Відео

I believe its the stadis 450 static additive they are using, it contains barium elements. and I think excess use of this and the barium is reacting with the vapour. I've noticed flights at 30000ft don't leave trails but ones above 33000ft do. I've noticed the warming effect of the spreading trails. knew most of this 15 years ago just not the technical side, thanks ✌✌

Thank god

Please do something similar for SAF

So what investments does this fellow have in renewables? The energy transition we're facing in Australia is critically important, and we must consider all angles carefully. The current push towards wind and solar dominance in our energy mix is proving more challenging than initially anticipated. Firstly, the infrastructure required for large-scale wind and solar farms faces significant hurdles. We're seeing unexpected social resistance in rural communities where these projects are planned. Concerns about land use, visual impacts, and potential effects on local ecosystems exist. These aren't just NIMBY issues - they reflect real concerns about how we're reshaping our landscape. Economically, the costs of this transition are ballooning. The grid upgrades required to handle intermittent power sources are far more extensive and expensive than initially projected. We're also finding that the lifespan of some renewable technologies is shorter than hoped, leading to higher replacement costs. Environmental challenges are emerging, too. The raw materials required for solar panels and batteries have their ecological footprint. We're trading one form of environmental impact for another. If we continue down this path without addressing these issues, we risk creating an energy system that's unreliable and prohibitively expensive. This could have severe long-term consequences for both households and industry. Energy-intensive industries might relocate to countries with more stable and affordable power, leading to job losses and economic decline. If we can't provide reliable, affordable energy over a 100-year timeframe, we risk becoming an economic backwater. Our standard of living would decline significantly as energy costs consume more of household budgets and all industries struggle to hold a competitive edge. We need to reevaluate our approach. We should consider more singular long-term low-emission technology like nuclear power. Even technological advances with coal, of which Australia has reserves for 1,500 years, can be acceptable. The stakes are too high to commit fully to a plan that is already showing significant flaws. Our goal should be an energy transition that maintains or improves our standard of living, supports our industries, and achieves our highest priorities in economic goals. The current path risks failing on all three counts. We need a robust, national discussion without ideological misinformation or personal gain; it's about our energy future and considering all options and their long-term implications. The Australian parliament is elected to improve Australian lives, not to send them back to the bush caves where the only mark of their existence may one day be handprints on a rock wall. Therefore, what guarantees does the current Prime Minister give that the future of Australia will be affordable to every citizen? The theme here is nonsense in the long term. Seems they are preaching to the converted. Lastly, hydrogen in Australia is dead.

Green hydrogen is one of the eventualities of an all green portfolio. Green steel, green aluminum, green ceramics, green ammonia, green heat, et cetera, are among the many others. This idea that all hydrogen can only be green hydrogen, from today, is either a misreading, or poor understanding of modern initiatives.

Hydrogen is not to be used to make grid electricity, in principle. So, the theme of the talk is a bit off from what global governments are seeking. However, some plants that have surplus electricity are making hydrogen to power turbines for peak power uses. These collocation moves are quite sound. Grids are going to go with massless means for generation for the most part.

H2 has the performance of 2 or 3 gallons of gas, in some passenger cars. There are 3.78 liters to a gallon. So, performance parity may, in fact, already be here.

Excellent talk gathering so many of the fundamentals for why H2 is only applicable in 'edge cases'. I wish the lectures were this interesting when I was a student there!

Air to water heat pumps are off the shelf all over the world and are ideally suited to replace a gas boiler with hydronic heating. They can hit any temperature you want. They have been available for 20 years in the US and Asia. Piece of cake.

🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:00 *🤵 Einführung in Michael Liebreichs Rolle und Vorbereitung auf die Diskussion über Wasserstoff* - Einführung von Michael Liebreich und Erwähnung seiner früheren Rollen und Beiträge zur Energieeffizienz. - Michael Liebreichs Ankündigung, dass er möglicherweise kritische Ansichten zu Wasserstoff äußern wird. - Erwähnung einer vorherigen Vorlesung und die Erwartung einer Antwort darauf. 02:28 *📘 Diskussion über die Faszination und Herausforderungen von Wasserstoff als Energiequelle* - Diskussion der historischen und zukünftigen Rolle von Wasserstoff in der Energiewirtschaft. - Zitate von Jules Vern und John Omar über die Potenziale von Wasserstoff. - Kritische Betrachtung der realen Fortschritte und der wirtschaftlichen Herausforderungen von Wasserstoffprojekten. 06:04 *🌍 Globale Wasserstoffstrategien und ihre Auswirkungen* - Analyse der weltweiten Einführung von Wasserstoffstrategien und der Bemühungen um eine Dekarbonisierung. - Beispiele für nationale Wasserstoffstrategien und deren Ambitionen. - Diskussion über die Herausforderungen bei der Umsetzung dieser Strategien und die geringe Nutzung von grünem Wasserstoff. 10:32 *🔧 Vergleich von Wasserstoff mit anderen Technologien und die metaphorische Nutzung des Schweizer Taschenmessers* - Vergleich der Vielseitigkeit von Wasserstoff mit einem Schweizer Taschenmesser und die begrenzte praktische Anwendung. - Diskussion über die spezifischen Anwendungen, in denen Wasserstoff vorteilhaft sein könnte. - Kritik an der Überbewertung von Wasserstoff in der öffentlichen und politischen Diskussion. 14:12 *🚌 Anwendungen von Wasserstoff in Transportmitteln und die Probleme bei der Marktdurchdringung* - Analyse des Einsatzes von Wasserstoff in Transportmitteln wie Bussen und Zügen. - Erwähnung spezifischer Projekte und deren Scheitern bzw. geringe Erfolgsrate. - Kritische Bewertung der Zukunftsaussichten von Wasserstoff in diesem Sektor. 17:09 *💸 Wirtschaftliche Unterstützung für Wasserstoffprojekte und die Schwierigkeit der Umsetzung* - Diskussion über die finanzielle Förderung von Wasserstoffprojekten und die mangelnde Realisierung trotz erheblicher Subventionen. - Erwähnung der großen Anzahl an Strategien und Projekten, die nicht zur Ausführung kommen. - Analyse der Gründe für das Scheitern vieler Wasserstoffinitiativen trotz umfangreicher Förderungen. 25:34 *💸 Wirtschaftliche Herausforderungen bei der Produktion von grünem Wasserstoff* - Diskussion über die Senkung der Produktionskosten von grünem Wasserstoff und die Schwierigkeit, bedeutende Kostensenkungen zu erreichen. - Elektrizität macht einen großen Anteil der Kosten aus; Unsicherheit, ob die Kosten um den Faktor 10 sinken können. - Die Bedeutung der Kapitalkosten und der begrenzte Einfluss der Reduktion der Elektrolyseurkosten auf die Gesamtkosten. 27:10 *🚢 Transport von flüssigem Wasserstoff und dessen Wirtschaftlichkeit* - Erörterung der physischen und wirtschaftlichen Herausforderungen beim weltweiten Transport von flüssigem Wasserstoff. - Vergleich von Wasserstoff mit herkömmlichen Kraftstoffen in Bezug auf Gewicht und Volumen. - Skepsis bezüglich der Machbarkeit des Transports großer Mengen flüssigen Wasserstoffs über See. 31:17 *🔄 Effizienz und Wirtschaftlichkeit der Wasserstoffumwandlung und -transport über lange Strecken* - Analyse der Effizienz von Prozessen zur Umwandlung von Wasserstoff in Ammoniak und dessen Rückumwandlung in Energie. - Niedrige End-zu-End-Effizienz bei der Umwandlung von Windenergie in nutzbare Energie in Europa durch Ammoniak. - Diskussion über die Kosten und die praktische Umsetzung von Wasserstoffimporten nach Europa durch Pipelines als einzige wirtschaftliche Methode. 36:07 *🔋 Speicherung von Wasserstoff und dessen Einsatz zur Energiespeicherung* - Betrachtung der Herausforderungen und Möglichkeiten der Wasserstoffspeicherung und dessen Verwendung für die Energiesicherheit. - Diskussion über kleine und große Skalenspeicherlösungen für Wasserstoff. - Die Notwendigkeit, integrierte Systemlösungen zu finden, die alle Aspekte der Wasserstoffspeicherung und -verwendung abdecken. 01:12:43 *🏠 Diskussion über die Elektrifizierung von Heizsystemen und Herausforderungen in der Wärmeversorgung* - Debatte über die Massenadoption von Wärmepumpen und notwendige Gebäudeverbesserungen im Vereinigten Königreich. - Betonung der Notwendigkeit, technologische Störungen zu überwinden, die von etablierten Energielösungen ausgehen. - Darstellung von Wärmepumpen als ökonomisch und physikalisch vorteilhafte Lösung trotz hoher Anfangskosten. 01:16:01 *🌍 Ausführliche Analyse der Potenziale und Herausforderungen von Wärmepumpentechnologien* - Detaillierte Erklärung der Kostenstrukturen und Installationsprozesse für Wärmepumpen in verschiedenen Haustypen. - Diskussion über die Senkung der Hardware- und Installationskosten durch direkten Vertrieb und vereinfachte Systeme. - Hinweise auf politische und steuerliche Hindernisse, die die Verbreitung von Wärmepumpen erschweren, aber bereits überwindbar sind. 01:18:05 *🛠️ Technische Lösungen und Anpassungen für den Einsatz von Hochtemperatur-Wärmepumpen in anspruchsvollen Umgebungen* - Diskussion über die Eignung von Hochtemperatur-Wärmepumpen für historische und schwierig zu isolierende Gebäude. - Beschreibung von Anpassungen an bestehenden Heizsystemen, um den Einsatz von Hochtemperatur-Wärmepumpen zu ermöglichen. - Erörterung der Möglichkeiten zur Nutzung von städtischen Aquiferen für Heiz- und Kühlsysteme in dicht bebauten Gebieten. 01:19:29 *🏗️ Diskussion über die Dekarbonisierung der Stahlindustrie und den Einsatz von Wasserstoff* - Analyse der Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von Wasserstoff in der Stahlproduktion. - Betonung der Kostendynamik und technischen Herausforderungen beim Übergang zu wasserstoffbasierten Prozessen in der Stahlherstellung. - Vorstellung verschiedener Ansätze zur Reduzierung von Emissionen in der Stahlindustrie, einschließlich des Einsatzes von Wasserstoff und alternativen Technologien. Made with HARPA AI

