Airbus announced the timing of the transition of civil aviation to hydrogen

In the near future, the global air fleet will continue to use traditional jet engines. But Airbus has already announced the timing of the transfer of civil aviation to hydrogen.

According to the agency Reuters, the management of the aircraft manufacturer notified the official representatives of the EU countries at a briefing.

They believe that the massive transition to hydrogen will occur no earlier than 2050. Until that time, starting in 2035, a number of airlines will start operating medium and short-haul aircraft manufactured by Airbus with engines running on this fuel.

At the moment, this manufacturer is the leader in the development of hydrogen engines. Its management announced the creation of the first zero-emission commercial aircraft. There is no exact information whether this statement is related to the replacement of the company's most massive product, the medium-range A320, with a more modern aircraft, which is also scheduled for the 2030s, but such a scenario is not ruled out.

It has yet to be decided which market segment the first zero-emission aircraft will target.

- said the representative of Airbus.

In the fall of last year, the company unveiled three samples of hydrogen aircraft. They were named ZEROe, which means zero emissions.

Comments

[poquello]

forgotten old

[Anachoret]

now the impudent saxophiles will come running and stumble upon cons) they say "Soviet planes flew on totalitarian hydrogen")))

[For example]

- 250 degrees.
If anything happened, they would all burn out in five seconds.

I'm not going to fly on this shit.

[poquello]

Quote: For example

- 250 degrees.
If anything happened, they would all burn out in five seconds.

I'm not going to fly on this shit.

this demonstrator, moreover still Soviet, on the new hydrogen as such is unlikely to be

[For example]

Quote: poquello

the new hydrogen as such is unlikely to be

Airplane on hydrogen without hydrogen.
How's that?

[poquello]

Quote: For example

Quote: poquello

the new hydrogen as such is unlikely to be

Airplane on hydrogen without hydrogen.
How's that?

discharge in the process, fill up a bag of aluminum and flew or on batteries

[For example]

The guys flew on hydrogen:

Well, maybe it's in fig?

[poquello]

Quote: For example

Well, maybe it's in fig?

yes, in general, it turns out if the efficiency is sufficient, then it is safer than kerosene, the process of isolation itself is isolated, and it is lumin in Africa too

[For example]

Well, maybe...

Progress cannot be stopped.

The main thing is to remain people.

[For example]

Quote: poquello

discharge in the process, fill up a bag of aluminum and fly ...

Then you definitely need to have files on board in NZ.

In the event of a leak from the aluminum bag, you can quickly file off a non-critical fuselage part with a file.

[Aqr009]

and he is a lumin in Africa too

Isn't it hard for an airplane to constantly carry a non-ferrous metal wagon with it?
In addition, the used luminosity will need to be disposed of somehow.

[poquello]

Quote: Aqr009

and he is a lumin in Africa too

Isn't it hard for an airplane to constantly carry a non-ferrous metal wagon with it?
In addition, the used luminosity will need to be disposed of somehow.

if it were not hard - such an aircraft would have been made long ago, well, for am aurus, fuel cells are used instead of a tank that is on a Toyota, on a hydrogen Tu-155 there were tanks

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: For example

The guys flew on hydrogen:

There was a burnout of the accelerator with the TTD.

[astepanov]

Quote: poquello

discharge in the process, fill up a bag of aluminum and flew or on batteries

Is it too weak to calculate thermodynamics? displacing hydrogen with aluminum is absolutely unacceptable.

[poquello]

Quote: astepanov

displacing hydrogen with aluminum is absolutely unacceptable.

hmm, even this in the article "Evaluation of the possibility of using aluminum to obtain hydrogen fuel" by Chudotvorov, Pugachuk 2017 did not see it, rather the opposite
"it is advisable to use energy storage substances, in particular aluminum, as an intermediate energy carrier for the production of hydrogen."

[astepanov]

Quote: poquello

Even this in the article "Evaluation of the possibility of using aluminum to obtain hydrogen fuel" by Chudotvorov, Pugachuk 2017 did not see

So I say, take it and count it, it's not difficult.

[poquello]

Quote: astepanov

So I say, take it and count it, it's not difficult.

yes, I somehow trust scientists more than)))))))))))) Your calculations

Quote: poquello

"it is advisable to use energy storage substances, in particular aluminum, as an intermediate energy carrier for the production of hydrogen."

