German hydrogen stood in the way of Russian gas


In the war for the European energy market, an unexpected turn has taken shape. Gazprom and its pipelines under construction, and the United States with their expensive LNG will lose in it. And the winner will be the German "green hydrogen", and this energy revolution will be paid for in many respects at our expense.


How did this become possible, and what will happen next with Russian oil and gas exports?

First of all, for a complete understanding it is necessary to take into account that the “green revolution” is actively going on in Germany. Frightened by Fukushima, Berlin relied on safer sources of energy: natural gas and WWI, gradually abandoning nuclear power plants and coal. Gazprom’s top managers joyfully rubbed their hands, counting on additional sales of their raw materials in Germany, stretching out additional pipelines to the EU to bypass Ukraine. The European gas market was also of interest to the United States, which by hook or by crook began to push through its LNG.

As a result, the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline was abandoned due to sanctions imposed by Washington, being built at 94%. Separately, we note that its continuation of the land Eugal is ready for operation, which is important for the further story. Now Gazprom intends to complete the offshore part of the pipeline by all means, for which it is guaranteed to receive new American sanctions. As it turns out now, the Germans, clearly tired of being between Russia and the United States, as between a rock and a hard place, Nord Stream 2 is not so needed. Berlin has removed the Nord Stream-1 EU Third Energy Package for the next 20 years, which will provide for its gas needs. Information about what he intends to replace the second "Stream" may initially cause a stupor.

On According to a popular DW publication, instead of Russian and American gas, Germany may in the future switch to its “green hydrogen”. The project for the development of large-scale hydrogen energy was called "H2-Startnetz 2030". “Turned” to environmental friendliness, the Germans intend to obtain “green hydrogen” from simple water by electrolysis. This technology called Power to Gas or P2G and has been tested in Germany for ten years. Over three dozen plants operate in the west and north-west of the country, which has already made Germany the world leader in the production of “green hydrogen”. FNB Gas proposes to transfer metallurgy and oil refining to this fuel, and to widely introduce hydrogen cars and trains.

Sounds famously, and we must admit that Berlin has everything in order to realize its plans. Obviously, this will lead to a decrease in the consumption of imported hydrocarbons. What’s even more “touching”, according to DW, Gazprom’s transport infrastructure can be used to “hydrogenate” Germany. Inga Posh, representing FNB Gas, explained:

On the basis of the existing gas pipeline network in Germany, an entirely new energy network would emerge that would enable such industrial sectors as steel and chemical industry to achieve climate neutrality.

We are talking about the use of the onshore extensions of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines for the needs of hydrogen energy: the OPAL and Eugal gas pipelines, respectively. According to German experts, it will be enough to lay an additional about 100 kilometers of pipe, which will cost only 600 million dollars. By 2025, one of the gas pipelines can be converted to hydrogen. Also, one of the largest underground gas storage facilities in Germany in Yangum, which is now controlled by Gazprom, may be transferred to the needs of an ambitious project. Salt caverns are most suitable for storing hydrogen.

The most interesting thing is that the domestic monopolist does not particularly mind. The representative of his subsidiary Gascade, the operator of Opal and Eugal, spoke very favorably about the transition of Germany to a new type of fuel:

We consider it necessary to use it to achieve German climate goals. Therefore, we fully support the provision of hydrogen to the existing gas infrastructure.

Well, what can I say. Well done Germans, allowed Gazprom, at the expense of Russian taxpayers, to build pipelines for themselves, which will be gradually converted to hydrogen, and the leadership of the state corporation does not even mind. Also of its kind, "well done." Well, in the meantime, we will finish building up Nord Stream-2, which has become irrelevant in this situation, because this is a “matter of honor" in order to guarantee new sanctions for it.
Used photos: gazprom.com
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

67 comments
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. Bakht Offline
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 29 May 2020 13: 07
    +3
    • 4
    • 1
    Question. If the land extensions of the Nordic streams are converted to hydrogen, then who will fill them with this hydrogen?
    1. Kristallovich Offline
      Kristallovich (Ruslan) 29 May 2020 14: 42
      +1
      • 1
      • 0
      “Turned” to environmental friendliness, the Germans intend to obtain “green hydrogen” from simple water by electrolysis. This technology is called Power to Gas or P2G and has been tested in Germany for ten years. Over three dozen plants operate in the west and north-west of the country, which has already made Germany the world leader in the production of “green hydrogen”.
      1. Bakht Offline
        Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 29 May 2020 15: 44
        +4
        • 5
        • 1
        Thanks for the quote. I read it. The question remains. Who will fill these pipes with hydrogen?

