I love that Hank's mustache can serve as a timestamp for the minimum length of time making a SciShow episode takes.

@candycemonroe7345

6 ай бұрын

Happy Pizzamas

@brycevining4500

6 ай бұрын

@@candycemonroe7345 Happy Pizzamas!

@voluptuousvince6522

6 ай бұрын

I miss it so much already.

@568qwerty

6 ай бұрын

That's right Bryce, good observation. In the future we can label the series as hank BC and Hank AD; Hank before cancer, Hank after diagnosis

@donchonealyotheoneal5456

6 ай бұрын

Hey Bryce I'm not going to be too hard on you because I don't know how old you are but if you're over the age of 18 You got to know something just because you have a thought doesn't mean that you should actually stated out loud or on a public forum such as this on the thought of hair growth you might want to look at his head hair because you know that for a time he was bald as an egg because he had to be injected with poison in order to kill the cancer cells that were attacking his body I think I speak for a lot of people that are glad that he is able to grow hair and still come to us in his geeky mannerisms and tell us about science facts or possibilities and I believe that the only way to make green hydrogen is with hydrothermal and or use the same heat that we use for smelting iron ore I think we need to combine the efforts of many different manufacturing processes and definitely we must not keep polluting our environment with the leftovers of our technological outbursts such as wind turbines that don't last very long and then what are we going to do with the waste there's also quite a problem or conundrum with used solar panels I personally think that the SpaceX should be looking into transporting tonnages of waste products to other planets not simply spitting them out into space but transporting our waste to other planets far far away where they would be burnt up in the atmosphere of that planet as in any of the gas giants rather than their ideas for colonizing and terraforming Mars or any other planet for that matter it's not gonna happen we don't have the technology SpaceX can barely get s*** up to earth orbit without exploding and I don't care how long they work on it there's just no way to sustain any sort of exploration of Mars with human beings possibly robots but where does that get us okay I'm done ciao for now

Regarding yellow hydrogen: Solar hydrogen production is not limited to electrolysis powered by solar energy. For example, you can focus sunlight to attain the temperatures required to thermally split water into it's constituent elements. Another method that is part of my thesis is developing photosensitizers to drive water oxidation and proton reduction catalysts, or photocatalysts, for water splitting reactions. Making solar cells with these photosensitzers/photocatalysts gives us an artificial leaf of sorts (doi: 10.1021/ar2003013).

@SpydrXIII

6 ай бұрын

artificial leaf? neat! i'm in!

@richross4781

6 ай бұрын

😂😂😂😂😂

@cathpalug1221

6 ай бұрын

I love the fact you give the doi so we can search it. Going to take a leaf from your tree

@bensoncheung2801

6 ай бұрын

Oh, cool.

@KeatrithAmakiir

6 ай бұрын

@@user-ku4nb6gb2t I teach solar power systems in college (in Canada), amorphous silicon PV is actually some of the least efficient technology currently available, even triple junctioned, but its fast and cheap to make compared to growing the standard crystalline cells. (commercial efficiency of amorphous is around 3-5%, crystalline is around 18-22%). I've seen several places try to create a solar leaf before, and while the concept is good on its face I have yet to see a practical one (doesn't mean stop trying, just means the tech isn't there yet sadly). I like your proposal for using CSP systems, I actually began a similar post myself then noticed this and deleted it in favour of commenting and boosting your well thought out reply, except for saying Chinese people don't know how to do an oil changes, that's just pointless racism tagged on at the end for no reason I can understand...

I'm doing my thesis on green vs blue hydrogen - blue is a joke because CCS is a total greenwashing nightmare! After 50 years of trying, it still hasn't been proven to work, at scale, without the plants breaking down or significantly missing sequestration targets. Any current CCS plants that have been working, at scale, are used for enhanced oil recovery. CCS also won't be able to sequester the 60% or more carbon equivalent, which is needed to internationally certify hydrogen as 'clean enough' to be called 'blue'. The Inflation Reduction Act will also make green hydrogen US$0.3 per kg by 2030, compared to blue hydrogen, which will be US$0.99-1.54 per kg by 2030. Governments need to invest in green hydrogen NOW and forget the blue bullsh##! ✊️🌎

@05Matz

6 ай бұрын

Yeah, the Alberta Conservative government (they rule the part of Canada I live in on behalf of the oil industry) openly advocates a Blue Hydrogen cycle (extra drilling for fossil methane -> split to CO2 and H2 -> H2 sold draining 'alternative fuel' credits, generating profit, and undercutting actual alternative fuels to stunt their growth -> CO2 used for enhanced oil recovery, draining 'carbon sequestration' credits to stunt their growth, oil sold for profit) to 'protect' the oil industry from the 'threat' of climate consciousness. It's a scam designed to fight actual solutions.