[astepanov]

Quote: poquello

yes, I somehow trust scientists more than)))))

So you must trust me. And the calculations, if they are performed correctly, lead to the same results, regardless of who performs them: an academician or a student. Do you think that scientists have some kind of separate multiplication table and a special law of conservation of energy? In vain, dear.
The exchange price of aluminum for today is 176188 rubles / ton, or about 176 rubles / kg. When aluminum reacts with water (in the presence of mercury), or with acids, or with alkali, 9 kg of hydrogen can be obtained from 1 kg of aluminum (since the equivalent of Al is 9, and hydrogen is 1). The largest amount of hydrogen is obtained from aluminum and water, although in practice this reaction is extremely inconvenient for the production of hydrogen, if only because it proceeds in the presence of mercury and slowly.
2Al + 6H₂O = 2Al (OH) ₃ + 3H₂
According to the above equation, from 9 kg of aluminum and 18 kg of water, 1 kg of hydrogen is obtained. The heat of combustion of hydrogen is 120 MJ / kg, taking into account the mass of aluminum and water (27 kg) - 4,44 MJ / kg. The heat of combustion of aviation kerosene is 42,9 MJ / kg, i.e. kerosene ultimately has at least 10 times the calorific value of "aluminum" hydrogen. But the price of aluminum for the production of 1 kg of hydrogen will be 1584 rubles, or 36 rubles / MJ. The cost of kerosene is 46 rubles / kg, or a little more than a ruble per 1 MJ. So much for the "aluminum" hydrogen aviation ...

[poquello]

Quote: astepanov

According to the above equation, from 9 kg of aluminum and 18 kg of water, 1 kg of hydrogen is obtained. The heat of combustion of hydrogen is 120 MJ / kg, taking into account the mass of aluminum and water (27 kg) - 4,44 MJ / kg. The heat of combustion of aviation kerosene is 42,9 MJ / kg, i.e. kerosene ultimately has at least 10 times the calorific value of "aluminum" hydrogen. But the price of aluminum for the production of 1 kg of hydrogen will be 1584 rubles, or 36 rubles / MJ. The cost of kerosene is 46 rubles / kg, or a little more than a ruble per 1 MJ. So much for the "aluminum" hydrogen aviation ...

15MJ is allocated per kg of aluminum, total +135, but yes, it is more profitable to scrap it

[astepanov]

Quote: poquello

15MJ is allocated per kg of aluminum,

From a kilogram of aluminum, not a gram of hydrogen or a joule of energy is released - this requires a second reagent, for example, water. And therefore, it is necessary to calculate the specific energy release taking into account the mass of this reagent.

[poquello]

Quote: astepanov

Quote: poquello

15MJ is allocated per kg of aluminum,

From a kilogram of aluminum, not a gram of hydrogen or a joule of energy is released - this requires a second reagent, for example, water. And therefore, it is necessary to calculate the specific energy release taking into account the mass of this reagent.

) 15 MJ is released for the reaction of kg of aluminum with the reagent, is that better? )))))))

[not main]

Quote: poquello

discharge in the process, fill up a bag of aluminum and flew or on batteries

Is it okay that the release of hydrogen requires more energy than is obtained during its combustion? I'm not even talking about the fire hazard of this colorless and odorless gas! By the way, "The Law of Conservation of Energy" has not yet been canceled!

[poquello]

Quote: non-primary

Is it okay that the release of hydrogen requires more energy than is obtained during its combustion?

is aluminum with alkali not a chemical process?

[not main]

Quote: poquello

Quote: non-primary

Is it okay that the release of hydrogen requires more energy than is obtained during its combustion?

is aluminum with alkali not a chemical process?

And how much aluminum and alkali do you need in kilograms to get a kilogram of hydrogen?

[poquello]

Quote: non-primary

Quote: poquello

Quote: non-primary

Is it okay that the release of hydrogen requires more energy than is obtained during its combustion?

is aluminum with alkali not a chemical process?