        For reference. What are the P2G and H2-Startnetz 2030 mentioned in this article?

        PS Gazprom, if not a leader, is one of the main players in hydrogen energy.
      2. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 20: 45
        -1
        • 2
        • 3
        The Ministry of Economics and Energy of Germany has prepared a draft / concept of the National Hydrogen Strategy (Nationale Wasserstoffstrategie). The document has not yet been published, but fell into the hands of the German press (Handelsblatt, Spiegel, etc.), which shared the content with the public.
        The central element of the National Strategy, which has so far only fit on page 21, is a catalog of three dozen events that cover the electric power industry, industry, infrastructure, transport, heat supply and R&D.
        As a "first step", the German government wants to increase "domestic production and use of hydrogen." To do this, it is necessary to create hydrogen production “in the amount of three, if possible, five gigawatts (GW) of electrolysis power”.
        The strategy focuses on international cooperation. Experts believe that Germany cannot meet the demand for green hydrogen through domestic production. In the medium and long term, Germany will have to “import large quantities of hydrogen.”
        It is also planned to use part of the existing gas pipelines to transport hydrogen and, in addition, to create purely hydrogen networks.

        https://energy.hse.ru/hydrenergy
  2. Blast Offline
    Blast (Vladimir) 29 May 2020 14: 42
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    Allegedly falling generating capacities will be directed to the electrolysis of water and the production of hydrogen. The problem of energy storage already with a beard, a question of efficiency and industrial volumes. I think a dead end idea. Is it so that in order not to completely abandon the internal combustion engine with the transition to hydrogen fuel, then it becomes clear where the "legs grow".
  3. Dust Offline
    Dust (Sergei) 29 May 2020 14: 53
    +3
    • 4
    • 1
    If everything had been so easy, the Germans had long ago replaced everything with hydrogen. A green hydrogen mixture needs to be made, and this is money. And the gas is ready. Production of the hydrogen mixture is expensive so far .... Yes, and the Americans with their technology would have long mastered hydrogen and sold it to the same Germans!)
    1. lieutenant Offline
      lieutenant (Vladimir) 29 May 2020 15: 31
      +2
      • 3
      • 1
      To get hydrogen, you need to get energy from the same gas.
    2. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 20: 05
      -1
      • 3
      • 4
      ... would have long mastered hydrogen and sold to the same Germans!)

      - and they are selling it already. And you can refuel cars, but not enough yet. 84 pieces.
  4. Troy Henry Offline
    Troy Henry (Henry) 29 May 2020 15: 22
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    If everything was so simple, then it would not be so difficult))
  5. Sapsan136 Offline
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 29 May 2020 15: 47
    +2
    • 5
    • 3
    Such a practice can cause an increase in oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere, and this will lead to an ecological disaster guaranteed ... humans and many other animals simply won’t survive in such an atmosphere ... So the next project in a series -

    The road to HELL is lined with good thoughts!
    1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 20: 08
      -1
      • 3
      • 4
      This practice can cause an increase in oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere.

      - when burning hydrogen - when hydrogen is combined with oxygen, water (H2O) is formed.
      1. Sapsan136 Offline
        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 29 May 2020 21: 38
        0
        • 4
        • 4
        But when hydrogen is produced, a lot of oxygen is released ...
        1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 21: 57
          -1
          • 4
          • 5
          no..

          1. The electrolysis process to which aqueous solutions of salts are subjected:
          2NaCl + 2H2O → 2NaOH + Cl2 + H2 ↑
          2. The transmission of water vapor at 1000 ° C over hot coke:
          H2O + C ⇔ CO ↑ + H2 ↑
          3. A method of obtaining from natural gas.
          a) conversion with water vapor:
          CH4 + H2O ⇔ CO + 3H2 (at 1000 ° C)
          b) oxygen oxidation in the presence of a catalyst:
          2CH4 + O2 ⇔ 2CO + 4H2
          1. Sapsan136 Offline
            Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 29 May 2020 22: 44
            +2
            • 4
            • 2
            Even better ... carbon monoxide (carbon monoxide) ... It's generally a terrible poison ...
            1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 22: 55
              -1
              • 3
              • 4
              Carbon monoxide is burned and converted to dioxide (carbon dioxide).
              1. Sapsan136 Offline
                Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 29 May 2020 22: 57
                +2
                • 4
                • 2
                Which is also good ...
            2. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 22: 56
              -2
              • 3
              • 5
              Carbon dioxide is essential for health and life. Its main action is the normalization of the oxygen-transport function of the body. In normal gas exchange in the body, the role of two gases is important - oxygen and carbon dioxide.