@TheMosayat

6 ай бұрын

Hello my friend. When will your thesis be out potentially? It would be really helpful for my research project. Or what main sources did you use as references in your work?

Pink hidrogen is way more interesting on all levels, especially when you consider that with new reactors they'll use waste heat to extract hydrogen, making the plant even more efficient. Please, scishow, be scientic, don't be scared of the power of the atom!!

@SireBab

6 ай бұрын

Furthermore, electrolysis gets substantially more efficient at high temperatures, you already have hot water vapor, so using that saves a ton of energy and thus cost.

@DrachenGothik666

6 ай бұрын

You're making a pretty large stretch with that assumption, thinking SciShow has an aversion to nuclear power, based on what evidence, exactly? Also, you might want to learn how to spell "Hydrogen" properly. There's no "i" in the word.

Green hydrogen uses spare renewable energy that would otherwise be curtailed, so is very low value. Blue hydrogen needs extra renewable energy to run the carbon capture. If you just used the renewable energy for electricity, you have lower emissions.

@jlp1528

6 ай бұрын

I'm team pink hydrogen: use nuclear energy! Who needs load following when you can just run the reactor at max power all the time and make hydrogen with any excess? That's the best way to run a nuclear reactor anyway: all of the power all of the time!

@arzigogolato8944

6 ай бұрын

You are missin a "hidden" cost: green hidrogen on "surplus" energy means that the plant which is supposed to do the electrolysis will be on standby for a lot of time, which is a waste of resources and makes it even less cost effective

@jlp1528

6 ай бұрын

​@@arzigogolato8944That's a fair point. Hydrogen is like anything else in the great "energy mix" we need: it has good places to be and applications to do, but a huge variety of factors need to be considered to find the best fit for each technology. As if that isn't complicated enough, some of those variables can change rapidly. I think the energy mix is yet another thing we should be exploring deeper with AI. It's a massive and complex problem, and bias gets in the way all the time.

@BooBaddyBig

6 ай бұрын

@@arzigogolato8944 Electrolysers are pretty cheap per watt though and their 'fuel' is even cheaper.

@BooBaddyBig

6 ай бұрын

@@jlp1528 What happens when the storage gets full? Earmarking nuclear power just for hydrogen storage that can get full seems spectacularly expensive.

Honestly, as long as profit is the central motive, fighting climate change is pretty much a losing battle.

@JumpingSpider37

6 ай бұрын

I mean yes and no. We will reach a point where the financial costs not to fight climate change will be to great. It’s a matter of when that shift will happen, and if it will be to late by then

@ihcfn

6 ай бұрын

Convince the people who profit most that it's in their interests and they'll find a way.

@InfamousIguana

6 ай бұрын

@@ihcfn Researchers are working on methods to couple the production of high-value-added chemicals to hydrogen production. This will help ease the burden of fossil fuel feed-stocks for commonly used chemicals, while making hydrogen production from green/blue/yellow methods more enticing than from steam reforming.

@General12th

6 ай бұрын

Renewable energy has been cheaper (even much cheaper) than fossil fuels for a few years now, so the profit motive is starting to push us toward fighting climate change already.

@agsystems8220

6 ай бұрын

As long as we fail to make companies/countries pay for their impact climate change will be a losing battle, but 'profit' is our best weapon against it. Satellites are good enough that we can measure emissions, so a global atmospheric CO2 and methane market is absolutely possible. People will always try to offload liabilities. The problem is that we let them. Make the cost of climate impact appear in a company's bottom line and watch them deal with it. As for how we get there? ... That is the hard bit.

