Hydrogen generation use and storage.

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

blane.c

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
5,174
Location
capital district NY
EERE Home





 
Last edited:

akwrencher

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
1,393
Location
Gustavus, AK
I found this interesting. I didn't know until recently that ammonia could be used as a fuel potentially, or that it was a hydrogen carrier. Chemistry wasn't my strong suit.

 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
6,956
Location
US
Hydrocarbon fuels are another way of conveniently storing hydrogen for later conversion to mechanical energy.
 

akwrencher

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
1,393
Location
Gustavus, AK
Yeah, I gather there are some technical challenges to overcome. There is a lot of research going on with it though. Which is interesting, if nothing else.
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,017
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
The Hydrogen Economy was a grand idea back last century when it was worked out.

X things to remember.

1. Hydrogen is a gas "battery". It's how you transport and temporarily store power made by another means.

Temporary, because it leaks like crazy. Through steel. A nice thick steel tank isn't really that much "worse" than a gasoline storage tank, since gasoline has a shelf life, for sake of argument a year? I'll WAG they're close enough to not argue about.

The sub-point is, Neither fuel can be put in a corner of your hanger for years and still be good. Arguably the Hydrogen doesn't go "stale" so you still have some ( but less than you put there ) fuel after a given time.

2. Hydrogen isn't very efficient at turning electricity/energy into portable storage.

Although using chemical feed stock like, say, methane, is more efficient than splitting water, on a scale of Power In vs. Power Out, there are still huge losses. Feel free to argue numbers but Zero ain't one of them. Which leads to

2A. Thus you need Lots of Cheap Power to make the Hydrogen Economy work. Period.

Cheaper and Lots More than today. (A government could Demand that you accept higher prices and scarcity, but their competitors won't, and out perform economically. )

3. Transport and storage are expensive. You don't use pipes to move it any distance. Leaks.

Complex chemistry solutions, like shipping it as a different chemical, just shoots your efficiency in the foot, again, so why not just use that chemical, instead?

4. Despite the doom & gloom that physics hands us, in certain cases Hydrogen is potentially great stuff.

Given lots & lots of Cheap Power, it can make sense, economically, and is VERY low pollution, except for oxides of nitrogen in ICE s that a catalytic converter can solve, and a potent, but health friendly, greenhouse gas.

It's a possible use for methane from biomass. The system used in the movie Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, is used routinely on pig farms. That just burns the methane. I'll suggest analyzing methane as fuel.

4A. It's a fairly rational way to transition from fossils fuels, which is the Reason the concept exists.

5. Unfortunately if your goal is CO2 control, unless you use nuclear en mass you have to emit more than you gain, if I understand the math right. So if that's your goal, pick a different "battery". Imho.
 

8davebarker

Active Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
41
Location
Greenacres, WA
2021

Who are We?

Introduction
Founder and Board Chair of Kontak
Worked on the problems associated with hydrogen for over 10 years
Invented elegant solutions and the patents are finally starting to issue

What is the Problem?
Writ large, it is Man-Made Climate Change

How is Kontak Going to Solve It?
Dramatically reduce the emission of CO2, NOx and carbon particulates
Substitute hydrogen for gasoline and diesel
Did you know that for every gallon of gasoline burned, 20.2 pounds of CO2 are created?

The Hydrogen Economy
Term first coined in the 1970’s
Forty years later, hydrogen is still the “Fuel of the Future”

For Hydrogen to be a Major Player in the Zero-emission Future
Cost Competitive with fossil fuels
As safe as gasoline or diesel
Available
Applications are already available

Kontak Decided to Attack Each Problem Separately
Cost
Storage + Transportation
Applications
Infrastructure

Two Key Breakthroughs
Ability to transport hydrogen on anhydrous ammonia(NH3)
Novel, factory-built, modular fueling station

Hydrogen verses Batteries
Fine for cars
Very poor choice for HD trucks and electric aircraft

After much hype and an estimated $600M from the DOE, where are we?