              Wiki
              1. Sapsan136 Offline
                Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 29 May 2020 22: 57
                +3
                • 5
                • 2
                This is if there will not be an overabundance of it ... but in industrial production it is inevitable ...
                1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 23: 04
                  -2
                  • 2
                  • 4
                  Will not be. In nature as in a submarine - nothing appears from nowhere, and nothing disappears into nowhere)
                2. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 23: 07
                  -2
                  • 3
                  • 5
                  The law of conservation of mass is the law of physics, according to which the mass of the physical system is preserved during all natural and artificial processes.
                  1. Sapsan136 Offline
                    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 29 May 2020 23: 13
                    +1
                    • 4
                    • 3
                    At one time, people like you suggested burning more coal .... in order to improve the climate on Earth in this way ... and what ?!
                    1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 23: 18
                      -1
                      • 4
                      • 5
                      ... so as to improve the climate on Earth ... and what ?!

                      Nothing) I also do not believe that a person is able to change something in terms of climate. The laws of physics also work here.
                    2. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 23: 23
                      0
                      • 5
                      • 5
                      Imagine a situation: you are standing in a huge forest opposite an anthill. There are ants running around. And the faster they run, the more the forest heats up. Funny, isn't it?
                      Mathematically, if you put us (people) at 4 per square meter, then the entire population of the earth will fit on a small island such as Gran Canaria. Find this island on the map, and you will understand how insignificant we are to influence something)
                      1. bear040 Offline
                        bear040 30 May 2020 15: 39
                        +2
                        • 5
                        • 3
                        In vain you are so ... Many deserts, Chernobyl, and much more have appeared due to the fault of man, or rather, his unreasonable helmsmen ... in whom the desire to rule is ahead of the ability to do this ...
                    3. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 23: 31
                      +1
                      • 6
                      • 5
                      ... at one time, people like you suggested burning more coal .... in order to thereby improve the climate on Earth ... and what ?!

                      I don’t offer anything at all. I believe it makes no difference what we burn, how we burn, how much we burn - we cannot influence anything. Nobody canceled the law of conservation of energy either. Nature itself regulates everything.
                      1. Sapsan136 Offline
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 31 May 2020 21: 50
                        +1
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        You are mistaken, and there are many examples of this. There, the Chinese planted greenery on the desert. And the Sahara, as I heard, appeared from the stupidity of the kings who ruled in that area.
                      2. Dear sofa expert. 31 May 2020 22: 12
                        -3
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        You are mistaken and there are many examples of this. There, the Chinese planted greenery on the desert. And the Sahara, as I heard, appeared from the stupidity of the kings who ruled in that area.

                        Oh well, are you serious about the Sahara?) Well, the “tsars” haven't been around for a long time, and the Sahara is getting bigger every year.
                        Although you can believe what you want. Since people believe in God, then there is no point in denying the devil.
                      3. Sapsan136 Offline
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 1 June 2020 07: 18
                        +1
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        Seriously, I somehow watched a documentary on this subject, I forgot the name ... And as for the fact that it was a long time ago, here nature resembles a person. A concussion, even if it was a long time ago, then hiccups all its life ... like much more ... People can believe in God, in a king, in communism, in Putinism, but this does not cancel the laws of nature ...
                      4. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 08: 03
                        -3
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        it does not abrogate the laws of nature.

                        Here they are guided. Start with Newton's laws.
                      5. Sapsan136 Offline
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 1 June 2020 08: 18
                        +1
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        You are trying to deny the obvious examples of how a person has influenced nature ...
                      6. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 08: 24
                        -3
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        You are trying to deny the obvious examples of how a person has influenced nature ...

                        Yes, I do not believe that a person can globally influence something.
                        Are you trying to object to the laws of "conservation of mass", and "conservation of energy"?
                      7. Sapsan136 Offline
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 1 June 2020 08: 28
                        +1
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        Doubting Thomas?! Facts indicate that you are wrong.
                      8. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 08: 32
                        -3
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        Facts indicate that you are wrong.

