Thanks Henry, once again, an excellent explanation. Sounds a bit analogous
to the heat pump vs heating an electrical element kinda scenario.
Troy.
-----Original Message-----On
From: arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:arocket-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Behalf Of Henry Spencerbut its
Sent: Tuesday, 2 March 2021 12:03 PM
To: Arocket List <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AR] hydrogen and electrolysis (was Re: ammonia borane)
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021, Troy Prideaux wrote:
I was under the impression that electrolysis was >80% efficient now.
I've heard some numbers >85%
My understanding is that electrolysis could still stand some improving,
efficiency is not really the problem. Even 100%-efficient electrolysiswould still
be hideously energy-intensive. There are just an almighty shipload :-) ofbrute
electrons in each kilogram of matter, and rearranging them by electrical
force is inherently costly. Chemical fuels store tremendous amounts ofenergy
by electrical standards.up
It's *much* easier to do such rearrangements if pushing one set of atoms
the energy hill, e.g. prying electrons off oxygen and putting them backonto
hydrogen where they came from, can be paid for by letting another bunchslide
downhill, e.g. by having C donate electrons to oxygens and turn into CO2.(If
you quietly disregard the fact that you have to get the C from somewhereand
put the CO2 somewhere else.)
Henry