The energy thread

Catfish · 09-08-22, 04:03 AM

@Mapuc: The new australian invention produces hydrogen by a special type of "solar cell", directly. So these are not only normal solar cells, they get the necessary energy by sunlight and directly produce hydrogen, and lots of it. They already are the power plant.

"The device is estimated to produce up to 93 litres of hydrogen a square metre an hour.“
"So if you have 10 sq metres of this unit, you can power a whole house … to replace your consumption of natural gas at home for cooking and heating"
I cannot quite imagine this is true, but ... 93 litres of hydrogen an hour per square meter! Probably only under optimal conditions (strong sunlight, moist air), but this alone is a full tank for a contemporary car.

Seeing is believing, of course.

re Nuclear plants i am all for letting the german three ones work longer, after all the environmental damage has already been done, from impact of the total energy ballance to heating up rivers, to burning 160 kgs of enriched uranium a day (that have to be dumped somewhere), to all accidents, and the risks remaining when trying to dismantle them (hint: you cannot).
The way humanity uses nuclear energy is 70 years old, using nuclear energy to power steam engines. This is ridiculous and dangerous.
But Habeck is not informed enough to decide this, imho. You cannot switch reactors on and off, they need weeks to power up properly, and likewise to cool down. Ballancing the daily electric load by a combination of pump settings, uranium rod managing and steam turbines alone is hazardous.
This kind of powerplant is still unsafe, even without external disasters like in Fukushima. Better not think of the inherent unstable and unsafe russian reactors, some new ones now being built in Hungary

So ok let the german ones run a year more and then see what has happened to energy production, and if alternative methods can then replace them AND coal plants.

09-08-22, 04:03 AM	#11
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,801 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	@Mapuc: The new australian invention produces hydrogen by a special type of "solar cell", directly. So these are not only normal solar cells, they get the necessary energy by sunlight and directly produce hydrogen, and lots of it. They already are the power plant. "The device is estimated to produce up to 93 litres of hydrogen a square metre an hour.“ "So if you have 10 sq metres of this unit, you can power a whole house … to replace your consumption of natural gas at home for cooking and heating" I cannot quite imagine this is true, but ... 93 litres of hydrogen an hour per square meter! Probably only under optimal conditions (strong sunlight, moist air), but this alone is a full tank for a contemporary car. Seeing is believing, of course. re Nuclear plants i am all for letting the german three ones work longer, after all the environmental damage has already been done, from impact of the total energy ballance to heating up rivers, to burning 160 kgs of enriched uranium a day (that have to be dumped somewhere), to all accidents, and the risks remaining when trying to dismantle them (hint: you cannot). The way humanity uses nuclear energy is 70 years old, using nuclear energy to power steam engines. This is ridiculous and dangerous. But Habeck is not informed enough to decide this, imho. You cannot switch reactors on and off, they need weeks to power up properly, and likewise to cool down. Ballancing the daily electric load by a combination of pump settings, uranium rod managing and steam turbines alone is hazardous. This kind of powerplant is still unsafe, even without external disasters like in Fukushima. Better not think of the inherent unstable and unsafe russian reactors, some new ones now being built in Hungary So ok let the german ones run a year more and then see what has happened to energy production, and if alternative methods can then replace them AND coal plants. __________________ >^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.