Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power Technology

Tesla Powerwall Rival Seeks To Bring Hydrogen Into Your Home (bloomberg.com) 133

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: It's about the size of Tesla Inc.'s Powerwall, but can store up to three times as much energy over a longer period. That's the promise of a new hydrogen-based energy-storage system for homes and businesses being developed by Australian startup Lavo Hydrogen Technology Ltd. The technology, developed with scientists at the University of New South Wales, uses power from rooftop solar panels to produce hydrogen from water by electrolysis. The gas is stored in a metal hydride container and converted back into electricity when needed using a fuel cell.

Australia's world-beating rooftop-solar take-up rates make it an ideal early market, said Lavo Chief Executive Officer Alan Yu. The unit will go on sale from November, with installations starting in June 2021, subject to final approvals. The company plans to sell 10,000 units a year by 2022. At about triple the price of a Powerwall, the Lavo unit's main selling point will be its ability to store more energy for longer. Each system will initially cost A$34,750 ($24,620) and will be able to hold 40 kilowatt-hours of power -- enough to supply an average household for more than two days, according to the company. Tesla's Powerwall holds about 13.5 kilowatt-hours. Lavo's Yu acknowledged that the higher cost of the system might initially limit interest to energy-technology enthusiasts initially, but he also sees it as a solution for small off-grid rural villages to replace diesel generators or a compact solution for communities and homes cut off from the main grid by natural disasters such as bushfires.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tesla Powerwall Rival Seeks To Bring Hydrogen Into Your Home

Comments Filter:
  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:06PM (#60626394)

    I am very much for the idea of pushing hydrogen tech.

    However, a home system that converts water to hydrogen seems inherently more fiddly than a simpler solar panel/battery system.

    As a home owner, I am pretty reluctant to have yet another possible location for water flow failures and leaks...

    My parents had a solar water heating system for a while, that worked simply buy running water up through a series of black panels that heated it up, then returned it to the house. While it worked well for a while, eventually the pumps started to fail, then some of the pipes... so we had to abandon using it.

    • Why? Hydrogen is a terrible energy medium. The systems that convert it to kinetic or worse yet electrical energy are madly expensive, its price is in the same ballpark as gasoline in the vanishingly few places it's available today, the only thing more difficult and dangerous that transporting it is storing it, and being currently produced almost entirely as a fossil fuel byproduct, it's practically a fossil fuel itself. For hydrogen cars, I like to say that hydrogen offers the best selection of the worst do

      • Oh, I suppose I should add that's not bad (or unusually dangerous) as a rocket fuel, but that's getting into very niche uses.

        • Hydrogen leaks are insanely dangerous because hydrogen leaks easily (tiny molecule), the leaks are hard to detect, and a low concentration is flammable in a room. Chemists always use Hydrogen lecture bottles inside hood not because it's toxic but because of the fatal consequences of an undetected leak in a room exploding.

      • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @07:46PM (#60626792) Homepage

        Or just simply look at the stats. This thing gets you a worse kWh-per-dollar ratio than a 2016 Tesla Powerwall, has way less W per dollar ratio, is massive (both in dimensions and weight), terribly inefficient (even worse because they're using metal hydride storage) (you better have an epicly massive solar array if that's what you're getting it for!), and involves having a massive tank in your home of a chemical which burns in almost any fuel-air mixture, ignites with 1/10th the ignition energy of gasoline (incl. common static sparks and minor discharges from home electronics), readily undergoes deflagration to detonation (fireball-to-explosion) transitions, pools under overhangs (and enters any pipes and can follow them to their destinations, pooling there), damages ozone if it's not trapped, leaks through almost anything, and embrittles metals. They're storing it as a metal hydride, so the pressures will be lower (still raised, and continously outgasing if breached) - but then again, the powders are generally pyrophoric and/or react with water even at room temperature and even when not loaded with hydrogen - and are then heated when in discharge operation. :P Oh, and won't be out for a couple years, if all goes right.

        I mean... just WHY? Seems like one of the most daft ideas I've seen in ages.

        Anyway, it seems like it's just a startup trying to raise capital. And since hydrogen is on a PR tear right now, they'll probably get someone to dump cash on them. You can basically make up whatever you want about claimed products with hydrogen and get people to declare you to be worth many billions. See for example Nikola, which declared a half-built natural gas truck to be "a hydrogen truck" by painting "H2" on the side, and claimed 1200 miles with a lightning-fast tractor that's no heavier than a traditional diesel tractor, when in reality the range appears is now down to ~450 miles, the weight is ~35 tonnes, and performance is plodding. Oh, and it currently takes 45 minutes to fill, because when you work with hydrogen at those pressures, you get heating problems if you try to fill too quickly.

