|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
This op-ed was original published in the Saint Albans Messenger and reposted here with permission
October 8, 2024
Abomination of an energy act — Thank you, Emerson Lynn, for your op-ed piece in the 4 Oct Messenger. You are way too genteel and mannerly, Emerson, in your treatment of our VT Legislature and their abomination of an energy Act, titled: Clean Heat Standard. At best, it’s an unmitigated disaster. At worst it will surely precipitate a financial calamity for our citizens and the long-term financial integrity of our state. Let me characterize things with some graphical imagery. Recall a short TV cartoon clip. An ‘olden days’ stagecoach drawn by cartoon horses with cartoon characters as coach driver and coach footmen. Cartoon passengers are hanging out the windows. The rickety old stagecoach is careening through the countryside in a frantic dash, bumping up, down, swaying side to side. The cartoon characters laugh and cheer as they sing “…we don’t know where we’re going but we’re merrily, merrily, merrily on our way…!” Well, that’s our legislature and their Clean Heat Standard …and, so, where are we going with VT-CHS?
Let me begin by suggesting horror stories that hundreds of millions—even tens of billions of dollars will be required to carry out the confusing particulars of Clean Heat Standard should surprise no Vermonter. Our legislators have enacted a law that beats around the bush with no sense of direction and no well-defined objective—except, perhaps, to create a massive pot of money. Inevitably, opportunistic, vested interests will plunder the pot of money without ever achieving any meaningful progress on carrying out the intent of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2020. The present situation is far worse than the cartoon stagecoach imagery, cited above, because in our case, the cart is presently before the horse! We need to change that. Simply stated, we have to stop putting carbon into our atmosphere. Presently there is only one viable, safe, cost effective and realistically attainable methodology and that is to supplant all fossil fuel energy sources with hydrogen. Wait! Don’t flee to the fire exits. Learn.
First from Wikipedia. “On May 2, 1800, English chemist William Nicholson decomposed water into hydrogen and oxygen using electricity. This was the first electrolysis of water.” Further, from Wikipedia, in 1839 Englishman, William Robert Graves demonstrated operation of a hydrogen energy fuel cell which produced an electric current by re-introducing hydrogen and oxygen to each other via a semi-permeable porous wall. Starting in the mid-1900’s, U.S. space programs regularly used hydrogen fuel cells as on-board power sources for space flight. Today, any ordinary citizen can buy electrolyzers and hydrogen fuel cells in the online marketplace. Both items exist in sizes from tiny up to huge units delivered to a jobsite on large flatbed tractor-trailer trucks. So, how does this impact an ordinary citizen?
One particular New Jersey citizen, named Mike Strizki, took advantage of the easy availability of hydrogen energy production components to build his own home hydrogen energy system. Mike, like me, is a retired civil engineer. I visited Mike at his rural home in New Jersey. On his garage roof, are solar panels which produce electricity all day long. His solar panel electricity powers his electrolyzer all day, producing hydrogen which he stores in tanks similar to the propane gas storage tanks one often sees adjacent to Vermont rural homes. With his hydrogen fuel cell, he produces electricity, as necessary, to keep his large home storage battery fully charged. His home-produced hydrogen powers all of his home electricity needs and also fuels his two Toyota Mirai hydrogen automobiles. Mike says he meets all of his annual hydrogen fuel needs during the months of May and June. Mike is completely off the grid and he did not go ‘broke’ putting together his home system. Presently, Mike custom-builds a limited number of home hydrogen power systems for individuals across the country.
It does not take a quantum leap to understand that for a few million dollars [not billions—not hundreds of millions] Vermont could get started on its own program of hydrogen energy home, commercial and industrial power system upgrades and demonstrate the viability of hydrogen as a realistic and affordable replacement for fossil fuel. The best news of all—a pot of federal money for hydrogen energy project grants to states like Vermont, already exists. All that is needed now is for VT citizens to insist that their legislators abandon the Clean Heat Standard and get us started into the new age of hydrogen energy– Greg Pierce P.E. (CE) ret.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary
Hydrogen is like a battery. It is not per se an energy source. It has to be “created” by expending energy. For heat, it is much more efficient to burn stuff directly. Translating an off-grid home system to grid-scale needs (including apartment buildings, hospitals, businesses, industry, etc.) only compounds the inherent inefficiency.
