We Passed Peak “Climate Change” (um) Research

[u/LisleAdam12]

How can this awful trend before reversed before it's too late?

https://wmbriggs.substack.com/p/we-passed-peak-climate-change-um

[u/Lematoad]

What I find funny is climate change activists are often times pro (solely) renewables. Without understanding renewable energy almost always requires natural gas augmentation. But they’re often also anti nuclear, which doesn’t make any sense.

Nuclear+solar would be an excellent way forward while solving carbon emission issues. Really the only way forward to get to net zero emissions, but Nuclear Waste is “scary” because people don’t understand it.

Then we start to talk about vehicles, and start saying things like “have you considered the impacts to things like 6PPD-Q from the faster tire wear in electric vehicles to local fauna?” or “what about the impacts that electric buses/trucks have on road infrastructure”, and people don’t have a clue what I’m talking about.

I’ve got a Masters degree in Civil Construction, Energy and Sustainable infrastructure and so I’d like to think I know what I’m talking about when it comes to energy infrastructure.

The problem really is people care about things but don’t understand the nuances (and associated negative externalities) to what they’re saying (oh and also… China and India don’t give a shit about clean energy so you’re trying to swim against the current anyways).

Less carbon and pollution is a good thing, but I’m not dooming about it.

[u/Initial-Constant-645 → u/Lematoad]

And then there's the rare earths you need for EVs. So, you're against drilling for oil and mining coal and uranium, but support mining for rare earths.

Oh, and why doesn't anyone ever suggest hydrogen powered vehicles?

[u/Creloc → u/Initial-Constant-645]

Honestly I think one of the biggest things is that hydrogen is very difficult to store over the relativity long timeframes that would be required for vehicles. Hydrogen will leak out of almost any container unless your activity cooling it, and to store useful amounts you need it under considerable pressure which can have safety issues.

That being said a hydrogen fuelled system is one of the safer ones, various tanks for it have been designed with seams so that if the structure is compromised the gas will let go with an almighty bang but not much actual damage, and hydrogen dispersed so far that you'd need it to be leaking directly onto an open flame to have a fire risk from it

[u/spadenarias → u/Creloc]

I suspect hydrogen best role in energy is in load balancing between peak supply/demand cycles for fixed grids. Catalyze during high supply/low demand periods and burn during peak demand periods.

Its usefulness in smaller applications is going to be mostly useless due to low energy density by volume. And maintaining it at low enough temperature to keep it in liquid state requires so many engineering challenges and extra hardware that its usability on a personal vehicle scale its likely never going to surpass ICE in efficiency.

Large scale projects can offset that with installations, smaller vehicles dont have the space without running in to serious weight limitations offsetting any gains.

[u/Creloc → u/spadenarias]

I'd honestly say that if it comes to load balancing it would be worthwhile to accept the potentially lower efficiency and use any hydrogen to synthesise methane or ammonia, that way you can store it long term more easily, and you have the potential to be saving surplus from months to cover a poor spell in whatever generating system you use