Despite all that money, the DOE did not move the needle much. Why is that?
Why not cars?
Too narrow an advantage gap
Too many fueling stations required
Too few miles travelled on average

1 gallon of gasoline = 33.7 kW-hr; hydrogen = 33.6 kW-hr

Conversion efficiency = 40% ICE, 90% electric motors and 70% fuel cell

Kontak and its Canadian partner, Hydrofuel, is about to change all that, radically

As Stephen Chu, former Head of the DOE explained: Hydrogen is expensive, unsafe, no applications, no infrastructure

Expensive: $16.51 per kilogram in Southern California even with incentives
Hydrogen is inexpensive to produce: <$1.00 per kilogramusing SMR of methane

So, where does all the money go?
Cost is in storage, transportation, and dispensing
Hydrogen must be compressed, liquefied or attached to a carrier.
We ae using ammonia which holds over 2X CH2

We have studied a dozen candidate chemicals
DOE graphic

$7.00 per kilogram at the pump, less than half the current priceof $16.51 with incentives

Hydrogen on ammonia also addresses the safety issue: there is very little gaseous hydrogen

Soccer Moms will not be filling their SUV’s with ammonia

3rd largest industrial chemical, primary use farm fertilizer

Applications: focus on retrofits, not new production

Infrastructure
GM estimates over 100,000 fueling stations required for cars
585 for HD trucks
Delivery vehicles come home at night

We are Seeking Collaborators

Here's the problem with electric cars
JCB Unveils Cheap Hydrogen-Fuel Technology
 

blane.c

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
5,174
Location
capital district NY
Are you saying hydrogen is best used in modified ICE?


I have some questions.

  • The ability to recycle the KONTAK organic Carrier hundreds of times? What does this mean?
  • Is this fuel only compatible with diesel type engines?
  • What is the weight of the fuel with respect for container and compared to gasoline and diesel for equal work?
 
Last edited:

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
6,956
Location
US
What is the Problem?
Writ large, it is Man-Made Climate Change
If we really believe that is the problem, then this is the wrong solution.
Did you know that for every gallon of gasoline burned, 20.2 pounds of CO2 are created?
Did you know that burning one gallon of gasoline can introduce zero pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere?
Produce the gasoline using algae or synthetic photosynthesis. The carbon comes out of the atmosphere and into the fuel. Later, it is burned and released back into the atmosphere. No net greenhouse gas additions. The cost of algal fuels is close to traditional ones, though not quite equal at today's low prices. Prospects for cheaper prices with artificial photosynthesis advances are good.
The only hardware changes are in the production of the fuel. All the existing tanks, pipelines, tanker trucks, retail tanks/pumps and (critically) millions of existing vehicles can handle this fuel just as they do today.

If combustion engines are the end user, this makes more sense IMO than any version of hydrogen (compressed, liquid, bound as ammonia, etc)
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,017
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
  • The ability to recycle the KONTAK organic Carrier hundreds of times? What does this mean?
  • Is this fuel only compatible with diesel type engines?
  • What is the weight of the fuel with respect for container and compared to gasoline and diesel for equal work?
After making their proprietary secret stuff, then shipping it as highly hazardous waste by rail, or truck through towns where a spill might kill thousands, you process it in their proprietary secret chemical plant, then ship the left over secret stuff back to the Oil Refinery where it's actually made from fossil fuels.

The expensive hydrogen from oil wells then ideally is used in a fuel cell and thrown into the atmosphere, after combining it with air, where it's an extremely potent greenhouse gas. ( water vapor )

Possible toxic chemicals they use include ammonia and hydrogen cyanide and gasoline. All can be shipped at room temperature and pressure to a chemical plant to make hydrogen. I don't know which they are using, but I assume it's highly toxic and if spilled on dirt requires a quarantine zone and bulldozers trucks and a hazardous waste emergency crew.

If I was less cynical I'd call it a con.
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,017
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
If we really believe that is the problem, then this is the wrong solution.
Yep.

You might notice that after claiming you can use biomass and solar they then brag how it is to actually use oil refinery flare gas.

Which in the near future will be as obsolete as making gunpowder from the nitre dripping down the castle walls where the army within urinates. We don't have castles full of people anymore. Refineries will be selling the flare gas instead of wasting it.

Sometimes knowing the actual history ruins watching badly made movies. This one reminds me of the Twilight saga, it's like the stupid teen girl version.
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
2,796
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
From post #9 above:

"3. Transport and storage are expensive. You don't use pipes to move it any distance. Leaks. "

There is an interesting solution to the transportation problem that uses current technology and would be profitable to finance.

Below is a farcical proposal that could gain massive political support.

Hydrogen transport by dirigible, zeppelin, blimp, aerostat or other large airship is a proven system that would allow for additional cargo to be transported as a by product of the transportation of the hydrogen.

Aerostat technology could also be used to improve the range and lifting ability of the currently popular EVTOL multicopter urban transport vehicles being developed.
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
658
Location
Martensville SK
Last edited:

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,017
Location
Rochester, NY, USA

500Kg requires 500 cubic meters. I'd add the weight of the balloon to that. then recalculate. 500,000+ litres.

Do you want to burn it in an engine already built into the glider? Or use a fuel cell stack and electric motor? In either case is that mass part of the 500Kg?
 
Top