The party that almost always controls the province of Canada I live in (Alberta, run more or less entirely by fossil fuel companies and its Conservative party) has openly laid out a plan to perform extra natural gas drilling, split the methane into hydrogen and carbon dioxide, inject the carbon dioxide into oil wells to increase oil production and sales, write up the CO2 produced as 'destroyed/sequestered' to consume as many 'carbon capture' credits out of Canada's or world sequestration credit markets as they can, market the hydrogen produced as "Blue Hydrogen" to flood the market with cheap hydrogen, consume as many Canadian or world 'green fuel' credits as they can, and choke out other alternative fuel sources. This is explicitly a plan to 'preserve' the fossil fuel industry and strike a blow against the 'threat' posed by alternative fuels and emissions credit programs. Don't be fooled by 'blue hydrogen'!

@rogerphelps9939

6 ай бұрын

They will fail simply because CCS has never been made to work at all well.

I'm not sure when this video was made, but a couple of days ago in France, researchers drilling to test for underground traces of methane found a very large pocket of white hydrogen. Although there were no specific details given, the discovery was billed as quite promising.

@TheRealWilliamWhite

6 ай бұрын

It was filmed about a month ago, during pizzamas.

@michaelcangley1868

6 ай бұрын

Thank you. I just read the article a couple of days ago and didn't pay attention to to date. I guess some news travels slowly.

@ethansloan

6 ай бұрын

I was thinking about that article, too.

Another things to consider with the carbon capture - will the carbon be stored indefinitely and are there any potential adverse effects to storing it in certain places?

@wintermath3173

6 ай бұрын

It could cause earthquakes, acidify groundwater, and/or seep back into the air over decades. In short, it *might* work, but should we bet our only planet on that?

I prefer clear hydrogen. Anyhow, one thing overlooked very often is storage and transport of hydrogen, it's extremely inconvenient and difficult and very low energy density per volume. Another is that as a replacement combustion fuel, many metals are incompatible with it, especially IC engines due to hydrogen embrittlement, even more so in modern times as metallurgy pushes for stronger and lighter steel alloys needed in modern engines, very rarely ever considered in the conversation of hydrogen as an alternative fuel but is a major issue!

@osmia

6 ай бұрын

This is the first time I've ever heard of any of those factors. Thanks for bringing it up

@tidbit1877

6 ай бұрын

Most people are thinking of just creating the hydrogen on artificial islands where huge wind farms will send their power to be then shunted to whichever nearby countries grid needs power. Any power not heading out to a power grid is then used to create hydrogen which is stored on the island, and when needed the hydrogen is burned right there on the island in a pretty standard power plant that uses the heat from the hydrogen to boil water and create steam that powers a steam turbine, so not an ICE. Also, there are hydrogen vehicles that generate electricity directly from hydrogen so all the parts are static, just add hydrogen and go. The hydrogen power plants would be capable of generating huge amounts of power when needed, on demand. This completely solves the wind turbine variability issue(assuming a large continent wide power grid with hundreds of wind farm locations whereby electricity can be sent where its needed and therefore the power from all the wind farms get averaged out and a large amount of the capacity of all the wind turbines then functions like base load). Lithium Batteries will be needed in very small amounts to help balance the grid, but only in small amounts.

@gamarus0kragh

6 ай бұрын

@@tidbit1877 Another option is to co-locate ammonia or another power-to-X plant with the hydrogen plant for production of fuels for ships or planes. One of the hurdles is that the processes producing eg. ammonia are best run continously, not in stops and starts as would be ideal to smooth out the feast-famine of wind farms.

@3800S1

6 ай бұрын

@@osmia There are some great videos by Engineering explain on some of the hydrogen IC engine vehicles and the massive engineering challenges to make it feasible. BMW have such a car. Most of these are basically tech demos. Here is Aus, LPG conversions and factory LPG cars were a bit craze in the early to mid 00s. But ultimately they never gained traction even if the fuel was significantly cheaper and cleaner burning. Much of the issues was reliability and convenience of the system needed to keep a pressurized gas in a vehicle, it's slower to fill, finicky, more safety issues, more prone to failures, even with OEM factory LPG injection cars could not address the issues. Then there was the problem with availability and if you run out you are screwed, unlike normal petrol you can get everywhere and a can to top you up at the side of the road if you make the mistake of running out is no big deal. Now hydrogen is basically the same problems but magnitudes harder! I heard a saying in recent few months that really opened my eyes to what makes something successful, "convenience trumps quality, always" There literally is nothing more convenient than refueling in less than 5 min basically anywhere and having such a simple, compact fuel system with more range than you can poke at. honestly I think high energy dense liquid at room temp without pressurization or cryogenic vesicle for hydrogen and alike with IC or potentially fuel cell vehicles are here to stay for a long time. Perhaps if commercially scalable and viable plankton farming direct to fuel technology ever matures, we are kinda doomed to use fossil fuel.