                        - I did not teach the laws of physics at a parish school.
                      9. Sapsan136 Offline
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 1 June 2020 12: 37
                        +1
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        No matter where you taught them, it is important that you deny the obvious ...
                      10. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 13: 41
                        -3
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        That way:

                        https://topcor.ru/14911-proishodjaschee-na-solnce-govorit-o-verojatnoj-rezkoj-smene-klimata-na-zemle.html

                        There you will tell everyone how the sheep ate greens in the Sahara, and immediately everyone felt hot.
                      11. Sapsan136 Offline
                        Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 1 June 2020 13: 55
                        +1
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        Why should I go there ?! You already wrote about Chernobyl, and about the desert that was planted in China, and about the Sahara, which is growing due to the foolishness of local authorities ... If you don’t understand all this and you refuse to admit that you can touch it, it’s not for you here ... but in the clinic ... excuse me for being straightforward, but you’re already tired of your stupidity ... you’re kidding me, or something ...
                      12. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 14: 00
                        -3
                        • 2
                        • 5
                        ... but you are already tired of just your stupidity ...

                        Mutually.
  • Bakht Offline
    Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 29 May 2020 15: 52
    +5
    • 5
    • 0
    Note to the author:

    Germans intend to get "green hydrogen" from simple water by electrolysis. This technology is called Power to Gas or P2G and has been tested in Germany for ten years.

    As far as I understood from the Internet, Power to Gas is not a hydrogen production technology. This is a method of adding hydrogen to natural gas. We started with 2%, now they can add 10%, at the moment, coordination is underway to add 20% hydrogen to natural gas.

    The large-scale hydrogen energy development project is called “H2-Startnetz 2030”

    From the same Internet and from the name of the project. This is a project of a network of gas pipelines that are planned to be converted to mixed gas fuel.

  • sH, arK Offline
    sH, arK 29 May 2020 17: 08
    +6
    • 6
    • 0
    Amazing nonsense !!! I also understand when they drown for electric cars such as Tesla (he himself drove in Las Vegas, a cool car, even liked it - but this may be the 2-3rd car in the family, but not the only one!) Or for windmills or solar power plants ( again - if this is for a country house, or a small village or town - then why not?) - but God forbid to draw global conclusions from these particular Decisions! And here, in general, “people with university education are given advice on a cosmic scale and the same cosmic stupidity”!
    1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 20: 19
      +1
      • 5
      • 4
      I also understand when stoked for electric cars like Tesla

      Tesla is undoubtedly a chic car, but there are a lot of serious flaws in electric cars. Leave the technical ones, they can be solved one way or another.
      But no one knows what to do with the disposal of old batteries. No, of course, in today's scale, this is still bearable. And imagine - the whole world will switch to electric cars?
      And the second one. You went to Tesla. It's good. Have you ever seen a car with a lithium battery burn? No? And I saw. They could not put out it! NOTHING! Until it burned to the ground. And it's on the autobahn. Now imagine this burning car in the city, or God forbid in the tunnel. The burning temperature of lithium is 600 ° C.
      1. sH, arK Offline
        sH, arK 29 May 2020 21: 24
        +4
        • 4
        • 0
        I won’t buy an electric car until I learn how to make batteries at least once every 5 more capacious and increase the charge speed to 80-90% per hour, while the number of charge-discharge cycles while maintaining 80% of the capacity does not reach at least 1000. Without this - an electric car is a NICE SOLUTION for wealthy geeks who have this 2-3rd car, or for warming tunbergs and other marginal nerds ... there is no subject for dispute. Although I also have 2 cars, one is a diesel jeep, the second is like a gasoline sports one ... and I wouldn’t change them for Tesla ...

        As for recycling, the batteries now run up to 10 years under good conditions, and, in principle, their centralized processing and disposal is not a problem, if you do not understand that this is also energy costs and environmental impact is not so much less than gasoline and diesel.

        And the fire hazard of the batteries is quite comparable to a gas tank - here it’s quite parity ..
        1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 21: 34
          0
          • 4
          • 4
          Quote: sH, arK
          Although I also have 2 cars, one is a diesel jeep, the second is like a gasoline sports one ... and I wouldn’t change them for Tesla ...

          Tesla is good. But very dear. My son changed his old gasoline Mercedes to the train (Nissan). Says - satisfied. I also have 2 diesel engines. They haven’t come up with anything better.

