Comments by "build Motosykletist" (@buildmotosykletist1987) on "Hydrogen industry booms in Port Kembla" video.

@waza987 : I think we broadly agree. Hydrogen is a safe, green, transportable, convenient source of energy. I think many people do not understand how, where, etc it will be used. Some seem to think it's a source of baseload power. It could be in rare circumstances, a bit like diesel is currently used as baseload power in some circumstances. I'm focused on it's use in heavy transport (shipping, trains, trucks, etc) where it is an excellent power source. Also many think it will be used in combustion engines, that will not be a major usage.
2
@Kevin... : Hydrogen is only one small part of that future. We will need all parts required.
1
@George Mann : Mate, I strongly suggest a bit of reading about Hydrogen and modern technologies. I love a 'Top Fuel' drag car as much as anyone but they are not representative of any practical use.
1
@George Mann : I just realised. You still think of hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion engines (ICE). No most uses will not involve combustion. [EDIT: do a bit of reading about 'Hydrogen Fuel Cells'. HTH, cheers, mate. ]
1
@George Mann : I'll leave you in your methanol orbit.
1
@George Mann : Hydrogen is "H". Why do you keep writing "H2" ???
1
@George Mann : LOL. So what about "H3" as in "NH3" Mate look up the periodic table.
1
@George Mann : Stop messing around in circles using strawman arguments to distract from your silly representation of Hydrogen as "H2", it is not. Is Nitrogen "N2"? No it's not. Hydrogen is "H" and Nitrogen is "N". Your confusion comes from trying to be a search engine expert. It does not work if you are in discussion with an educated person. I'll help you out again. To untangle your confusion try a search for "Molecular Formula". "H2" is the 'Molecular Formula' for Hydrogen. While you are at it search "ammonia as a fuel".
1
@Adam... : We use hydrogen for power here in Australia. Which type of power were you referring to?
1
@thisis... : No.
1
So you are saying coal is not a source of energy? That is sort of true I suppose but then coal is also "a medium for storing and/or transporting energy."
1
@waza987 : BTW. Too many people forget the basics that they were taught in school. (to express it very badly) All energy was created in the 'big bang' and cannot be created or destroyed. It can only be changed or transformed into something else but the energy still remains. [EDIT: Search "Energy" in wikipedia. ]
1
@Whoisthis1111 : Hydrogen cars are electric. They charge in minutes, electric takes hours, long hours if charged at home. Also your numbers are very debatable. That said, the jury is out on which will be adapted. Perhaps both, perhaps mostly one. Who knows at this time, the market will eventually decide.
1
@George Mann : Why isn't Hydrogen safe ? It is quite safe and easy to transport.
1
@Whoisthis1111 : BTW mate, by "effective" I am presuming you mean "efficient" or calorific value. Your 40% number for "fossil fuels" is not accurate because there is a huge discrepancy between say wood and coal, etc. Most 'petrol' engines are in the 30% range but hybrid engines using 'petrol' can achieve up to 50% and that number is improving rapidly. Electric cars at 90% totally ignores the source of power, losses in transmission and storage, driver skill, etc, which distorts the figure to the point of useless. Jump in a Tesla, turn on full power, hit the gas pedal to the floor and let me know how efficient it is in terms of kilometers. I'm going back to watch my F1 practice. See you.
1
@George Mann : Hydrogen is not "explosive". So you are obviously wrong there. Also hydrogen dissipates incredibly fast, within less than a second to far less than your 4% concentration. So it won't combust as you suggest. As i said before, I suggest you do some reading. Start with the basic science.
1
@George Mann : Some basic science for you: Hydrogen is not explosive. Just search "is hydrogen explosive". HTH, cheers [EDIT: Is flour explosive? An interesting subject. ]
1
@George Mann : I'm glad to help you learn from your mistakes. cheers. [EDIT: Just to clarify. Neither hydrogen or flour are explosive, full stop. They can burn very rapidly which is quite different to exploding. Your search should have revealed that. If not I suggest another try. ]
1
@George Mann : Keep searching, you'll learn eventually. Try searching Wikipedia for "Deflagration" which is not "Detonation" ! Then search Wikipedia for "Detonation" ! So two different things. Deflagration (very fast combustion) is different from detonation, which multiplies or grows, supersonically through shock waves, collapsing a substance extremely quickly. * Hydrogen is not explosive, full stop. * Flour is not explosive, full stop. * Burning rapidly is not explosive, full stop. You are still learning. I should charge you tutoring fees. hth, cheers.
1
@George Mann : SUMMARY OF YOUR LESSON TODAY * Hydrogen is a safe, green, transportable, convenient source of energy. * Hydrogen is not explosive, full stop. * Hydrogen dissipates in air incredibly quickly. * Flour is not explosive, full stop. * Burning rapidly is not an explosion, full stop. I once saw a bloke standing in the middle of a flour "explosion" as it was called in the newspaper. He was not hurt or blown apart or burnt. He was singed slightly. It burned so rapidly it did not produce enough heat to do more than singe the end of his hairs. He did experience a case of sunburn on his exposed skin the next day. The fire was so fast and so short, I wasn't sure if it was flames or a flash of light. BTW. Have you spotted the link between hydrogen "H" and ammonia "NH3"? It's your Tutors bedtime soon, so goodnight.
1
Why would there be a "booming" in the sense you are intimating ?
1
@peterolsen9131 : Except the Hindenburg was not a boom and the fire was not a hydrogen fire. I suggest you look into it.
1