not power generation technology - it's a storage and transmission technology. It helps in the same ways as electric cars and battery development, in that it allows centralization of power generation. You still need to do the modal shift at the generation end, whether that's CCS, change of source, etc.
This sort of tech makes it more interesting for a country with lots of windy coastlines:
https://news.stanford.edu/2019/03/18/ne ... l%20energy.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
One of the main downsides is that H2 is very inefficient, and therefore expensive, way to store electricity. Currently it's something like only a 1/3* as efficient as a decent lithium battery, there are losses in cracking the H2, losses in the fuel cell, and losses in liquify and/or compressing it. That's why I don't see it being at all useful for any form of ground transportation. Possibly for flight or rockets where the kWh/kg thing is significant, but your planes will have limited space in the fuselage due to the cryogenic tanks, which will in aggregate still be heavier than hydrocarbon equivalents (fuel + tank). Flying such things will not be cheap.jimbob wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:45 pmExactlydyqik wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:19 pmThe main thing with hydrogen is that it's the equivalent of battery technology, not power generation technology - it's a storage and transmission technology. It helps in the same ways as electric cars and battery development, in that it allows centralization of power generation. You still need to do the modal shift at the generation end, whether that's CCS, change of source, etc.
From my limited understanding, electrolysis machines are expensive to purchase and you want them running as much as possible to pay off the capital. So only running when there is excess supply may not be viable, some spreadsheet would show the relevant prices for electricity/capital to make it worth while. Also, if using it as storage, you are only going to get 1/3 back compared to a battery.
*Yes, citation required, CBA at the moment, about to go to bed.
- Matatouille
- Fuzzable
- Posts: 320
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:26 pm
- Location: UK
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Its worse than that for planes unfortunately. Liquid fossil fuels used currently have the wonderful property of their tanks being able to conform to almost any shape you like. This makes filling with fuel awkward shaped and hard to access places like the inside of a wing super easy, leaving easier to reach spaces like in the fuselage free for freight (and humans, the self-loading variety of freight).bjn wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 10:41 pmPossibly for flight or rockets where the kWh/kg thing is significant, but your planes will have limited space in the fuselage due to the cryogenic tanks, which will in aggregate still be heavier than hydrocarbon equivalents (fuel + tank). Flying such things will not be cheap.
As soon as you need to make your tanks into pressure vessels, you're losing that big advantage, and it is going to cut the fuel volume that can be stored (which is already now of lower energy density as discussed up-thread), significantly increase the structural weight to make non-cylindrical pressure vessels, and/or massively cut into the convenient volume that you want to put revenue-earning payload. Probably a mix of the three.
This change is necessary, but those operators that don't see getting with the program to be advantageous to them are going to make a colossal stink.