          ... batteries now run up to 10 years under good conditions, and in principle, their centralized processing and disposal is not a problem

          10 years - I don’t think so. There is chemistry. She has a temporary resource. 3-5 years and kirdyk. A battery costs a lot of money. I did not think up recycling, I read it. The problem today is big. And the production is costly and environmentally dirty. If you set a goal, this problem will certainly be solved.

          And the fire hazard of the batteries is quite comparable to a gas tank - here it’s quite parity ..

          No, what are you)
      2. Bakht Offline
        Bakht (Bakhtiyar) 29 May 2020 21: 30
        +5
        • 5
        • 0
        Just for information.
        I didn’t go to Tesla, but I’ve been dealing with lithium batteries for 25 years. Small in size type D. 4 jokes per instrument. In general, there were several hundred of them on board.
        You can not put out them. They are not taken by any fire extinguisher. Water, foamy, carbon dioxide. It is all useless. On board there were 2 (two) special fire extinguishers for lithium batteries. Thank God, I never had to apply. And also there were always special containers. If the battery warms up - immediately into the container. An explosion is inevitable. Moreover, as knowledgeable people said, a sickly explosion.
        Yes, the cost of one fire extinguisher for lithium batteries seems like 40 thousand evergreens. Approximately the cost of the car. :-)
        1. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 22: 02
          -1
          • 3
          • 4
          You can not put out them.

          Credit!) So it is, unfortunately.
    2. Dear sofa expert. 29 May 2020 20: 42
      -1
      • 3
      • 4
      Here, in my opinion, a good article about hydrogen energy may be of interest.

      https://energy.hse.ru/hydrenergy
  • 123 Offline
    123 (123) 29 May 2020 17: 51
    +5
    • 6
    • 1
    It is good that the author decided to go to journalists, and not, for example, become a doctor. Paper can endure everything, people - no.
    Harm is minimized.

    Before talking nonsense, they could have simply scored Gazprom ready to supply hydrogen, they would have probably learned a lot of interesting things.

    Hydrogen perspectives. Gazprom is ready to offer Europe a gas alternative

    https://neftegaz.ru/news/gazoraspredelenie/551262-rossiya-predlozhit-evrope-alternativu-gazu/

    Germany wants to get hydrogen from many sources and strategies indicate potential exporters. Nigeria, which will produce fuel, has already been identified as one of them. by electrolysis using renewable energy.

    However, now it is the most expensive technology. and so on 4% hydrogen in the world produced in this way. Most of, 68% - from natural gas.

    https://eadaily.com/ru/news/2020/03/05/v-severnyy-potok-2-mogut-dobavit-vodoroda

    Does Gazprom work in the implementation of hydrogen projects? What modern solutions can we offer Europe?
    Of course. At Gazprom’s gas and oil refineries, hydrogen is traditionally used in industrial processes - for example, in the production of light petroleum products. In addition, a comprehensive scientific and technical project is being implemented to create low-carbon production technologies and use methane-hydrogen fuel for gas turbines in Samara and Ufa. Tomsk is testing technology for the production of hydrogen from natural gas with zero emissions. For a number of research projects, we work together with our partners from Germany, the Netherlands and France. For us, this is an extremely important new dimension of cooperation. Half a century ago, we together formed the European gas market, opening the continent with access to reliable and profitable fuel supplies. Today we are shaping the energy of the future together.

    https://www.gazprom.ru/press/news/reports/2019/fuel-of-future/
  • boriz Offline
    boriz (boriz) 29 May 2020 21: 11
    +5
    • 5
    • 0
    And did anyone see the calculations, how much lime will be needed for forests and fields for solar panels, for areas with windmills, next to which people and animals will not be able to live? Is there any mercy in Europe for this?
    In China, despite the huge population, there are significant unused areas. But the Chinese have completed their games with RES. They have a planned economy. Under the influence of the West, they spent a lot of money, counted, tears. And they stopped state subsidies for renewable energy. We decided that the game is not worth the candle. I believe them more.
    Gazprom (as well as Wintershalle, Uniper and others Total and Shell) is very interested in the fact that the geyropeyts finally ditched the coal and nuclear energy. At the same time, there will still be gas; clicking the button to change the energy development vector will fail. And when it turns out that hydrogen turns out to be golden (how much does the land in Europe cost? How much will the production and maintenance of renewable energy take?), You will have to win back and the fastest and cheapest way will be the construction of gas power plants.
    When Marzhetsky represents Gazprom as a bunch of idiots, he somehow forgets that in Europe and without Gazprom there are a lot of interested companies that are able to supply both Merkel and the Bundestag and the European Parliament with cancer. And these companies are with Gazprom in the same harness. And the leaders of these companies (including Gazprom) seem to me, at least, no more stupid than Marzhetsky.
    1. boriz Offline
      boriz (boriz) 29 May 2020 21: 27
      +4
      • 4
      • 0
      And this is not to mention the fact that hydrogen does not make any varnishes / paints, nor rubber for tires and other things, nor plastics, fertilizers, butane / popan, etc. It is unrealistic to supply automobiles with hydrogen, it is unrealistic to transport liquefied hydrogen ... And if the volume of purchases of natural gas is small, then prices will rise.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 29 May 2020 22: 28
    +1
    • 3
    • 2
    The author did not go to high school from the word at all. He does not understand that any conversion of energies is not something that is more than 100%, but cannot be equal to 100%. Hence, electrolysis, with the goal of separating water into hydrogen and oxygen, spends more energy than then, the removal of energy from the oxidation of hydrogen. Where does the energy for electrolysis come from? Read the explanations of a knowledgeable engineer, not a stupid scribble.