And how much aluminum and alkali do you need in kilograms to get a kilogram of hydrogen?

a lot if something new is not invented

[not main]

Quote: poquello

Quote: non-primary

Quote: poquello

Quote: non-primary

Is it okay that the release of hydrogen requires more energy than is obtained during its combustion?

is aluminum with alkali not a chemical process?

And how much aluminum and alkali do you need in kilograms to get a kilogram of hydrogen?

a lot if something new is not invented

So we arrived. This is like carrying a refinery and an oil reserve instead of a simple TS-1, TS-2, or RT.

[poquello]

Quote: non-primary

Here we come

and no one says that it is not so

Quote: poquello

the new hydrogen as such is unlikely to be

the only question is when

[not main]

Quote: poquello

Quote: non-primary

Here we come

and no one says that it is not so

Quote: poquello

the new hydrogen as such is unlikely to be

the only question is when

That's when physics and chemistry for the 7th grade will be learned, then it will be!

[faiver]

how does the "old" hydrogen differ from the "new" one?

[poquello]

Quote: faiver

how does the "old" hydrogen differ from the "new" one?

old - demonstrator, read carefully

[faiver]

I'm sorry, I read it wrong

[isv000]

I'm not going to fly on this shit.

On an airplane, in any case, there are not many chances, even with hydrogen or without it.

[Piramidon]

Quote: poquello

forgotten old

This one seemed to be working on gas

[poquello]

Quote: Piramidon

Quote: poquello

forgotten old

This one seemed to be working on gas

NK-88 is also a gas turbine, but it, for example, has a high-pressure turbo pump instead of a conventional pump, like rocket engines. First, liquid hydrogen goes to a heat exchanger, where it heats up and turns into a gaseous state, and only then into the combustion chamber.
https://life.ru/p/1346897

[Kuroneko]

Quote: poquello

forgotten old

That's it. We tried. The project was deemed inappropriate for a number of reasons.
What has changed now? Well, apart from the agenda, okay? Or is it just her?
And by the way, if in the crashes of traditional liners sometimes someone else survives, albeit by a miracle, then on hydrogen ones there will no longer be such an annoying omission. Everyone will be dead there, and without options.
Well, the real bewilderment is the fact that a breakthrough of electricity is needed to produce hydrogen. And only nuclear power can provide it. From which the EU also refuses.

[poquello]

Quote: Kuroneko

The project was deemed inappropriate for a number of reasons.

money for him was not easy

[Kuroneko]

Quote: poquello

money for him was not easy

No, there was a whole bunch of reasons. Starting from safety, ending with efficiency (hydrogen is expensive to obtain in terms of energy costs, kerosene is several times cheaper) and security (to redo the entire infrastructure?).

[poquello]

Quote: Kuroneko

Quote: poquello

money for him was not easy

No, there was a whole bunch of reasons. Starting from security, ending with economy and provision (the whole infrastructure to redo?).

there was no money, these problems brainwash

[Kuroneko]

Quote: poquello

there was no money, these problems brainwash

And now they all suddenly appeared? Especially when it is still unclear, when will the world economy wake up from coronabesy? No, this nonsense is purely from the AGENDA. But again: what the hell is hydrogen, if you, dear Western sirs, also give up nuclear energy? Wind turbines, geothermal and solar panels? Three times HA.

[poquello]

Quote: Kuroneko

And now they all suddenly appeared?

Quote: Kuroneko

what the fuck is hydrogen

)

[Kuroneko]

AND? Let's count, for example, how many cars in the world are powered by batteries (the same Tesla cars, but they are not the only ones, I dare say), and how many - on a conventional internal combustion engine. The difference is not an order of magnitude, not two, or even three (and you can continue). Single misunderstandings can be riveted without problems. Why is the entire car fleet of the world not in a hurry to use hydrogen and not going to transfer? This would mean an energy collapse (and there is still a lot of gas, and the share of cars running on gas is slowly, but only increasing). Well, with the tesla-caras, packing the same parsley. Where to get such a burst of energy and hundreds of tons Oil lithium for batteries? Therefore, these trinkets will remain relatively piece goods. We do NOT have on the ball Dirt of such resources, in order to make such a show off massive and ubiquitous.