Exactly! Unless someone (Elon?) has a really fireproof hose to connect to the sun, hydrogen is not found in nature as an element and requires more net energy input to generate via electrolysis than is yielded in the using. Basic physics, thus “more efficient to burn directly.” Creating hydrogen is to create an energy storage unit; it requires an external energy source (solar, nucelar, or fossil fuels) to create, and there is a net loss of energy. So it just begs the question — where will that energy come from. Nuclear (fusion? appears to be the best future gambit. But we won’t get there because we spent all our money on renewables that pollute more than nuclear reactors ever have. https://www.libertynation.com/nuclear-power-is-looking-good/
Yup, hydrogen is wonderful. Until it’s not. To compare the danger of hydrogen to that of propane just because both are gases stored in a tank is disingenuous at best, an outright lie at worst. Hydrogen gas does not liquify at ordinary temperatures like propane does. Therefore, it has to be stored under higher pressure or cryogenically (think frozen). Hydrogen molecules are also very small – small enough to squeeze between and through the molecules of a metal container. Every hydrogen tank therefore leaks in the single digit percentage range. Hydrogen burns at 4820 degrees Fahrenheit, while propane burns at 3560 degrees Fahrenheit. So when a hydrogen tank blows, it does so at a higher temperature than propane and that explosion will be at higher pressure.
So what’s the answer? As I’ve said over and over, zero-point energy. Yes, we do have the technology ands it’s probably in use in military applications already. After all, Tesla was on to this type of energy a hundred years ago. You really think we haven’t figured it out yet?
Hydrogen is a viable source for energy. Look at our sun. Of course, we wouldn’t employee hydrogen in the same manner. Producing energy in our world has never been by a singular method. So, it is logical that for the sake of the climate the same methodology will hold true. Solar panels aren’t the cure all for reducing CO2 in the atmosphere and neither are windmills. They’re only presented as such. Hydrogen is not a singular savior either.
There are areas where hydrogen can be useful in reducing CO2, as suggested in this article. Yes, utilizing hydrogen requires different metrics of handling. But, never the less, industry uses it on a daily basis in laboratories, in metallurgy, in specific welding and metal cutting processes. Putting hydrogen in pressure cylinders is no more dangerous than doing the same with oxygen, argon, nitrogen and other gasses. It is safer in high pressure cylinders than propane is in low pressure cylinders, because propane cylinders are made of thin steel and easily ruptured in accidents and fires. Hydrogen usage for reducing CO2 emissions has been explored only to a small degree for power generation and transportation. Research and development funding needs to be increased to refine the work that has already been accomplished.
Unfortunately, lobbying sends more funding resources to the promotion of wind and solar power. The green energy industry has destroyed the nuclear power industry to make way for itself. Nuclear has drawback with waste but so does solar and wind. Solar and wind manufacturing processes require hugs amounts of electricity produce by coal and gas yet the world looks the other way, saying nothing. What’s the point? Every method of producing power has drawbacks.
Hydrogen for fueling transportation has less drawbacks than electric vehicles. EVs require rare elements for the magnets in the motors, and large amounts of copper compared to an ICE vehicle. The infrastructure for charging EVs is decades behind in development. The infrastructure for supplying hydrogen powered vehicles already exists. It’s called gas stations. In certain test regions of California, owners of hydrogen vehicles go to gas stations to refill. The technology already exists and has been proven reliable. It can easily be introduced throughout the world.
Hydrogen, as noted before is no more a cure all than any other method of creating power, for homes, industry, or transportation. If developed and and utilized it would provide cleaner energy than solar and windmills whose manufacturing require using coal in their production and mining for materials, likewise requiring fossil fuels.
“If you like $6-per-gallon gasoline, you’re gonna love $14-to-$20-per-gallon hydrogen.”…Hydrogen is insanely expensive, in energy terms, to manufacture. It takes about three units of energy, in the form of electricity, to produce two units of hydrogen energy. In other words, the hydrogen economy requires scads of electricity (a high quality form of energy) to make a tiny molecule that’s hard to handle, difficult to store, and expensive to use.
Now, back to hydrogen. It’s the most common element in the universe. It’s also one of the most difficult to produce and manage. About 98% of global hydrogen production now comes from hydrocarbons, with some 75% from natural gas via the steam methane reforming process. Oil refiners use a lot of hydrogen to remove sulfur from motor fuel. Water electrolysis, producing hydrogen by splitting water molecules, accounts for less than 2% of world hydrogen output. Why does electrolysis account for such a small percentage? The answer is simple: it requires vast amounts of electricity.
The only good use for the St. Alban Messenger is to start the fire in your wood stove. They should cover more of the crime operations in the city, but that would be bad for the tourist business.