    https://bezgin.su

    https://newsland.com/community/5255/content/o-zelionoi-energetike-kak-o-novoi-raznovidnosti-religii-v-21-veke/6244607

    https://www.nkj.ru/archive/articles/22733/

    https://topwar.ru/131628-zelenaya-revolyuciya-v-evrope-lozh-ot-pervogo-i-do-poslednego-slova.html
    1. Dear sofa expert. 30 May 2020 00: 49
      -1
      • 3
      • 4
      Where does the energy for electrolysis come from?

      The energy of the sun, plus a catalyst for splitting water.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 29 May 2020 22: 41
    +1
    • 3
    • 2
    The burning of methane, the main gas in natural gas, also produces clean emissions - water and carbon dioxide. At the same time, the energy efficiency is quite high - 60-70%. Solar panels have reached their highest efficiency of 25%. Wind farms ruin not only the environment with their noise, but also the manufacture of these 200 meter monsters costs the ugliness of the same environment. The author mixed up the basics. Hydrogen energy production technology does not produce it, but accumulates energy instead of batteries, being an alternative to lithium batteries. So, there is a multiple conversion of energy, which, of course, reduces the overall efficiency of the system.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 30 May 2020 20: 16
    -1
    • 1
    • 2
    Quote: Dear couch expert.
    Where does the energy for electrolysis come from?

    The energy of the sun, plus a catalyst for splitting water.

    Can you tell me the name of the catalyst? And at the same time, the degree of efficiency of electricity generation by solar panels.
    At the same time, estimate the price of this bodyagi. It will come in handy when you drag this system home.
    According to my estimates, by what I have outlined for myself, and, with the price of electricity that I buy, the payback of all this will be around 100 years, and, without taking into account the costs of restoring dead elements.

    http://www.invertor.ru/pricelist.html

    You confuse (by virtue of your education) subsidized generation, when 70% of the money goes for the FASHIONABLE trend from the budget, and economic feasibility in industry.
    At the same time, look here:

    1. Dear sofa expert. 31 May 2020 22: 30
      -2
      • 1
      • 3
      Can you tell me the name of the catalyst?

      Cobalt and Nickel Oxide, for example. The rest is itself.

      You confuse (due to your education) subsidized generation

      I see, you are not very polite, smart guy?
      Come to me for "personal messages" and send a copy of your diploma. Let's see what kind of design engineer you are, or what you call yourself there?
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 30 May 2020 20: 27
    +1
    • 3
    • 2
    Quote: Bakht
    Just for information.
    I didn’t go to Tesla, but I’ve been dealing with lithium batteries for 25 years. Small in size type D. 4 jokes per instrument. In general, there were several hundred of them on board.
    You can not put out them. They are not taken by any fire extinguisher. Water, foamy, carbon dioxide. It is all useless. On board there were 2 (two) special fire extinguishers for lithium batteries. Thank God, I never had to apply. And also there were always special containers. If the battery warms up - immediately into the container. An explosion is inevitable. Moreover, as knowledgeable people said, a sickly explosion.
    Yes, the cost of one fire extinguisher for lithium batteries seems to be 40 thousand evergreens. Approximately the cost of the car. :-)

    https://blog.e-karting.ru/ustrojstvo-akkumulyatornoj-batarei-tesla-model-s/
    The Tesla battery consists of tens of thousands of finger-type elements made in China.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 30 May 2020 20: 35
    +1
    • 3
    • 2
    Quote: Dear couch expert.
    You can not put out them.