@rogerphelps9939

6 ай бұрын

No need to boil water. Combined cycle gas turbines can exceed 60% efficiency whereas anything that boils water is around 35% efficient. If combined cycle can be done with natural gas it can be done with hydrogen.@@tidbit1877

Sabine Hossenfelder made a good review of hydrogen credentials. Never mind the production method, it's bluddy hard to contain/store without leakage

Burying the lead with that nuclear hydrogen. Really wanted to hear more about that one as it seems the most feasible.

I’m actually a researcher looking into ways to store hydrogen efficiently so that, in case hydrogen can be produced in a clean way, we can store it and use it as intended. So happy to see this video!

Since experiencing Electrolysis in school chemistry class, I always thought that this was how all hydrogen was made! I'm so dissapointed that its not the case 😔

@JuneEgbertIsTheBestYTer3

6 ай бұрын

CATS ARE EVIL! Imagine liking those DEMONS!

@chippysteve4524

6 ай бұрын

When I was at school,our chemistry teacher told us that water could not be split into H and O by electricity so I guess we are moving forwards in some ways!

@jjbarajas5341

6 ай бұрын

I mean they're not called hydrocarbons for nothing.

@JWQweqOPDH

6 ай бұрын

​@@chippysteve4524As a note, IIRC pure distilled water can't be split through electrolysis. You need some electrolytes.

@regulate.artificer_g23.mdctlsk

6 ай бұрын

@@jjbarajas5341 Why are we bothering to dig up *carbon that's meant to stay underground* just for hydrogen, when water is so abundant/ubiquitous on Earth?

I thought this was going to be about the large reservoir of hydrogen found in France which seems to be the best way to get hydrogen that we didn't know existed until now.

Great to see Hank looking well

Maybe they do this already. I live in Buffalo, NY. We get our electricity from a hydroelectric plant that uses the Niagara River to generate electricity from the same water that eventually goes over Niagara Falls. I can imagine a hydrogen plant here that takes some of the same water that is used to produce the electricity and using it to produce hydrogen.

Ahhh this episode gave me a nostalgic vibe. I’m so glad I can continue to watch scishow with Hank. Been watching for over a decade now. I’ve been telling anyone who will listen exactly about green hydrogen since 2011.

incredible science reporting. Thank you for your work

Imagine leaving the car running in the garage and accidentally creating a sauna instead of dying.

@protocetid

6 ай бұрын

Lol. Praying green hydrogen pans out because there are car enthusiasts who don’t want to move to EVs, they think they’re lifeless by comparison. ICEs are considered more fun, they produce many more sensations and feedback in response to driving. Vehicles that use hydrogen share those characteristics with gasoline powered vehicles.

I'm so happy you're getting better with your health, Hank!

I think the trope that wind-farms produce no electricity when the wind doesn't blow is a smaller issue than the amount of wind-farms that are stopped with brakes when there is wind because the grid would be overburdened otherwise... this is not only a waste of valuable resources but also an additional strain on the wind-turbine because it needs to have the brakes engaged

I am so so happy that you're back Hank ❤❤❤

I'm glad people are looking into these things, no matter how close we are to accomplishing them just yet

Hankstache! Sci show is like a time machine

Beautiful video thx Hank

Just stopping by to wish Hank some love. Hope you get well bud.

I love all in Scishow, but i need to be clear, Hank is the soul of the Show, thanks for your awesome work.

About electrolysis can you use saltwater for it*googles* Oh it makes acid instead

Thanks 👍

3:44 "We ideally want industries to start converting their operations now, which means we need to make it make business sense for them to do that." Or we could, y'know, stop letting the private sector handle any of this to begin with. The hard part would be buying our legislators back.

@tatianatub

5 ай бұрын

its a gates sponsored video you really expect them to consider degrowth

Walter! You're Back!

Do I see hair?! Good to see you recovering Hank!