[astepanov]

Now let's talk in essence.
1. Hydrogen can be produced in many ways, any chemist will tell you dozens - but two remain more or less profitable: water electrolysis and methane (or any other hydrocarbon) conversion:
1) СxНy + xH2O = хСО + (х + 0,5y) H2 - steam reforming reaction;
2) CH4 + H2O = CO + 3H2 - steam reforming reaction;
3) CO + H2O = CO2 + H2 - CO conversion reaction
Summing up the last two reactions, we get:
4) CH4 + 2H2O = CO2 + 2H2
Hydrogen is supposed to be used as aviation fuel: 5) 2Н2 + О2 = 2 Н2О
But it is easy to see that the sum of reactions 4) and 5) gives in the end
CH4 + 2 O2 = CO2 + 2 H2O
What does this mean in practice? In practice, this means that CO2 emissions are the same - that when using "conversion" hydrogen, that when burning hydrocarbons, with the only difference that CO2 will be emitted from the manufacturer, and not in the sky, and the cost of fuel will increase due to all kinds of losses during processing. The cost of flights will also increase, including due to the infrastructure for transporting hydrogen, onboard cryogenic equipment, etc. Yes, the calorific value of hydrogen is higher than that of methane - only the density of liquid methane is 0,41 kg / l, the boiling point is minus 162 ° C, and the density of liquid hydrogen is only 0 kg / l at a boiling point of minus 0,071 C. any benefits of hydrogen. So, we are once again being puffed up by our brains.
As for the electrolysis method of hydrogen production: the voltage across the cell of the electrolyzer is practically at least 2 V at a thermodynamic voltage of 1,24 V, from which it follows that the efficiency of the electrolyzer does not exceed 62%. Taking this figure into account, if the efficiency of a nuclear power plant is somewhere in the region of 30 - 40%, then in the production of hydrogen the efficiency will be only 18 - 24%. These are the pies.

[Kuroneko]

I sobsno, and talked about it. But in general terms. Thank you for supporting my thesis with practical calculations.
This nonsense is a stupid subpoena. Again, global cuts and super-profits for megacorporations.
PS Electrolysis could in fact become profitable, even despite the very high energy costs (electricity from nuclear power plants is extremely cheap, and the reserves of radioactive elements will last for more than one century), but for this we need to promote nuclear energy. And the countries of the West are just curtailing it.

[Artem76]

I support your words, I have also repeatedly said about this (on the "topkor") .... Hydrogen is another gift, in addition to the "charm" for extraction, there are "joys" for transportation and storage, and he is still a bastard ...
and if we talk about hydrogen cells, then there are also high requirements for the purity of hydrogen, and no matter what "go"

[askort154]

astepanov ..... And now let's talk in essence.

Bravo, Alexey! On the 12th, the President will present the State Prizes, we will include you on the list on behalf of the sofa people at VO.

[astepanov]

Quote: askort154

we include you in the list on behalf of the couch always on VO.

Essentially have something to say? They also squealed about railguns, and my calculations were rejected without argument - but where are they, railguns? They sawed the loot, and so it all ended.

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: poquello

forgotten old

Forgotten old, you say?
Let them remember 1937 - the disaster of the Hindenburg airship:

[Kuroneko]

Quote: ROSS 42

Let them remember 1937 - the disaster of the Hindenburg airship:

Well, this is greed in the name of higher performance characteristics. Helium is the only reasonable choice for an airship. And by the way, it’s in vain that everyone has practically ceased to engage in airships. This is, albeit slow, but amazingly economical and cheap to manufacture aircraft for the same transportation of goods. Moreover, it does not require any runway at all.

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: Kuroneko

And by the way, it’s in vain that everyone has practically ceased to engage in airships. This is an albeit slow, but amazingly economical aircraft for the same transportation of goods.

I agree. There were some attempts to revive airship building in Russia, but things did not go further than balloons with helium ...

[Kuroneko]

Quote: ROSS 42

There were some attempts to revive airship building in Russia, but things did not go further than balloons with helium ...

Once upon a time I studied Soviet projects on this topic, during the 80s. With a lens-like gas bag and short wings, according to estimates, quite good speed would be provided, with immeasurably less power and gluttony of the engines. They don't need to lift the apparatus - they just need to push it horizontally. And a molecular difference between helium and the composition of the atmosphere is responsible for the lift. = 3

[astepanov]

Quote: Kuroneko

Well, this is greed in the name of higher performance characteristics

What are the performance characteristics? The lifting force of hydrogen and helium are related to 27 to 25, the difference is almost imperceptible. But the industrial production of helium in the late 20s, when the Hindenburg was designed, did not exist anywhere in the world.