    Credit!) So it is, unfortunately.

    Tried to revive an old half-dead battery. Finger. He raped him with electric current without restriction, in the region of 5 Amperes. He quickly warmed up and caught fire. Almost in the hands. It burns like a fire, scattering sparks, heated up red-hot. Around there were wooden furniture, floors, ceilings .... Somehow I picked it up with pliers and threw it out onto the street. Overtaxed - it is said weakly. Now I charge only with current limitation, and in an iron can with sand buried and covered with a piece of iron.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 30 May 2020 22: 56
    0
    • 2
    • 2
    Quote: Dear couch expert.
    This practice can cause an increase in oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere.

    - when burning hydrogen - when hydrogen is combined with oxygen, water (H2O) is formed.

    And when methane - C2H4 is burned, the same water is obtained and CO2 - carbon dioxide, utilized by green plants. As far as I remember, it is heavier than air, and cannot rise into the upper atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect.
    1. race Offline
      race (Yaroslav) 12 June 2020 00: 59
      +2
      • 2
      • 0
      Quote: aleksandrmakedo
      And when methane - C2H4 is burned, the same water is obtained and CO2 - carbon dioxide, utilized by green plants. As far as I remember, it is heavier than air, and cannot rise into the upper atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect.

      Dear, have you mentioned someone’s education here the other day? So, now I would like to pay attention to yours, because you obviously missed the chemistry. For your information, C2H4 is ethylene, but CH4 is methane. And yet, just carbon dioxide, along with methane, is the main greenhouse gas. Actually, that is why Europe is striving to switch to carbon-free energy in order to eliminate emissions SO2.
      Also, only water and SO2 when methane is burned, they are formed only under ideal conditions, as a rule, on the pages of textbooks. In reality, carbon monoxide is still present in the exhaust gases. WITH and nitrogen oxides NOx. This exhaust is much cleaner than when burning gasoline, diesel fuel or fuel oil, but you can’t call it environmentally friendly.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 30 May 2020 23: 12
    +1
    • 3
    • 2
    Quote: Dear couch expert.
    Where does the energy for electrolysis come from?

    The energy of the sun, plus a catalyst for splitting water.

    Now, slowly I will explain. Semiconductor compounds, well "see" the spectrum of light, quite narrow. One chemistry sees red, the other blue, and so on. I noticed after all, there is a lot of this garbage, glowing in different colors. There is even infra and ultra .... Not visible. So, the same picture happens as a receiver. And from this it follows that the semiconductor layer does not “take out” all the energy from the solar. To make things better, they make multi-layer elements that deflate almost the entire spectrum. But such panels (and they are already made 32 (!!!) layered, in each layer a little opaque. And, the more layers, the more opaque these panels become. That is, there is a threshold for layer buildup, as energy generation starts again And such a threshold has already been reached. With all the tricks, with lenses collecting light, mirrors, pyramids (micro sizes), no fig is pumped out anymore. And this is 25-28% today. And a further increase in efficiency is achieved with blood in one places, increasing the price to space.
  • Ruslan Mailov Offline
    Ruslan Mailov (Ruslan Mailov) 31 May 2020 02: 59
    +1
    • 2
    • 1
    The production of hydrogen by electrolysis has long been a known process. Just use the obtained hydrogen for heating or energy production will not work - the balance is negative. Regarding the environmental friendliness of electric vehicles, the question is still that. Somewhere electricity needs to be generated. Of course, the larger the heat engine, the cleaner you can get the exhaust and move it outside the living area. But there is a very serious limitation. Suppose we made an electric car with a battery for 10 thousand one charge, long-lasting, fast-charging, inexpensive (someday it will be), but only the current power generation will not pull it. Take an average engine power of 50 kW and count. Good luck
    1. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 08: 35
      0
      • 1
      • 1
      Mercedes GLC F-Cell is the first production car. There are not many of them (as well as gas stations), but they are already driving.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 31 May 2020 23: 48
    -3
    • 0
    • 3
    Quote: Dear couch expert.
    Can you tell me the name of the catalyst?

    Cobalt and Nickel Oxide, for example. The rest is itself.

    You confuse (due to your education) subsidized generation

    I see, you are not very polite, smart guy?
    Come to me for "personal messages" and send a copy of your diploma. Let's see what kind of design engineer you are, or what you call yourself there?