“In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most. No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores. No system of energy can deliver sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it. This universal truth applies to all systems. Energy, like time, flows from past to future” (2017).

Thank you for a fabulous presentation.😁👍

That was really not good, like at all. Watch this if you want to hear feel good stories about the good old times when Britain was leading in nuclear and "young people don't know VHS" kind of jokes on repeat. This talk stays very vague about any relevant topic in the field. Tech, costs, financing, building times, waste. Every topic is touched *very* lightly at best. And was there really a room full of British experts on nuclear and no one intervened when he forgot that the Hinkley Point C strike price is coupled to inflation? Because by now the price has already risen by approx 30%. Even relatively expensive offshore wind farms are half of that right now. And in contrary to nuclear power plants it seems reasonable to assume that there will be a learning curve. Plus, it doesn't take 15 years to build, plus it is not the government financing it.

Lol at Olaf Schultz saying "we will create a big boom" with hydrogen. No thanks , we already saw such a German hydrogen big boom with the Hindenburg.

Thank Goodness for Michael Liebreich speaking truth to power about hydrogen.

What is missing is the possibility of huge grids. When someone considers hydrogen from Canada to Europe - it's cheaper to lay a cable for the same amout of power from Canada to Europe (it's not longer than existing HVDC-Links in China) , and the losses are maximum 10%, not 80%. And there is no chance that the situation "no wind" happens in North America and Eurasia/Africa at the same time, and the sun does not settle if the grids are connected over such distances. Technology exists, prices are reasonable, it just needs to be built. But noone talks about it.

This is stupid. Why not use the hydrogen that nature has so thoughtfully stored on carbon? CH4 is abundent, already has delivery systems, and doesn't pollute.

and by the way you can reduce steel with ammonia and no need to crack back down to hydrogen - use blue ammonia to reduce steel (not green)

It is confusing to only have one label for Blue and Green Hydrogen - Green is not scalable at a reasonable cost - Blue on the other hand is

I'm an absolute fanboy of Michael since following his podcast. His ability to draw threads together means he has a future in fabrics, should the energy thing not work out! A great choice of panellists, especially Kate's 'vox pop' insights - and that is not meant in any deprecatory way. I absolutely believe that we need to take on the vested interests not just with data, but with stories and narratives, because there is a reason 'social proof' is not far behind the hero section of every website. So many talking points, and my only regret is that YT transcripts are not user-friendly, because I want to pick this session apart!

Brilliant, thankyou

Hydrogen to manufacture ammonia for fertilizer. Eventually in time the main source for agriculture.

The people who fell prey to it are the german green party. And who trained them for many years?` Can you guess?

Ursula von der Leyen is completely incapable to understand anything about hydrogen.

It was interesting

Cobalt is the recent headliner found by ICFO, which encourages our esteemed scientist Dr Yang, and all others, in testing every element on the table. Great job Dr Yang

French German Nuclear Volkswagen Reactors? If we can agree on the Common Market, it's all ready to hand over to the Engineers.

Anyone who thinks Fusion is a viable option is staring at the Sun too long, that is why we have Solar panels, and will never have collision reactions from the kind of technology within the reach of todays techniques.

An excellent presentation and discussion. Very knowledgeable and informative.

Excellent talk. Michael and Paul Martin do such a great job of laying this out for us non-technical people.

If you'd like to hear more from Michael Liebreich, his thoughts on hydrogen and other aspects of the clean energy transition, as well as from leaders across the climate space, please follow Cleaning Up, a podcast hosted by Michael and Baroness Bryony Worthington.

Very interesting, well sum up.