[Petro_tut]

But the industrial production of helium in the late 20s of the 20th century,

in the USA, since 1915 sufficient volumes have already been produced

[Petro_tut]

Moreover, it does not require any runway at all.

But at the same time, it requires mooring masts, huge erlings, low wind conditions, plus a "heap" of Helium, the reserves of which are not very large, and it is still a task to hold this gas

[Season]

Yes, it burned out. And how did the fascist tanks burned near Moscow, near Prokhorovka and in Stalingrad? The fascists always have such an inglorious end.

[Season]

I absolutely agree with you. A PR campaign will now begin to praise Western achievements. Yes, I agree. Praise themselves, they know how and love.

[vadsonen]

If it starts, then in vain. Airbus's promo website explicitly states that the first such prototype was the Tu-155.

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/stories/hydrogen-combustion-explained.html

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Anyway, it does not promise any benefits for ordinary passengers, ticket prices will remain the same, airlines will simply save and earn more. They promoted the 787 with its fuel efficiency, and for ordinary passengers, the ticket prices for the 787 Boeing are not lower.

[Svetlana]

What will they save on?

[dauria]

airlines will simply save money and earn more

On what ? Hydrogen in its pure form does not seem to be lying on the road. It is still necessary to "dig out" it from the same natural gas. Do not "get" it out of the water. Here it is more likely something else - earlier they blocked the flights of other people's planes on the basis of the "noise level". Now they will be on "cleanliness and greenness". For the "economy" of a flight on hydrogen, oil must end on the planet ....

[For example]

Someone wants to make money on airlines.
Make them buy new aircraft and recycle old ones.
Passengers will undoubtedly pay for all this.

All the greens cackle.

It's like the ozone hole when the whole world was forced to buy American technology.

[spacekitty]

For the "economy" of a flight on hydrogen, oil must end on the planet ....

The Stone Age did not end because the planet ran out of stones. Progress does not stand still.

[credo]

Quote: Lt. Air Force stock

Anyway, it does not promise any benefits for ordinary passengers, ticket prices will remain the same, airlines will simply save and earn more. They promoted the 787 with its fuel efficiency, and for ordinary passengers, the ticket prices for the 787 Boeing are not lower.

Everything is the same as with an electric car - a lot of show-off and prices bite.
Until 2050, there will still be so much water leaking that by that year these projects will be forgotten and new ones will appear.

The population is held for fools and told tales of clean ecology, forgetting to mention that any type of transport is made of metal, which in turn is made from ore, and most of the interior decoration of vehicles is derived from petrochemicals, and so on.

[Runoway]

Everything is the same as with an electric car - a lot of show-off and prices bite.

First of all, our extortions, customs clearance, etc. bite.
Right now, the power reserve for the majority (Tesla Model Y and Ford Mustang much E ~ 500 km (refuel at 350r at home from the outlet) cost from 3 million rubles (it's like the ubiquitous Toyota rav4 Honda CR-V KIA Sorento Santa Fe)
Nissan Leaf is even cheaper than 2-2.5 million.
Saving 150-200tr per year on gasoline and maintenance.
The battery lasts for 8 years, its cost for the same leaf ~ 300tr = 2 years of operation of a car with an internal combustion engine

[credo]

Quote: Runoway

Everything is the same as with an electric car - a lot of show-off and prices bite.

First of all, our extortions, customs clearance, etc. bite.
Right now, the power reserve for the majority (Tesla Model Y and Ford Mustang much E ~ 500 km (refuel at 350r at home from the outlet) cost from 3 million rubles (it's like the ubiquitous Toyota rav4 Honda CR-V KIA Sorento Santa Fe)
Nissan Leaf is even cheaper than 2-2.5 million.
Saving 150-200tr per year on gasoline and maintenance.
The battery lasts for 8 years, its cost for the same leaf ~ 300tr = 2 years of operation of a car with an internal combustion engine

Well, it turns out, it turns out that ours resist such ecological transport?
But how and at what price are these wonderful cars sold in the United States itself and what is the demand for them?