    Maybe you should send a copy of your work book? Then, when you stop carrying the blizzard with the competition of hydrogen, I'll think about it.
    Only a theoretically unsuccessful "specialist" can compare a product obtained in finished form with homemade products.
    Give me your diploma here. Have a good laugh. My profession is an engineer. Not a diplomat. And you need to prove the truth without snot and hard. Offended? So, you did not find reasons to prove your case. So your position is worthless. If you're right, fight. Lithium batteries have an efficiency of 80%. Given the double conversion to charge-discharge, we have a decrease of another 20%. But this is about 60%. Electrolysis - electricity generation will have an efficiency of not more than 30%. Prove what is wrong.
    1. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 08: 18
      0
      • 1
      • 1
      Maybe you should send a copy of your work book?

      Come out. I think there will be something like: a janitor, go watchman of the cooperative "cucumbers" is written.

      Then when you stop carrying the blizzard with hydrogen competition ..

      For you. If an engineer, then you will be interested.

      https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/tech-zukunft/alternative-antriebe/wasserstoffauto-brennstoffzelle-co2-neutral-batterie-lithium/
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 1 June 2020 00: 24
    -1
    • 1
    • 2
    Quote: Dear couch expert.
    I also understand when stoked for electric cars like Tesla

    Tesla is undoubtedly a chic car, but electric cars have a lot of serious flaws. Leave the technical ones, they can be solved one way or another.
    But no one knows what to do with the disposal of old batteries. No, of course, in today's scale it is still bearable. And imagine - the whole world will switch to electric cars?
    And the second one. You went to Tesla. It's good. Have you ever seen a car with a lithium battery burn? No? And I saw. They could not put out it! NOTHING! Until it burned to the ground. And it's on the autobahn. Now imagine this burning car in the city, or God forbid in the tunnel. The burning temperature of lithium is 600 ° C.

    https://habr.com/ru/post/409761/

    Here they write off the failed Panasonic finger-type batteries. In the amount of a couple of tens of millions of pieces.
    There is another channel of deception - home storage power plants WITH RETURN OF ENERGY TO THE NETWORK (!!!!!). They sort out the dead, they still choose the breathing, and from them they complete the secondary.
    Attempting to determine the probability of failure-free operation of a system consisting of ten million elements yields a negative result. That is, the system is in elementary repair constantly. From here it became clear why, out of 129 megawatts of installed capacity, it is capable of giving only 100.
    1. Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 08: 39
      -2
      • 1
      • 3
      Here they write off the failed Panasonic finger-type batteries.

      Absolutely stupid?
  • Dear sofa expert. 1 June 2020 12: 39
    -4
    • 0
    • 4
    Quote: Sapsan136
    No matter where you taught them, it is important that you deny the obvious ..

    - everyone sees differently.
  • boriz Offline
    boriz (boriz) 5 June 2020 17: 27
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    Martsinkevich more than once specified that ordinary gas pipelines should not be used for hydrogen. Due to the higher chemical activity of hydrogen. He is a knowledgeable person, did not give reasons for doubt in his assessments.
  • aleksandrmakedo (Dubovitsky Victor Kuzmich) 12 June 2020 15: 48
    +3
    • 3
    • 0
    Quote: Rasen
    Quote: aleksandrmakedo
    And when methane - C2H4 is burned, the same water is obtained and CO2 - carbon dioxide, utilized by green plants. As far as I remember, it is heavier than air, and cannot rise into the upper atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect.

    Dear, have you mentioned someone’s education here the other day? So, now I would like to pay attention to yours, because you obviously missed the chemistry. For your information, C2H4 is ethylene, but CH4 is methane. And yet, just carbon dioxide, along with methane, is the main greenhouse gas. Actually, that is why Europe is striving to switch to carbon-free energy in order to eliminate emissions SO2.
    Also, only water and SO2 when methane is burned, they are formed only under ideal conditions, as a rule, on the pages of textbooks. In reality, carbon monoxide is still present in the exhaust gases. WITH and nitrogen oxides NOx. This exhaust is much cleaner than when burning gasoline, diesel fuel or fuel oil, but you can’t call it environmentally friendly.

    Yes, of course, you are right. I did not skip chemistry. The last time I kept a textbook in 1962. And he knew chemistry on the course better than anyone. But, memory is something. .. I apologize. And thank you for the comment.