1:51 Energy Sources Throw a Party -Foil Arms and Hog

Liking the new Hank look and as always I enjoy this channel. 👍👍

i can't get over the moustache... but as always very informative content too!

lookin good Hank

What a good episode

Honestly, glossed over the biggest means of dealing with all of this: Nuclear. It's non-renewable GREEN energy. No CO2 (at least not for running it. Shipping fuel and building the thing in the first place, sure, but that's not a part of the power generation process).

Nuclear energy is best so far.There are high temperature sodium nuclear powers in Japan that produce lots of hydrogen the heat they produce can be used in many things such as melting stuff ,heating etc. The good thing is this type of nuclear powerplants wont cause core to melt once electricity and cooling stops.They stop on its own without needing any prevention which is a safety bonus.

@TheRealWilliamWhite

6 ай бұрын

I don't understand why so many people are against nuclear, it doesn't produce greenhouse gasses, has minimal waste, on a public health level it's safer then coal fired power plants, and If built and operated properly for the area isn't dangerous.

@05Matz

6 ай бұрын

On a public health level, nuclear is safer than even just the damage _from radioactivity alone_ caused by coal power plants. Turns out inhaling burned rock dust is REALLY bad for you. There's all sorts of contaminants in coal that go straight into the air, including radioactive ones. @@TheRealWilliamWhite

@exosproudmamabear558

6 ай бұрын

@@TheRealWilliamWhite For eu it is the best kind of energy source in my opinion. Eu do not have hurticanes,tsunamis nor earthquakes so I never understood why they were so afraid of nuclear after Fukushima. Japan has many natural disasters so I can understand if they were more reluctant about it but it is absulutely opposite of it. Nuclear waste is a problem sure but it is managable. The cost is something important in my opinion. Nuclear power is so expensive right now due to safety measures but I am sure developed countries can handle. So yeah I dont understand why countries runnibg away from nuclear especially when they do not have reliable energy sources

@agsystems8220

6 ай бұрын

Nuclear was best 30 years ago, but I don't see much point in it currently. If we already had good modern reactor designs in place with production ramped, then I would be all for it, but I don't see us getting it up to speed before renewables (solar in particular), and while the risks and down sides have been exaggerated they are still enough for me to think solar paired with methanol is the way forward.

@rogerphelps9939

6 ай бұрын

No there aren't.

Can you guys talk about the most underdiagnosed illness? I was recently diagnosed with Bile Acid Malabsorption syndrome. It took 9 years to get that diagnosis but I'm now living well and fine.

If we are aware of potential problems we can prepare for dealing with them.

Pink hydrogen looks pretty promising, although I do live in a country with only one nuclear reactor, so I don't see it being a path that my country will ever go down.

White hydrogen or geologic hydrogen are options as well. There are pockets that have been found. That would give the option to use existing tech for immediate benefit. There are active hydrogen wells but that number could be single digits.

Holy mustache Batman!

6:17 "I don't really see how it's different from green" Mining.

Yay, the mustache is back again!

One possibly cost-effective method of hydrogen production in maybe a decade is pyrolysis of hydrocarbons. Basically CxHy -> xC(graphite) + 2yH2. Its nonrenewable but carbon neutral in the atmosphere, and the main problem is getting graphite out of the continuous process. If we find a solution to that, the process has the potential to be fully continuous and COULD be cheaper than SMR (cool stuff doesnt always work out)

Hi Hank!

If we're going to use renewables to power the methods of making hydrogen, why not use them for making complex hydrocarbons? (ie synth/e-diesel or biodiesel) better energy density than hydrogen and the fuel itself can sequestered. It's fine to use carbon fuels where the carbon comes from the carbon cycle and not pump it from the ground. Since we're really just talking about it on the context of energy storage and not production.

Pink hydrogen sounds interesting as it could give us a relatively pure source of carbon for use in potentially, manufacturing graphene should we work out a reliable and fast way to assemble it from carbon.

When all the different color hydrogens combine their powers together they summon the HydroZord.

Carbon capture is like tasking you dog to guard the sausage.

Turquoise Hydrogen is a favorite topic of mine. It strikes me as more sustainable long term than blue hydrogen, and much easier to regulate (on account of it producing a solid "waste" product). It would still suffer from the problem of incidental methane emissions, however if the process of Methane pyrolysis is done close to the sites of natural gas extraction, than those can be minimized.