Here is an excerpt from the US article:
"... The top 10 best-selling electric vehicles in the US in 2020 are as follows:

Tesla Model 3: 95 units;
Tesla Model Y: 71 344 units:
Chevrolet Bolt EV: 19 units;
Tesla Model X: 19 units;
Tesla Model S: 14 units;
Nissan Leaf: 8972 units;
Audi E-tron: 7089 units;
Porsche Taycan: 3943 units;
Hyundai Kona EV: 2964 units;
Kia Niro EV: 2807 units
Electric vehicle sales in the US are up 2020% in 11. While this isn't all that much, it's actually not a bad result considering the overall fall in the automotive market due to the global pandemic. However, electric vehicles still account for only 1,8% of the American car market ... ".

The percentage is especially impressive, and this despite the fact that a federal discount on purchase has been introduced on electric vehicles in the United States.

[Runoway]

Well, it turns out, it turns out that ours resist such ecological transport?

Ours ask for 20% VAT on the import of an electric car
It is not entirely correct to compare the US market (big fans of 4-5-6L engines)
Average salary in the USA for 2021 $ 3620
In the Russian Federation, officially $ 600 (in fact, 300%)
The cost of AI-95 in the USA is 0.7 $ / l, in principle, like ours, is it worth it to be driven by fuel with such income ?????? Moreover, their kW jumped on fast charges and costs $ 0.25 \ kW
In our country, it is very profitable (for now) not to pay transport tax for an engine over 285hp in 50r, and monthly 000tr for gasoline (10tr / year) + MOT
TOTAL: for 5 years of owning an electric car, you save ~ 1 million rubles, it is very significant

[NOMADE]

It's all beautiful, as long as the cars are new .. As for the bodice, did you use it in the winter?) There the real power reserve is sooo much reduced, even in Vladivostok (I am not talking about Yakutia). And the batteries there are so-so, they degrade very quickly (by the way, specify their cost). All in all, you have a small, front-wheel-drive sedan for a horse-driven price. Imaginary savings on gasoline and then, before the first problems with replacing the battery, the price: gas consumption - will not pay off

[Runoway]

I wrote about the cost of the battery above! There is no need to confuse the first-generation bodice (120km summer / 80km winter) with the cars I mentioned above, the price of it is from 450tr, regarding the operation in my city there are a lot of taxi drivers on them.

[Real Pilot]

A beautiful-economical-hyped airliner takes off ...

And below, at the airfield or somewhere else, they burned several tons of the same kerosene to obtain hydrogen charged into this plane. Well, or electricity from a thermal power plant or a nuclear power plant. Not free hydrogen, it is not found in nature in the required concentration. Hydrogen is still very volatile and leaks away. It is not easy to transport, unlike kerosene.

It's like electric cars. The total environmental damage from them is not less due to the generation of electricity at the station, taking into account the technologies for the production and disposal of batteries, even slightly more than from cars with internal combustion engines.
But city dwellers will breathe easier.

[credo]

Quote: RealPilot

... But city dwellers will breathe easier.

And if the population of the earth goes to a subsistence economy, it will become easier to breathe everywhere.

[rotfuks]

I would say that the residents of not all cities. For example, an electric car is a salvation for the city of Alma-Ata, it stands in a gorge and there is absolutely no wind there. And there even the leaves do not fall from the trees. And they are not blown away by the wind, because they are completely calm. But in other cities there are such winds and drafts that carbon monoxide simply does not linger. But "green technologies" are forcibly imposed on everyone. And what these "green technologies" often turn around for people is shown by the winter events in the state of Texas in the USA. Not a single freezing American climbed into the newfangled Tesla to warm up, but many kept warm in the most ordinary cars.

[Petro_tut]

And below, at the airfield or somewhere else, they burned several tons of the same kerosene to obtain hydrogen charged into this plane.

Took from the socket from the photovoltaic panels

[Runoway]

Regular passengers still do not promise any benefits

Similar to SP-2, but the fuss is fuss about all the media, the whole country is experiencing

[Light]

Interest is not caused by the gas pipeline itself, of which we already have so many, but by the accompanying project hysterics of Americans, Poles, ukrov and other irregular breathers.

