Something to keep in mind when hearing about hydrogen as a renewable or green fuel is that nearly half of hydrogen production, worldwide, comes from natural gas. Another 45% or so come from coal and oil sources. Renewable hydrogen - electrolysis, generally - is basically a blip.
Hydrogen is, in many cases, an attempt _by the fossil fuels industry_ to carry on business as usual in the face of carbon-reduction initiatives by putting the carbonaceous parts out of sight.
Steam reforming and other techniques for squeezing hydrogen out of fossil fuels aren't worthless; one of the outputs of steam reformed methane is longer-chain hydrocarbons, for example, which are useful. (It also kicks out a lot of carbon mon- and dioxide.)
However, hydrogen as a platform won't solve the problem of being dependent on fossil fuels within the foreseeable future.
@owen Something else I don’t hear people mentioning enough is that hydrogen also slots in “nicely” with fossil fuels in regards to centralized production, requiring transportation infrastructure, refueling stations, etc. You can’t make hydrogen in your own house. It keeps energy centralized and scarce and profitable
@Hypx @owen @danirabbit I make hydrogen in my intestines, but that doesn't make it economically feasible to power a vehicle. Yes, you can make it at home in dozens of ways, including electrolysis, none of them close to efficient. Cracking the hydrogen from hydrocarbons in the only cost-efficient way, which is why we make it that way now.
@shuttersparks
@owen @danirabbit
Same crap that people said about wind and solar.
In the end, you're literally combining sunlight and wind with water and making a fuel with it. The cost floor of that idea is literally zero. Any sort of fundamental analysis will reveal that this is both inexhaustible and has the ability to be cheaper than any other idea. No other idea could even be as good in the long-run.