I love that I've spent enough Hank-time on Scishow that I was already thinking carbon capture when he detailed the black hydrogen. Thanks Hank 😀

He looks like Toby Flenderson doing Movember lol

Don’t forget water vapor is a greenhouse gas too, it’s just not as bad as CO2 and methane. We will need a solution that reduces our consumption of physical resources but still produces equivalent power. I won’t be surprised if we see super dirigibles mining our upper atmosphere in the near future.

Is the solar and wind with all the need for rar earths (and digging them up) as well as all the waste even green? If I haven't missed a video, you never talked about this aspect much here.

Hydrogen is an epic energy storage medium

I feel like all those youtube shorts really changed how Hank presents the topic and their approach to making videos, they seem somehow more entertaining and even more captivating than the old ones? Or it's just me being so happy to see Hank talking about science stuff yet again =)

I think Turquoise Hydrogen can be useful. Solid carbon is easier to make use of for something like fertilizer or turn into activated charcoal for environmental cleanup, so we at least get more use out of it instead of just stashing it.

That turquoise hydrogen sounds promising. I'm thinking that I hear about so many methane leaks from various sources that if they're fixed and the methane is funneled towards the turquoise hydrogen generation and then we're left with carbon not carbon dioxide, it just seems like it could be a win

@regulate.artificer_g23.mdctlsk

6 ай бұрын

Turquoise hydrogen is just Blue hydrogen.

Red and pink hydrogen is the way (directly from high temperature nuclear reactors or hot electrolysis using waste heat). That, or something between those and green.

Had an idea.... what if they (instead of using water that's used for other things) just distill ocean water to remove salt, and as it's a vapor, THEN shock it to split it up, should be easier(use less energy?) if its a gas and "spread out" when electrolyzed, right?

Who is Hank Green? Some guy who just recently decided to have a good looking mustache!

It's always the same tripping block: it's not as effective as dirty methods (we did latch onto them for a reason). The race isn't to invent a new tech, it's make it good enough to replace the old without losing our level of progress. And we're constantly moving the goalposts.

Given that methane can be extracted from decomposition, I think any process that can use methane as the basis to get hydrogen will likely be the most successful. Imagine a wastewater treatment plant that produces not only the clean water and fertiliser that most already do, but also makes hydrogen for industrial processes! And it can be done based on composting of other things, like manure from farms, waste food, prunings, pretty much any biological materials. Compost those in a "methane cow" instead of a compost heap and you could be getting liquid fertiliser, compost, power, *and* hydrogen ...

The mighty proton! Erm and some electrons...and occasionally a deadbeat neutron.

For the moment still almost exclusively Grey, makes you wonder if the rest are just greenwashing.

Geothermal or electromagnetic fields can be most easily used to produce energy and there would be no excess waste from its production. Just a thought

@rogerphelps9939

6 ай бұрын

We already get energy from electromagnetic fields. The electromagnetic fields in question are called sunlight.

Hank Green, John Green, and Blue Green

Lushious stash. Hope you can grow a fro to go with it, would look bad ass.

Hi Prof!

What about using geothermal energy sources to make hydrogen, like they do on Iceland? What colour is that?

A quick question: why you should build an electrolyzer to make it produce H2 only while you have excess energy production from renewables, when you can have a nuclear power plant and operate that electrolyzer 24/7? Don't you like pink, or what?

I remember hearing about an idea to use hydrogen production as a way to more effectively create, store, and transport clean energy here in Australia. Theory being, most of Australia is really flippin' dry and sunny and so a good place to put solar farms. However, these places also are west of the Great Dividing Range, and most Australians live to the east of that mountain range (for that exact same reason). So, go put your solar panels out in the desert, use them to break water into hydrogen, and then transport the hydrogen back to the cities to burn as needed! Simples!

@fehzorz

6 ай бұрын

Or simply build transmission lines, you don't need to go that far west of the capital cities to get a lot of land that's good for renewables. Exporting to other countries on the other hand, now that's a lot more interesting.