[Runoway]

Hysterics?! no hysteria, well, the Americans wanted to squeeze out the market from us, well, it didn’t work, they stayed with theirs. As for the neighbors, it is a shame for our state that such a shit was bred near the borders (it is even impossible to imagine that some Mexico would blather on the United States and put sticks in its wheels)
Polish apples, Latvian sprats, Ukrainian sweets, Czech beer, Coca-Cola, McDonald's and all household chemicals with iPhones help with hysteria.

[Light]

The fact of the matter is that they really wanted to, they even quarreled with the Euroassans, and in my opinion this is the main advantage of SP-2. Otherwise, I would be better off selling lng to them with good added value. Separate pleasure is given by the lamentations of Russophobes, both neighbors and domestic, also a plus for the stream, personally from me.
Problems with neighbors, by the way, began immediately with the collapse of the Union, and Zavad brought his puppets there to the leadership. And I am not speaking for the countries in full, in the same Baltics, Ukraine, Georgia, Poland there are enough normal people who do not see an enemy in Russia, despite the widespread brainwashing. And it is so good that we managed to recover and deal with the Belarusian Maidan and in Central Asia we do not allow amers to gain a foothold.

[Runoway]

What an optimist you are! Overall your message
"the neighbor's pig died, so it's okay, but my soul is nice" ©

Problems with neighbors, by the way, began immediately with the collapse of the Union

Yes, but if earlier it was only Latvia and Lithuania, then since 2000 Putin's times
+ Georgia
+ Ukraine
+ Bulgaria
+ Poland
+ Czech Republic
Everything is increasing, as I said, there is no foreign policy, but the Western plan is on its way.
Who was left from the "ring of the anaconda"
Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Armenia and Kazakhstan? At what cost we keep, at the cost of migrants and how long we keep

[Light]

And it's very good that this "pig is dead"! Now, according to Zelensky, Ukraine will be missing 3 lards a year for the war with Donbas, people will breathe a sigh of relief.
In our neighbors: Eastern Europe spun off immediately with the disappearance of the Warsaw Pact, the problems with the Baltic and Ukrainian Nazis were never resolved during the entire existence of the USSR, and appeared immediately from the moment of their "independence", already in the 90s they were lost to for us, as friendly ones, it is enough to look at the composition of the CIS. And already active attacks in Georgia at 08 or Ukraine at 14 and color revolutions are already the response of the Americans to Russia's actions in foreign policy, in Syria, Venezuela, China, the Arctic, and so on.

[Yves762]

Airbus announced the timing of the transfer of civil aviation for hydrogen

Something somehow inspired ...

[Wedmak]

Well, there seems to be a difference. On the plane, it will be stored in a liquefied form unambiguously. And this will not happen.

[bk316]

On the plane, it will be stored in a liquefied form unambiguously.

What about the leak?
It doesn't smell like an infection, but explodes much better than gasoline vapors.
Plus he's under pressure.

[Wedmak]

Sensors to help, 2-3 per cylinder is enough in abundance. In principle, this can be solved, but the question arises, where to get hydrogen in such quantities? Will it not turn out that after the transition we will make water from the luts?

[vadim dok]

Almost all powerful generators in thermal / nuclear power plants have hydrogen cooling of the windings and there are no generator explosions! Actually, hydrogen is not explosive, only a mixture of hydrogen-oxygen / oxyhydrogen gas / in a ratio of 2,5 to 1 is dangerous!

[Brturin]

Quote: vadim dok

Almost all powerful generators in thermal / nuclear power plants

But these are stationary objects, and cars and airplanes are "movable property" - there are both earth and air holes. turns, drifts on one side of the speaker, and on the other, dimensions ...

[bk316]

, only a hydrogen-oxygen mixture is dangerous

Of course, you know gasoline also does not burn without oxygen
But the trouble is in the air 20% oxygen.

[Petro_tut]

He doesn't smell like an infection,

Add sulfur, immediately smell

[Yves762]

Yes, be it 10 times "liquefied", and to leak out and evaporate, creating explosive mixtures in little or little closed volumes, will still be for a sweet soul. Moreover, the CPV is wider than the comfort of hydrocarbon gases.
In any case, with OU it is gas.
So something like this:

- will still be a "frequent guest"
Or this:

[Jacket in stock]

Quote: Wedmak

Well, there seems to be a difference. On the plane, it will be stored in a liquefied form unambiguously. And this will not happen.

