17
A Wind Power Crisis Is Holding Back the World’s Green Energy Goal (www.bloomberg.com)
submitted 1 week ago by humanspiral@lemmy.ca to c/climate@slrpnk.net
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

While wind is more expensive than solar, and has issues highlighted in article, the higher capacity factors, and production outside of midday, means less battery capacity is needed to serve renewables, and batteries get charged more often.

A key to bringing down transmission costs for wind, especially offshore where transmission is the highest cost component, is hydrogen production. Picking up H2, or refueling, by trucks and ships can provide cheaper energy than transmission lines. Pipelines are even cheaper with enough volume, and double as storage.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 4 points 1 week ago

The issue with hydrogen is that is diffuses and leaks straight trough metal pipes, and makes the metal brittle in the process. But... that property could also be used to create super dense storage, by intentionally diffusing it into something like aluminium

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Plastic/FRC pipes solve the leakage problem. They are also salt water resistant. Soft steel NG distribution pipes have low leak rates as well. Converting hard steel NG transmission pipes is possible by lining them in plastic. In any near future, H2 only new pipes would be built. H2 is more valuable when it is pure because it has higher efficiency electric conversion than NG, as well as being an ingredient to several important chemicals.

[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 3 points 1 week ago

That's conveniently ignoring that the type of plastic or rfc you need are not quite cheap or quick to make

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

Spoolable FRP pipes up to 4" in diameter can fit on a truck. Rated for 200bar. Pre covid, this was quoted as $50k/km as full deployment cost with 10s of km per day buildout rate. Spoolable pipe that can fit on ships has no diameter limit.

I don't know details of manufacturing process, but spools, plastic pipe extrusion, and fiber reinforcement should be highly automatable.

[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Not every random frp is suitable, hydrogen will fit trough most plastics and fibres. So... the cheapest crap won't Just do the trick

[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago

PE pipes used for NG seem "good enough" https://www.pe100plus.com/PPCA/HYDROGEN-TRANSPORT-IN-POLYMER-PIPES-FOR-NATURAL-GAS-DISTRIBUTION-TEN-YEARS-OF-EXPERIENCE-p1737.html

PTFE is known to be better. Fiber reinforcement is mostly an outside layer to increase pressure resistance. Putting PE or PTFE inside existing steel pipes would also work.

[-] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 1 points 6 days ago

You should read what you linked. It says:

  • the hydrogen leaks more than natural gas
  • this type of plastic degrades even when not in use
  • they have not looked into the issue of hydrogen diffusing out trough the plastic

I wouldn't say a pipe underground that you have to dig up every year to check if it's not falling apart on it's own is a great option

[-] Five@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 week ago

PTFE and chemicals used in its production are some of the best-known and widely applied PFAS, which are persistent organic pollutants. PTFE occupies more than half of all fluoropolymer production, followed by polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF).

-- Polytetrafluoroethylene on Wikipedia

this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
17 points (94.7% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5181 readers
489 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net