        This is a key aspect, BTW - in the real world, hydrogen doesn't get you extra range, as your tanks are over an order of magnitude heavier than the fuel, and you still have to have large battery packs, as well as the fuel cell stack. Compare say a Tesla Model 3 LR with a FCV Clarity for example (range, weight, performance, etc) - Tesla crushes it. And remember that the FCV Clarity is heavily subsidized, while Teslas have ~25% margins (~18% without credits). Oh, and li-ion batteries generally have longer lifespans than PEMFCs to boot, and don't require platinum. We're entirely ignoring the massive issues of fuel availability, terrible fuel expense, terrible fuel production inefficiency, etc etc.

        Hydrogen is just such a massive non-starter.

        • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          In the end it will be the grid corporations who decide on the storage medium as in. For sale, solar panel and double battery storage, one for your use and one for the grid the surplus from your system going to the battery that supplies the grid and that you get rebates for. As much solar panel area as possible, so multiple controllers for each facing to better control power generation. For lease, same thing, part pay the bill with the energy generated. Finally discounted energy, for the energy you use direc

        • ...and embrittles metals. They're storing it as a metal hydride, so the pressures will be lower...

          The article says (emphasis added)...

          The gas is stored in a metal hydride container and converted back into electricity when needed using a fuel cell.

          Also, last I checked, the issue you mentioned of embrittling metals hasn't been solved, more just reduced based on material selection and manufacturing techniques. So, before long the metal hydride (which metal?!) container they're storing it in will develop cracks by simply storing hydrogen in it and it'll leak an extremely flammable gas in or around your house.

          This embrittlement problem that you mentioned is the single biggest issue with hydrogen.

        • by Rei ( 128717 )

          *** 35000 pounds, not 35 tonnes. Mixed up US and metric units in my writing. Basically about double the weight of a typical semi tractor.

      • The systems that convert it to kinetic or worse yet electrical energy are madly expensive,

        Currently, but they are advancing technology to produce hydrogen all the time, and hey if you are using solar the conversion energy is free...

        its price is in the same ballpark as gasoline

        Yes but again, the technology is improving rapidly, and unlike gasoline no-one would mind having a hydrogen "refinery" by them so you could have hyper-local production very easily.

        the only thing more difficult and dangerous that tran

        • Yes, with every theoretically possible advancement put together, hydrogen cars might almost make as much sense as EVs already do today, all so we can refuel a hydrogen car slightly faster than a present-day EV quick charge, that'll totally work out any day now.

        • Currently, but they are advancing technology to produce hydrogen all the time

          That's the opposite process, which really hasn't been a problem for like a century or so. But fuel cell systems really aren't cheap [sainc.com] -- especially the small-scale ones.

    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      and what makes you think there are additional locations for "water flow failures"? As a "home owner", what do you know about this technology?

      I mean, we all know what you know already. You're SuperKendall, you don't know anything about anything, but it's cast as a Tesla competitor so there must be something wrong with it.

      As a home owner, do you do without hot water so to avoid an "another possible location for water flow failures and leaks"? Isn't a hot water heater "more fiddly" than just cold water?

      • and what makes you think there are additional locations for "water flow failures"?

        Um, the fact the system says clearly it produces hydrogen from water, and is located in your house??

        I mean, here you either are thinking you have to bring jugs of water over to it, or it runs on captured rainwater? Really curious how you imagine it working without a water line running to it...

        I would have responded to the rest of your message but I couldn't understand it; I don't read Full Retard.

        I'll let you have the last re

    • by etash ( 1907284 )
      I call BS on the solar heater. In Greece there are millions such units on the rooftops and leaks are never a problem.
      • Has been common in Australia for many decades. Cheap and effective.

        (There is no problem with snow in most of Australia.)

        The heaters have an electric booster that cuts in if you get more than a couple of cloudy/rainy days in a row. Unfortunately, that is exactly when solar electricity stops working as well. There are systems with LPG boosters for off-grid locations.

        Certainly heating hot water with solar electricity is not very sensible.

        • I should add that the way they work is a glass sheet over a sealed box with black pipes underneath. It gets quite hot on cold days, and can easily boil on hot days.

      • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        Apparently his house doesn't have running water either. If you want to wash your hands you have to go outside.

      • My dad had an early one. Solar panels on the roof heated water, and could be used to run a heater in the house.
        Continual problems with
        1) water temperature getting too high being hard on the pipes.
        2) pumps failing because of high temperature water.
        3) Hot water tanks had a hard time keeping the water from corroding them.

        He went through two sets of new pumps and two sets of water tanks before finally giving up and scrapping the whole system for the value of the copper.

        I would assume someone has figured this st

    • Works in practice, but still expensive:
      https://www.homepowersolutions... [homepowersolutions.de]
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      This one stores the H2 in a pressure cylinder, but else it's similar.

      The neat thing is that in the winter it uses the heat generateed by the fuel cell to heat the house -> makes sense, because if the system is balanced, this makes the fuel cell very efficent.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It won't be competitive with batteries. Massive demand for batteries has pushed prices down and used ones are available for budget conscious applications. Unless there is some really compelling reason why batteries won't work for a particular application then nothing else can compete.

    • by jbengt ( 874751 )

      My parents had a solar water heating system for a while, that worked simply buy running water up through a series of black panels that heated it up, then returned it to the house. While it worked well for a while, eventually the pumps started to fail, then some of the pipes... so we had to abandon using it.

      With those failures it was not solar heat that was the problem, it was the materials and the installation (and, if it lasted a long time before failing, possibly the maintenance.)

      • Not so long ago I lived in a house that had a solar water heating system. The big problem with them is corrosion, or efficiency. Either you have to run a separate loop with corrosion retarders (aka "coolant", like automotive stuff) and the use a water to water heat exchanger, or you will have corrosion. If you use the heat exchanger you pay the efficiency penalty, if you don't then your panels themselves eventually fail and then you have to go back on the roof to service them. And for the separate loop syst

  • I have a bridge I'd like to sell you..

    Zero chance they deliver that system with that capacity at that price within my life time. Can we say "vaporware"?

  • by Dasher42 ( 514179 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:13PM (#60626426)

    How well does this system last? Batteries are making significant strides in durability. Lithium-iron-phosphate batteries have become the standard for home energy storage, especially if buffered with supercapacitors to prevent spikes in the load from stressing the batteries, but there are yet more durable solutions if you've the room for them.

    What's the expected lifespan of these electrolysis systems? Can economy of scale and innovation bring their costs down at a rate competitive to newer batteries? Because, energy storage is seeing some amazing R&D.

    • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

      I don't know, but even if it had zero wear, I don't think this would make much sense. The hydrogen fuel cells are only going to be about 40 to 60% efficient on the back side, as opposed to 92.5% round-trip efficiency for the Powerwall, and that's before you consider the efficiency lost while producing the hydrogen or the cost of buying city water to split into the hydrogen.

      Then again, if you assume that a Powerwall lasts only 5,000 charge cycles, they cost 18.5 cents per kWh delivered, so that could eas

      • Yes, 18.5 cents per kWh is an insane price. The most I remember paying for electricity was just above 8 cents per KWh. Right now I'm at 3.9 cents.

        To even consider paying for a Powerwall it would have to last for at least four decades with no issues.

        • by ras ( 84108 )

          This story is from Australia. The retail price of electricity in Australian ranges from 21 cents / kWh ... 34 cents / kWh [canstarblue.com.au], plus there is a line connection fee of about $1/day.

          • it still doesn't make a powerwall financially viable. The calculations a lot of forums in Australia have done still have a payback period well past the warranty and lifetime expectations of the device, under ideal conditions and usage you may break even. Powerwalls are simply too expensive for what they are, with Tesla you are buying the brand, there are plenty of competing devices that actually are financially viable.
            • You're also buying turnkey. I can do much better with my own components, leaf batteries etc., but I have to actually do it. Even though solar power systems are very simple by modern standards, most people's eyes glaze over just during the capacity planning stage.

              I *am* building my own system, so I don't think it's impossible, it's just that for the masses it's very unlikely.

      • Flywheel storage is looking pretty good right now. Just saying.

        Sadly, Beacon Power discontinued their small flywheels a long time ago, and only makes big ones now. Do you know anyone else doing it?

    • How well does this system last? .

      Well, fuel cells are notoriously flaky things that take a lot of maintenance and refurbishment. In this case my guess is the hydrogen handling systems will be the problem. Hydrogen is hard to store for long periods, will require very high pressures to hold the volumes required at normal temperatures (which guarantees it will be a gas). High pressure compressors are not very reliable things, high pressure storage cylinders require regular inspection.

