this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023

43 points (83.1% liked)

News

31215 readers

2857 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

rjc@lemmy.world

Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

What is white hydrogen? Scientists say the clean-energy gas could save the world. (www.businessinsider.com)

submitted 2 years ago by Salamendacious@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hydrogen power is an exciting form of clean energy. But hydrogen typically needed to be produced in a lab using energy-intensive methods. White hydrogen, a newly identified hydrogen source, could eliminate the need for lab production.

all 30 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 20 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This really gives off oil company clean coal vibes.

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Why's that? Is it just a feeling or do you think this article is lying about something specific?

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"largest known deposit"

Because they're taking a limited deposit of stuff out of the ground. Again. And when it starts to run out we'll have to dig deeper and pollute more. Again.

This is the easy way. We should have learned by now that's a bad idea.

[–] skeezix@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

I think we should only use organic free range hydrogen .

[–] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I knew there was a new Color coding hydrogen article because I've seen lots of comments in the last day of people talking about it like its been their career for the last 30 year's

[–] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

My favorite hydrogen is dark fuchsia. That's when you capture your flatulences in a pink balloon.

[–] MechanicalJester@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

A hundred years ago the East Coast US village my grandmother grew up in had municipal hydrogen gas supply.

Hydrogen lights, cooking etc.

Crazy huh?

[+] Brainsploosh@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Since burning hydrogen just creates water, no, not really.

[–] Dukeofdummies@kbin.social -2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

... I mean it wouldn't imbalance C02 but you would be adding water. At scale that could be just as bad.

Carbon neutral, yes, but water positive.

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

How would it be just as bad? Water doesn't cause climate change.

If we converted all of the CO2 humans have ever released into water, you'd get around 2.5 times lake superior. I don't see how that would cause much issues.

[–] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Water vapor is a greenhouse gas.

[–] thalience@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Yes, but the amount of it in the air globally is not increased by burning hydrogen. The processes that remove extra water vapor from the atmosphere operate on a much faster time scale than the ones that remove CO2.

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It wouldn't be on it's own though.

Without other greenhouse gases kickstarting the warming process, just adding water vapor to the atmosphere just saturates it faster, slowing natural evaporation of the water cycle, which would eventually just move all the additional water to the ocean.

[–] Dukeofdummies@kbin.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"at scale" it could be just as bad. C02 isn't poisonous the big problem we're dealing with is we're putting C02 from the ground in oil and coal and putting it into the air. We've been adding C02 that was NOT in the environment into the environment.

Yeah some water isn't a bad thing, but if all of a sudden we're adding from sources outside of the water cycle a LOT more water into the atmosphere you've got increased clouds, increased weather patterns, All of a sudden the inland portions of continents can start dumping as much water into the air as a warm ocean, that can DEFINITELY be a problem.

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah, but we're really talking a LOT more water here. Like Noah's ark numbers.

I was talking about an amount equal to what we so far added in CO2, which is would be an insignifcant amount when turned into water.

[–] Perfide@reddthat.com 2 points 2 years ago

Burning Hydrogen produces pure, fresh water, a very scarce resource relatively speaking.

Also, even at scale it's not even a drop in a bucket compared to the oceans.

[–] raunz@mander.xyz 2 points 2 years ago

Water is good for you

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We don't have enough fresh water so that is of limited concern.

The big problem with hydrogen is leaks, which we can't measure well enough yet. But 5% leakage cancels out all the benefits from replacing fossil fuels. And I'd guess hydrogen leaks from natural sources would be even harder to control.

Massive potential from hydrogen but lots of problems to solve.

[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well fuck... it doesn't seem to matter much what we do, we have simply overshot the carrying capacity of the earth, by a lot, and no matter what tech we try to use to solve the problem, the carrying capacity is the one thing we can't solve for, or at least, we can't seem to.

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 3 points 2 years ago

We have more than enough resources to go around, they're just badly distributed. And mostly in the hands of people who have a lot of money tied up in Big Carbon.

We can easily produce enough renewable electricity to replace all fossil fuels. Hydrogen has a role in storing renewables, along with batteries and hydro. We just need to get strict about leaks. And improve transport and housing so that we need less fuel to start with.

[+] Brainsploosh@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Are you suggesting we're going to flood the world if we use hydrogen fuel?

[–] theKalash@feddit.ch 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

But burning coal just creates CO2, which every animal breathes out anyway?

Not quite. There is a CO2 cycle similar to the water cycle. Basically plants/algea absorb CO2 from the atmosphere then animals eat those, burn it and release it back in a somewhat balanced way.

Burning coal and other fossile fuel is adding large quantities of CO2 to the air that were previously stored. And it doesn't take a lot of CO2 to mess things up (we only messure it in parts per million). So just burning the stored coal almost doubled the CO2 in our atmosphere, which is a big deal.

On the other hand, adding a few lake superiors to the ocean is literally a drop in the bucket.