@Respectable_Username

6 ай бұрын

@@fehzorz The idea is that you can do this even _further_ away than transmission lines can efficiently transmit (energy is lost over distance). So if say you had a giant solar farm up around Darwin (so you get relatively consistent sunlight hours throughout the year) and then could transport the hydrogen down the east coast. But yes, then _also_ have the capability to sell overseas too! It's basically the best way to transmit stored energy over long distances 😊

Carbonated drinks like coke and other sodas need CO2 and that's often provided by places that burn stuff. If we combine the hydrogen production and CO2 capture for fizzy drinks, we can probably get the net emissions down, even though we still produce CO2 in the process.

fyi folks hank's mic is out of phase in this video, you might wanna check the dc offset on the audio file when you mux it into the video - the audio logo is fine in stereo image but hanks sounds more on the left side here. real painful on headphones.

we like water, plants like co2, we like plants, they make oxygen. it's all good man. no crisis, no need to stop living normally.

World famous KZreadr: Hank Blue

This is what is powering the Green Lantern and all the other colors of lanterns, hydrogen.

it’d be cool if we’d use hydropower to generate the electricity needed for electrolysis

Crazy timing... just this weekend scientists discovered what could be up to 250 million metric tons of white / clear hydrogen in France which could make all of this irrelevant!!

@aidanechi

6 ай бұрын

We current produce a bit under 100 million metric tons of hydrogen per year and quickly rising, so while they are large, natural deposits will not hydrogen production “irrelevant”.

I always wondered why bother with H2 engines and storage, if you can instead run existing propane and natural gas infrastructure on fermented methane... H2 also has the big disadvantage of leaking.

Do we have to choose just one method? Why not decide on a method that fits the area where the processing plant is?

Go Go Sci Show!

how is puttting it in the ground different than fracking....? Ground storage must come with a LOT of dangers.

Love the iPhone X haircut

You show seascapes with the segment about green hydrogen. Some of these projects pump water out of the ground for the electrolysis. This may not be good for the folks who use the same aquifer for their water wells. How long before their wells run dry? Pumping the CO2 into the ground sounds simple, but may not be so easy. Local folks may not be eager for such projects. So many examples where drilling/mining/pumping projects have resulted in major issues.

What colour has the microbial produced hydrogen?

What about HANDLING or STORING hydrogen? Liquid hydrogen must be kept at near absolute zero (for starters), which itself requires lots of energy.

@harrywilliamson7043

6 ай бұрын

Not quite. It doesn't have to be liquid to transport. It can be carries as a compressed gas.

@InfamousIguana

6 ай бұрын

There are many materials in development for storing hydrogen. One such method is dissolving it into metals and storing it as metal hydrides which can achieve quite high energy densities. energy.gov has a nice graph about on their "Materials-Based Hydrogen Storage" page with quite a few materials, their energy densities and temperature requirements. You are still correct about requiring cool temperatures for adsorption of hydrogen onto different materials, and than on top of that heat is required for hydrogen release. A more practical method for using hydrogen would be a hydrogen fuel cell, which behaves similarly to a battery. We can make the comparison of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles to electric vehicles, except instead of charging a battery, we would be "charging" the fuel cell by splitting water into hydrogen, where it will then be stored in an above mentioned material, to later be used as a fuel. In this case, we no longer need to handle or transport the hydrogen.

What about mining hydrogen from the giant planets of the solar system?

As much as I'd be excited to see Hydrogen power become an alternative, and I understand it is greener than carbon chains. Is producing a ton more water vapor around the world not going to create a massive cloud seeding problem, in relation to the videeo you made a few months ago on the removal of sulphur dioxide from shipping fuel.

@rogerphelps9939

6 ай бұрын

Not true. Water vapour is only a temporary resident in the atmosphere and it would be very easy to condense it into water just by running it through more water. The amount of water produced per kwh is pretty small anyway.

Yellow Hydrogen: Hydrogen gotten by mining the Sun.

We have no way to store hydrogen long term. Until we figure out a container that it can't just seep through, it's not really viable.

Would it be possible to get an playlist with all animal related videos? I appreciate this channel ❤ thanks for all the hard work.

Who knew hydrogen could be so colourful?

I thought you were talking about Balmer lines.

Thanks. I'm an environmental scientist, and so far hydrogen is not a sustainable solution. Besides the problems you mentioned, it is 3-6 times less energy efficient compared to electricity solutions, and REALLY hard to contain. So, it's irrelevant for vehicles, buildings, etc. It might be relevant for long term energy storage, fertilizers, and steel production- but only when we'll have renewable electricity x5 times the electricity we use today.

"Yes, but it costs more money, so we rather poison the Atmosphere and risk our survival." - Humans