      I don't have a clue about the electrolysis part of this,

    • by ras ( 84108 )

      How well does this system last?

      Their website [lavo.com.au] says 20,000 cycles, or about 50 years at one cycle per day. At 40 kWh it's unlikely you will use 1 cycle per day, so it should be longer.

      • by ras ( 84108 )

        I should have read further. The 20,000 cycles is a headline figure on the web page. Warranty is 10 years and they say the expected lifetime is 30 years.

  • by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:19PM (#60626452)

    Why not just tie the device into the grid, and use it as backup when there are outages.

    If you're in a remote off grid site, it makes some sense.

    If I need to have something using hydrogen in my yard, I'd prefer storing it in a concrete 2 foot thick building with a blow-off roof.

    • With a battery, you can defer your electricity usage to when rates are at a minimum. In addition, you can wait until rates are at their peak before putting any collected solar energy back onto the grid. With the Tesla powerwall unit, Tesla manages when this occurs but you can bet that they operate in such a way to maximize your savings / their profits.

      Also, most grid operators will no longer credit you dollar for dollar with regards to the power being pulled from or inserted into the grid. So it makes

      • by heypete ( 60671 ) <pete@heypete.com> on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:47PM (#60626516) Homepage

        With the Tesla powerwall unit, Tesla manages when this occurs but you can bet that they operate in such a way to maximize your savings / their profits.

        In California, at least, they don't allow stored energy to be sent back onto the grid. One can export solar-produced power, but not battery-stored power. Storage systems like Powerwalls are designed such that they cannot export power to the grid.

        The Powerwalls have a few operating modes, including backup-only (stay at 100% charge to provide for maximum backup power in case of an outage), self-powered (minimize grid imports, with no consideration of time of day), or time-of-day-aware (where the user configures the time-of-use rate schedule for weekdays and weekends). The system automatically maximizes solar exports during peak time and manages the battery charge/discharge activity throughout the part-peak and off-peak times for the user's benefit.

        Tesla doesn't have any profit incentive after the Powerwalls are sold (unless it's part of some leased system, but I'm not familiar with that) so it's entirely in the user's control.

    • As reported by Boomberg.com (the l they stuck in there must be a typo, right?)

  • More info (Score:5, Informative)

    by gurps_npc ( 621217 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:21PM (#60626458) Homepage

    For more info, take a look at: https://reneweconomy.com.au/au... [reneweconomy.com.au]

    They have a nice diagram explaining a bit about the intended use.

    Does not tell where it is installed - do you have to install it in your home's wall, or can a more cautious person install it in a shed 30 ft away from your home with a power line connecting the two. This would significantly lower the risk of a hydrogen explosion and many people might prefer this no matter how low the chance of this occurring.

    Particularly the first purchases. I would love this, but I would not sign up for Model 1.0

    • We already had the "revolutionary battery that's not ready yet but makes everyone else obsolete story" (well, once we finish it off, and figure out production, and . . .) this month. This should have waited for next month.

      At least it got coming in the third week right . . .

  • by John.Banister ( 1291556 ) * on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:27PM (#60626472) Homepage
    Here's another article [reneweconomy.com.au] and another [fuelcellsworks.com]. They call this a storage system and the advertised benefit is all in the storage, but to get the storage one has to buy an electrolyser and a fuel cell. What if one wants to produce biohydrogen [wikipedia.org] or use an existing fuel cell in a car, or put the hydrogen in a car, or use it with a Giacomini water heater [giacomini.com]? The price might be less than triple that of a powerwall if one could purchase their metal hydride storage à la carte.
  • by swillden ( 191260 ) <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:40PM (#60626494) Journal

    Three Powerwalls would give you 40.5 kWh of storage for $21k, vs 40 kWh for $24k for this hydrogen storage system. Unless they can bring the price down, this doesn't make sense purely on a cost basis.

    • Plus you have to consume water AND you have significantly lower round trip efficiency due to conversion from water and lower efficiency of fuel cells. PLUS the question as to if the electrolysis and fuel cells will really last as many cycles as as Powerwall. Just the water thing and reduced efficiency for the same cost seems to makes it a bad idea. The system has more moving parts so it almost HAS to have a high failure rate. I can't imagine having constantly fresh supplies of water and hydrogen running thr
      • If the hydrogen system really could do 40kwh for $24k then it would be attractive. Presumably that would mean 400kwh for $25K -- the only thing you need for more storage is a bigger tank. The max discharge current might be an issue.

