Hydrogen

717 readers

9 users here now

A community about hydrogen and its use as a way to fight climate change.

Rules

All posts must be about hydrogen, fuel cells, or a related topic.
Posters that only attack hydrogen will not be tolerated.

This community has been migrated from:
fedia.io/m/hydrogen
fedia.io/m/hydrogen@kbin.social(Original server is defunct)

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Hypx@piefed.social

This hydrogen turbine turns controlled explosions into electricity (www.sciencedaily.com)

submitted 3 days ago by Hypx@piefed.social to c/hydrogen@piefed.social

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Scientists have successfully generated electricity with a hydrogen turbine that produces its own pressure through detonation waves instead of relying on a mechanical compressor. The breakthrough could unlock dramatically more efficient power systems for clean energy and future aviation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Hypx@piefed.social 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Please read that sentence more carefully. It is not saying what you think it is saying. The detonation wave generates pressure without compression.

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I could be very pedantic here, but I'm actually trying to understand how this is different from a traditional engine.

In that sentence, what does the "required pressure" refer to? Presumably an elevated pressure is required, instead of a negative pressure? For what purpose? How is that pressure achieved? Is the pressure changed by a change in volume? Temp? Once the pressure has changed, does the gas do work on something?

[–] Hypx@piefed.social 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The pressure increase is achieved via detonation. This happens without a compression stage. It then pushes on a turbine generating electricity.

It is clearly described in the article. Like I said, you need to read it more carefully.

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You keep saying that, but it seems that you're only able to make sense of the article because you have some prior knowledge. I was hoping you would share that knowledge, but it seems you have no interest in doing so. What was the point of sharing the article then?

Since you seem to want to be reductive, it appears that this detonation engine is nothing more than a regular combustion engine with a fuel mix that is more reactive. That's great and cool, but it still isn't clear why this is any significant innovation.

[–] Hypx@piefed.social 2 points 3 days ago

It is a combustion engine, just minus the compression stage. If you actually read the entire article (which at this point, I suspect you have not), it is potentially more efficient than a regular combustion engine. That is the entire point of the thing.