There is some sucking and blowing in this presentation. Paraphrasing here but "the problem with using green hydrogen is it requires a build-out of green power generation". That is the opportunity. We can build green power generation in places with great green economics without worrying about grid demand (e.g. Newfoundland Canada). This significantly improves the ROI on that green power, better utilization, cheaper land, etc. You cannot export grid power from Australia to Japan but you can export green fuel. I agree, hydrogen is ridiculous but that is a straw man argument. No serious person with any actual experience with ammonia and hydrogen would ever suggest using hydrogen. Hydrogen requires ridiculous pressure or ridiculous temperatures. Ammonia is a different story. Ammonia is an energy-dense liquid. This means it is cheap to ship a lot of energy. (Notice he showed an 'efficiency' breakdown not a cost breakdown of shipping ammonia. The input is 100%-green free-wind, the costs matter, not the power loss.) We can build and build and build green energy production, that is not the bottleneck. We can build turbines, a port, hydrogen, and an ammonia plant in 5 years. Expanding an electric grid in a tiny fraction will take 10 years. Building green ammonia is the FASTEST route to reducing GHG. I have asked 5 different green ammonia developers "If I gave you a contract for green ammonia could you build me supply?" Every single one said - "Absolutely, with a contract, there are zero barriers, how much do you want?" His conclusion - use heat pumps, and EVs, lacks any math. What is the GHG impact of this? We use 100m barrels of oil daily, and roughly 20m barrels of that oil is consumed as diesel. WE NEED FUEL. Shipping, trucking, trains, mining equipment. Home heating is worth doing but it will not avert climate change. Natural gas is largely a byproduct of oil production. It is fantastically cheap. Using this as your point of comparison is a great way to make your argument sound solid. If you compare the price per unit of energy of green ammonia to the price of diesel you get an entirely different picture, they are within spitting distance of each other. Remember, the oil industry is constantly re-investing. Exploring, fracking, drilling, etc. The question is - what is the energy produced per unit of investment? The match on green ammonia looks good.

Thank you Professor Narayan, and may you Rest in Peace.

Now look, one does not just watch a great video without adding a meaningful comment. Ooopsie...

Could not manage to watch after about 30 mins.... the presenter was basically mocking the whole concept and anyone supporting Hydrogen - in those 30 mins atleast he has not presented any solid technical reason of why it is unsustainable other than costs. If you move back about 120 years one could talk exactly the same things about Internal Combustion engines and Petrol / Diesel too. I expected a more erudite presentation from someone of his fame

This is plain physics and common sense, what can people argue except protecting their investments/intesrests. Thank you very much for sharing.

My own calculations for energy density of oil tanker vs tube trailer came up with 7x requirement, not 15x. Where did i go wrong?

38:36 One 30t tube trailer carries 300 kg of Nitrogen.

Toyota also sponsored H2-FCEV-Policecars in Germany and of course media reported this. No clue what the police is doing with them.

When I was a young engineer old guys told me about the transparent flames that were glowing at the flanges of a hydrogen pipe and the explosion when hydrogen diffused through the plastic of a cable into a cellar. Sooner or later there will be a severe explosion and every politician will be surprised.

If you use just hydrogen for plastics, you get water. 😂

A lord mayor as an expert on Hydrogen😂. The world is hyped up with people having an opinion about Hydrogen without the academic background to understand it. Especially politicians have in general no clue whatsoever and just are parroting what the industry tells them. One of the reason is that they don't have a solution for decarbonisation. I once asked in a German forum, what their future carbon source would be, to create plastics, chemicals etc. and no one had a solution. But we do hydrogen...

Good to see fantastic lecture. Can i have presentation/slide available ? please share.

This is a "must watch" video for everybody involved in cleantech and the energy transition. Michael, thanks for again explaining things in such clear and no BS way!

Didn't mention how (leaking) hydrogen indirectly has a greenhouse gas warming potential, by slowing the breakdown of methane into Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. (Unless I missed it?). Don't get the feeling these people comprehend the urgency and scale of the dire predicament we're in.

Thanks! Based on this valuable information I could make an informed decision and invest my money in Tesla (instead of my state subsidized program before) and therefore help directly creating the cleaner and more efficient future we all want. Hope the FUDsters don‘t come for you.

But doing everything with batteries wont work either right? Simon Michaux's report and the recent work by Ed Conway for example show we have orders of magnitude to few resources like copper to completely replace our existing system. We have no choice but to degrow.

Think i need to link to this video every time someone starts talking about hydrogen cars on every EV review video I've ever watched.

The power of the gas lobby is enormous. They can pay to repeat the wrong message until all politicians' heads are turned, to subsidise the wrong stuff. Politicians must get better informed, and more politicians should be more than just masters of rhetoric. Journalism is also to be blamed.