        The amount of water required is tiny. Not an issue compared to flushing toilets.

        Efficiency actually does not matter much. Solar panels produce lots and lots of energy, but only during the day. And there are cloudy and rainy days were a really big tank would be helpful.

        And fi

        • Presumably that would mean 400kwh for $25K -- the only thing you need for more storage is a bigger tank

          10X the size for $1k additional cost? I doubt that. Storing hydrogen is non-trivial. The tank is likely one of the most expensive parts of the system. Of course volume increases faster than surface area (and hence materials required) so you probably can scale it 10X for less than 10X the cost. It may be that the reason 40 kWh is the minimum size is because they have to scale it up that far to be even close to price-competitive on a per-kWh basis. So at larger storage capacities it probably does become cheap

    • Lets face it you aren't buying this OR a powerwall on cost basis. If that is the deciding factor you would not get either.
      • Lets face it you aren't buying this OR a powerwall on cost basis. If that is the deciding factor you would not get either.

        I don't see how that's relevant. Whatever the deciding factor, you're still going to pick the most cost-effective of the available options.

        But I think your premise is wrong, too. I'm buying powerwalls (and solar) for financial reasons. The grid in my area is unreliable, to the point that a few weeks ago we were without power for much of a week. I figured out how to wire an 8 kW gas-powered generator I have into the house to keep us limping along, but it wasn't good. I could get a NG-powered home generator

  • We live in the desert

    Using solar to make hydrogen out of water to get electricity is getting into Rube Goldberg territory.

  • by OpinOnion ( 4473025 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @05:52PM (#60626536)
    At about triple the price of a Powerwall, the Lavo unit’s main selling point will be its ability to store more energy for longer. Each system will initially cost A$34,750 ($24,620) and will be able to hold 40 kilowatt-hours of power -- enough to supply an average household for more than two days, according to the company. Tesla’s Powerwall holds about 13.5 kilowatt-hours. FYI 13.5 x 3 happens to equal exactly 40 kilowatt hours WITHOUT endlessly consuming water or needing storage tanks. It sounds like a stupid idea vs the efficiency of ion based energy storage. Do you really think converting water to electricity in a multi stage process that includes converting water to hydrogen, storing it and then having a fuel cell convert it back at the same cost per kilowatt as a Tesla Powerwall makes any sense at all? Even if the hydrogen system was as efficient as the lithium ion system the lithium would still be simpler, more compact, more portable and much easier to install. You're talking about piping water and hydrogen as well as installing solar and fuel cells. That's too much complexity AND you still have to consume water to make all this work, probably potable water since it's a household.
  • Fuel cell efficiency is like 35%, so since this is tech journalism, they mean the energy before losing 65% to heat as it goes through the fuel cell. So that 3x the energy becomes essentially the same as the Powerwall when measuring usable amounts.

    sees it as a solution for small off-grid rural villages to replace diesel generators

    Why not just get a 48kwh LiFePO4 battery today? Get over to Alibaba and order one for $10k, not maybe sorta $25k in maybe sorta 2 years. Batteries that you can charge with solar, losing only ~5% to the inverter. With solar-powered electrolysis you will say goodbye

    • by Guspaz ( 556486 )

      Tesla's raw cell pricing are expected to drop under $100/kWh shortly (they're only slightly above it now). Obviously there's a whole lot more that goes into a powerwall installation than just the batteries, but it kind of goes to show how expensive that incredibly inefficient hydrogen system is.

    • Batteries that you can charge with solar, losing only ~5% to the inverter.

      Sounds nice. Doesn't exist.

      There is a loss when charging the batteries, there is a loss when discharging the batteries, the solar panels' efficiency varies with insolation, and there is a loss when inverting the power. It adds up to more than 5%.

      I'm also not ordering anything expensive from alibaba, too many people have had too many problems with returns.

      • by DavenH ( 1065780 )
        Your money your choice, but if you do the actuarial math you come out way ahead compared to spending 4x as much on a Powerwall or 6x on Battleborn etc

        If we're talking about LFP batteries in particular, round-trip losses are about 10%. Inverters are indeed about 5%, so 0.9 * 0.95 = 15% energy lost. Zooming out, that's compared with (0.5 fuel cell) * (0.7 electrolysis) * (0.95 inverter) = 67% losses of the fuel cell / electrolysis loop.

