Ford’s electric F-150 pickup truck

[freebeard]

Even then?

American Gas Association
Natural Gas is Taking America to the Moon, Mars, and Beyond
Apr 11, 2023What you might not know is that Starship is fueled by natural gas. Starship is intended to be a fully reusable super heavy-lift launch vehicle, capable of transporting 100 tons of cargo to orbit, with a target cost of $10 per kilogram. ... For comparison, the Space Shuttle Columbia cost approximately $65,400 per kilogram transported to orbit ...

Blue Origin
New Glenn | Blue Origin
The vehicle is powered by seven of the most powerful liquid oxygen (LOX) / liquefied natural gas (LNG)-fueled oxygen-rich staged combustion engines ever flown. Each BE-4 engine is reusable and generates 550,000 lbf (2,450 kN) thrust at sea level with deep-throttle capability.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

There is zero reason to turn natural gas into hydrogen to power vehicles. It is far cleaner and cheaper just to use the natural gas directly.

Quite common in countries such as Argentina, and even in some parts of Brazil.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Quite common in countries such as Argentina, and even in some parts of Brazil.

Natural gas had a little bit of momentum in the USA during the 00's before dying to a niche in the medium and heavy duty truck segment. It can make financial sense in the right application.

The initial boom died when a lot of electricity generation in the USA shifted to natural gas and prices went up.

If I'm not mistaken a lot of propane and natural gas vehicles is South America are aftermarket conversions. We used to have some small companies do them in the USA but that dried up when EPA and CARB started cracking down on them.

[Piotrsko]

There are still converters doing natgas for fleets of busses and trash trucks in cities other than left coast. All our muni equipment is because you grt 250-300 k miles between overhaul and couple thousand more mile between oil changes. Since mechanics are hard to hire anymore........

[aerohead]

This was the title of yesterday's 'ENERGY SWITCH', TV program, from the University of Texas, at Austin, Texas, hosted by scientist, Scott Tinker.
His guests were Dr. Steve Hamburg, and Dr. Julio Friedman, both involved in the hydrogen question.
* Presently, China leads the world in hydrogen production.
* Presently, 'all' hydrogen is 'not carbon-neutral', produced from 'methane', referred to as 'Gray-hydrogen.'
* The production of 1-kg of gray hydrogen emits 22-kg of carbon dioxide.
* Hydrogen itself is a 'potent' greenhouse gas, and nobody knows how much 'rogue' hydrogen is released to the atmosphere each year.
* 'Green-hydrogen' manufactured from electrolysis using renewable energy doesn't presently exist.
* 'Blue-hydrogen', manufactured by steam-reforming of natural gas ( methane ) presently does not exist.
* 'Pink-hydrogen', manufactured by hydrolysis using nuclear power plant electricity presently does not exist.
* Presently, 1,000-miles of hydrogen pipeline exists in the USA.
* Presently, 'Industrial process-heat' for:
- Steelmaking
- Chemicals
- Glass-making
- Heavy trucking
- Heavy shipping
cannot be satisfied with 'electricity,' and if could be satisfied with 'hydrogen,' would reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions by 7%.
* Using hydrogen fuel-cells where 'batteries' can be used is considered a non-starter on account of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
* Fuel-cells for a typical 18-wheeler would cost $ 90,000 ( US ).
* So far, from 1975, to 2025, 'hydrogen' has never taken off, as a
business model ( 50-years ).
* The notion of 'Government Procurement' as a market-pull mechanism for kick-starting the hydrogen industry was tosse4d out, although, in light of the present White House, that may be dead on arrival as a concept.
* In order to hit the 20%- 30% energy target by 2050, requires annual production of 730,000,000-tons of hydrogen.
* 'Hydrogen 'HUBS'' would be required in existing 'Cancer-Alley' industrial petro-chemical locations, asking area residents to accept 'another' industry, where they already suffer inordinate levels of pollution-related health challenges.
* Some of the talking points by Hamburg and Friedman:
-1,000-X scale-up
- efficiency
- hydrogen -to- synthetic jet fuel
- land use restraints
- cost effectiveness
- needs
- market
- scalability
- equitability
- theoretical
- realistic
- carbon pricing
- incentives ( production credits, grants, policy )
- penalties
- inclusion of all, presently-omitted externalities into the calculus, in order to create a truly- level playing field among players
- limits
- we don't have 'longer'
- we need 'bigger'
- price-points
- both agreed that:
* create pilot plants
* collect data
* get 'clarity'
* then use to make decisions / policy

[freebeard]

Two new electrocatalysts.
phys.org: Nanoscale tin catalyst discovery paves way for sustainable CO₂ conversion

Tom Burwell, ...said, "We can assess the performance of the catalyst by measuring the electrical current consumed by the reacting CO2 molecules. Typically, catalysts degrade during use, resulting in decreased activity.

"Surprisingly, we observed the current flowing through tin on nanotextured carbon increased continuously over 48 hours. Analysis of the reaction products confirmed nearly all electrons were utilized to reduce CO2 to formate, boosting productivity by a factor of 3.6 while maintaining nearly 100% selectivity."

phys.org: Dual-site catalyst transforms CO₂ into renewable methanol

Zhenxing Feng and Alvin Chang of the OSU College of Engineering helped characterize a novel electrocatalyst developed by collaborators at Yale University and helped explain the improved efficiency for deriving methanol from carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that's largely responsible for global climate change.
...
The researchers' dual-site catalyst is the result of combining two different catalytic sites at adjacent locations, separated by about 2 nanometers, on carbon nanotubes and represents a significant improvement over previous single-site catalysts.

The new design increases the methanol production rate and results in a higher Faradaic efficiency of 50%, meaning less of the electricity used to catalyze the reaction is wasted. The previous single-site version operated at less than 30%.