Researchers discover safe, easy, and affordable way to store and retrieve hydrogen

[Jim__]

From phys.org

Reversible changes in color and crystal structures during storage and extraction of ammonia through chemical conversion. Credit: RIKEN
_______________________________________________________________________________________________


Researchers at the RIKEN Center for Emergent Matter Science (CEMS) in Japan have discovered a compound that uses a chemical reaction to store ammonia, potentially offering a safer and easier way to store this important chemical.

This discovery, published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society on July 10, makes it possible not only to safely and conveniently store ammonia, but also the important hydrogen is carries. This finding should help lead the way to a decarbonized society with a practical hydrogen economy.

For society to make the switch from carbon-based to hydrogen-based energy, we need a safe way to store and transport hydrogen, which by itself is highly combustible. One way to do this is to store it as part of another molecule and extract it as needed. Ammonia, chemically written as NH3, makes a good hydrogen carrier because three hydrogen atoms are packed into each molecule, with almost 20% of ammonia being hydrogen by weight.

The problem, however, is that ammonia is a highly corrosive gas, making it difficult to store and use. Currently, ammonia is generally stored by liquefying it at temperatures well below freezing in pressure-resistant containers. Porous compounds can also store ammonia at room temperature and pressure, but storage capacity is low, and the ammonia cannot always be retrieved easily.

more ...

[Irish_Dem]

1. Our oligarch overlords will not permit easy and free sources of energy.

Or perhaps they will figure out a way to still grift off of it.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. This is about hydrogen storage, not about sources of energy. . . . nt

[Irish_Dem]

7. So all the talk about hydrogen has nothing to do with energy?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. This thread was about storing hydrogen energy, not producing hydrogen

It is just that the post of yours that I responded to, which was a response to the OP, seemed not to notice that the OP was about storage, not sources. So I clarified.

It is a completely illogical conclusion to state that "So all the talk about hydrogen has nothing to do with energy?". Nobody thinks that, it does not follow from what I wrote, and I don't think you should believe it either.

You are of course free to go off on tangents about production and sources as you wish, but storage is not production and production is not storage. I was simply declaring that there is a distinction.

Threads live lives of their own, tangents are common, and you should go forward with whatever discussion you like about hydrogen as energy.

[Think. Again.]

2. Yet another step forward...

We continue to make leaps and bounds in the tech necessary to get us off of fossil fuels, but we still have to battle the opposition BS that CO2 industry conitnues to spew.

For example, in the article above, perhaps unnoticed is the line "For society to make the switch from carbon-based to hydrogen-based energy, we need a safe way to store and transport hydrogen, which by itself is highly combustible."

Since when has "highly combustible" been a problem with gasoline, oil, and natural gas storage and transport????

[BComplex]

3. Good point.

Yep.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

6. Hydrogen combustibility is different, both good and bad

H2 gas rises and doesn't creep along the ground like gasoline vapors. Good.

Hydrogen, especially pressurized, attacks (eats into) metal tubing, piping, fittings, valves and tanks. Unlike oil and gas. Not good.

Hydrogen possesses the NFPA 704's highest rating of 4 on the flammability scale because it is flammable when mixed even in small amounts with ordinary air; ignition can occur at a volumetric ratio of hydrogen to air as low as 4% due to the oxygen in the air and the simplicity and chemical properties of the reaction. However, hydrogen has no rating for innate hazard for reactivity or toxicity. The storage and use of hydrogen poses unique challenges due to its ease of leaking as a gaseous fuel, low-energy ignition, wide range of combustible fuel-air mixtures, buoyancy, and its ability to embrittle metals that must be accounted for to ensure safe operation.[1]

[Think. Again.]

9. materials to store and transport hydrogen....

...have been figured out and are still improvingg

https://astforgetech.com/how-to-store-transport-hydrogen-the-ultimate-guide/

[thatdemguy]

5. I will admit I am anti hydrogen. read below

Last edited Mon Jul 10, 2023, 11:23 AM - Edit history (1)

I am against hydrogen for a few reasons. One the most economical way to get it is nat gas and the only by product of that is Co2.

It is very energy intensive to get it any other way. It has a very low energy density even when at cryo temps. The best use is in fuel cells, which do make sense in cars.

Read the below USDOE on trying to use ammonia in anything beyond and industrial setting for hydrogen storage. By the time you you make hydrogen, convert it to ammonia and then convert it back its a loss of engery

opps forgot the link
https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/articles/potential-roles-ammonia-hydrogen-economy#:~:text=Ammonia%20can%20be%20decomposed%20(cracked,toxic%2C%20non%2Dgreenhouse%20gas.

[Think. Again.]

8. yes...

Loss of energy occurs whenever energy is transferred from one medium to another.

Hydrogen is, at this important moment, the only non-CO2 portable fuel we have. Yes, it doesn't have the efficiency of fossil fuels but it does have positive energy output even so.

We were using fossil fuels because of their efficiency, but we need to stop using fossil fuels because of CO2 emissions. Hydrogen does have less efficiency but more importantly does NOT emit CO2.

It isn't a question of whether we should displace fossil fuels with hydrogen but how quickly we can do it.

[thatdemguy]

11. More than a loss of energy at each stage, its a loss over all

You lose some around around 20% over all meaning to get 100 unit of energy from hydrogen you use 120 unit of energy to get the hydrogen.

If your using nat gas feed stock to get the hydrogen you might as well burn the nat gas. You get like 3 times the energy and the same co2 output.

If your breaking down water you use 5 times the energy for the amount of hydrogen you get. The only green way to get hydrogen is solar power, and you much better off using the solar to just make electricity for use, as you get twice the amount of energy.

Hydrogen is not dead as an energy storage means, but there is very little legit reasons for it. One of the few is being able to use generated electrical power that is not being used. Aka all the power plants running in stand by for when wind and solar does not met the demand.

[Think. Again.]

13. My apologies...

You write: If your using nat gas feed stock to get the hydrogen you might as well burn the nat gas. You get like 3 times the energy and the same co2 output.

My aplogies, I thought it was understood that if we are trying to stop using fossil fuels, we would not be using natural gas to create the hydrogen.

You also write: The only green way to get hydrogen is solar power, and you much better off using the solar to just make electricity for use, as you get twice the amount of energy.

Yes, getting hydrogen from solar, wind, hydro, or nuclear are the only ways to get hydrogen without using fossil fuels, that is the goal. However hydrogen as a portable storage medium serves purposes that the electricity directly produced from those sources can not provide, we will need to have portable stored energy for vehicles of all sizes, off grid applications of all types, and consistant energy output when intermittent sources like solar and wind are powering the grid, to continue to displace fossil fuels

[hunter]

10. Why would we want to do this?

It's some interesting chemistry, but seriously -- toxic lead, ammonia, conversion losses...



How could this possibly relate to a decarbonized society with a practical hydrogen economy?

That's some complete fantasy land stuff.

[Think. Again.]

14. we will need to...

We will need to displace CO2 emitting energy with non-CO2 emitting energy sources and the variety of ways that energy can be stored, such as what the article discusses, will need to be explored for their potential uses, benefits, and drawbacks.