  • You'd think that anyone tasked with being an editor would have the mental acuity to at least check to see if the linked article is freely available.

    • You'd think that anyone tasked with being an editor would have the mental acuity to at least check to see if the linked article is freely available.

      You must be new here.

  • Just a random thought, haven't looked at the particulars of it at all.
    Would it be possible to pull the hydrogen out of something like natural gas, and have it be overall carbon-neutral?
    • Sure, that is how Hydrogen is made, But what is left over is CO2.

    • There are natural gas fuel cell units. They are connected to city gas and provide power when the power is out... for a while. Eventually the natgas stops being pumped and then they don't work either. You can store natgas pretty efficiently (CNG/LNG) but you need an expensive pump to do that, it's not like the natgas infrastructure in your town delivers it at high pressure. But natgas is not carbon neutral, period. You'd have to use methane from compost or similar, and then you'd also have a membrane to worr

      • Eventually the natgas stops being pumped and then they don't work either.

        Fascinating. It makes sense... But it's never happened to me in Seattle.
        Worst case was a 9 day power outage. Still had gas the whole time. I've never had my gas go out.

  • Yeah, it'll bring hydrogen into your house at approximately...
    *googling*
    Several thousand feet per second when it explodes.
  • Too dangerous to use residentially. This can turn into a fuel-air bomb if things go wrong. Leave hydrogen storage in factories where there's regular maintenance and expert eyes to keep an eye on it.
  • ... is to bind it with another element.

    And then to release it from that binding, you need to consume energy

    So.... how is that supposed to be practical, exactly?

  • Wow. 50% energy loss when O2 is vented from electrolysis tank, and another 30% in the PEM recombination. Sad, 67% losses
  • I'm in a developing South East Asian country, and living a a relative modern city with most of the modern electrical gadgets and appliances including air conditioning. However, my monthly usage is only about 90kWh for my 3 bedroom apartment. So, 40kWh is like almost 2 weeks of energy usage for me!
    • by khchung ( 462899 )

      I'm in a developing South East Asian country, and living a a relative modern city with most of the modern electrical gadgets and appliances including air conditioning. However, my monthly usage is only about 90kWh for my 3 bedroom apartment. So, 40kWh is like almost 2 weeks of energy usage for me!

      With 2 minutes of Google-fu, you can find that the average household electricity consumption of the US or Australia is easily over 10 times that of a typical SE Asian developing country. So, yes, your figures are on the same ballpark.

      https://www.nationmaster.com/c... [nationmaster.com]

      E.g., in 2005:
      United States 4,599.49 kWh
      Australia 2,987.48 kWh
      Thailand 390.68 kWh
      Philippines 186.8 kWh
      Indonesia 183.46 kWh

  • by Nocturrne ( 912399 ) on Monday October 19, 2020 @09:17PM (#60626948)

    Every time I read about new hydrogen energy tech, I get the feeling it is just a secret play by the oil industry to keep us all using oil and gas - oil and gas are the easiest sources of hydrogen, after all.

  • I live in a Zeppelin, you insensitive clod!
  • It is called Redflow Z cell [solarquotes.com.au]. They are safer and more durable than Li-something chemistries. Currently more expensive than the lithium batteries, but I think this is down to volume and automation.
  • Hydrogen is very volatile and hard to store, having a container with hydrogen in your home is not something that should be taken lightly, a lot of accidents already happen with regular gas lines/containers at home. a small leak might turn into a big disaster.
  • This seems fairly idiotic.

    If you want less than 50% round trip efficiency, why not just install good ol tough as nails nickel-iron batteries.

    They last at LEAST 30 years, don't require exotic materials, and don't even require a BMS.

    It's bad when low efficiency, low tech solutions seem superior to your fancy new tech hydrogen.

    • This seems fairly idiotic.

      If you want less than 50% round trip efficiency, why not just install good ol tough as nails nickel-iron batteries.

      They last at LEAST 30 years, don't require exotic materials, and don't even require a BMS.

      It's bad when low efficiency, low tech solutions seem superior to your fancy new tech hydrogen.

      This makes a very important point. Energy density need not be an issue for stationary power storage. This is unlike mobile energy storage, in mobile phones and EVs for example. From an ecology point of view, nickel-iron looks like a winner. One problem with the economics of high-tech energy storage is that the externalities of manufacturing and decommissioning the batteries might be neglected.

      I am assuming here that the installation costs of a low energy density storage system are acceptable. Bury the batte

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Working...