As a matter of fact, there are already ways of storing hydrogen in solid form of easily decomposable metal hydrides.
No leaks, no fires.

[bk316]

As a matter of fact, there are already ways of storing hydrogen in solid form of easily decomposable metal hydrides.

There is, but this is an airplane for him every kilo of excess weight is death ...

[Bshkaus]

Something somehow inspired ...

It is not correct to compare derezable with a leaky design and pressurized cylinders where hydrogen is dosed into the combustion chamber - these are fundamentally different technologies

[bk316]

It is not correct to compare derezable

airship
Pancake specialists gathered ...

[Sergey Kulikov_3]

So the test word "dereban" :)

[Bshkaus]

airship
Pancake specialists gathered ...

I don't write this word every day, there is even nothing to cover. Next time I will say "sratostat"

[bk316]

I don't write this word every day,

So I'm just talking about this and not about the Russian language.
I am a programmer and I will write it correctly in a dream, because I have written it thousands of times.
And about hydrogen, I'm not saying it's all bullshit.
There are simply difficulties.

[Bshkaus]

And about hydrogen, I'm not saying it's all bullshit.
There are simply difficulties.

of course have. Now there is a boom in stratospheric parachute jumps, people are wondering what to fill the stratospheric balloon with. Hydrogen is 2 times cheaper, but ...
As an option, I suggested a long halyard between the stratospheric balloon and the gondola. If something happens, the gondola is out of reach and immediately goes down when the halyard breaks. Even the top of the nacelle is in the shape of a cone to deflect the shockwave. The trouble is that it can work at altitudes, but at low altitudes, safety is not ensured. In short, well them, my business is a spacesuit)))

[bk316]

As an option, I suggested a long halyard between the stratospheric balloon and the gondola.

Cool. Cheap and cheerful.

[Voltsky]

hydrogen is dissolved in diesel fuel or other absorbent

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: Yves762

Something somehow inspired ...

I didn't have time to get to your message and posted almost the same opinion. But you were marked (+).
Hydrogen is such an unpredictable thing.

[alex aircraft]

In the Soviet Union at the end of the 80s a Tu155 flew, one of which was powered by hydrogen. With the collapse of the country, the topic has become poorer. Again we will be in the role of catch-up ??

[poquello]

Quote: alex aircraft

In the Soviet Union at the end of the 80s a Tu155 flew, one of which was powered by hydrogen. With the collapse of the country, the topic has become poorer. Again we will be in the role of catch-up ??

we will not play the role of catch-up, airbass showed up for show, and in general, all the planned systems are old with old problems, they may expect that over time they will lick us, but they sense that times are changing

[Piramidon]

Quote: Alex aircraft

we will be in the role of catch-up ??

And where is the hurry? We need to see what the watermelons will do, where the cones will be stuffed for themselves, how much such flights will cost. Green energy is still costly.

[Bshkaus]

What can I say? Well done: the road will be mastered by the walking one. Taking care of the environment is the thinking of an advanced civilization. We do not live in the Stone Age, there are already too many of us, and there is only one ball - it must be protected by any means, and not exploited for wear and tear. Our grandchildren will have to live

[Artem76]

Yours is true, but ...
Those "guardians" for green energy, you know how waste is dumped and where, the problems of the Gulf of Mexico, the Rhine is no better than our Moscow ... they think about themselves, and not about the planet as a whole, ... they want to make a piece of paradise for themselves , and take the garbage to others, well, or in the case of the Russian Federation - we are supposed to be pure hydrogen for them, and all the "delights" of its extraction will remain with us ...
To begin with, it is necessary that EVERYONE on the planet stupidly stops shitting, although around themselves ...

[tralflot1832]

And where they will take hydrogen, again in Russia, We got it already, then our gas is dirty, hydrogen will also be totalitarian! In 2050, everything will be paid in rubles and yuan! And at a special rate!

[Brturin]

Quote: tralflot1832

And where will they take hydrogen, again in Russia

So our business is to propose ... In the near future we will present the first sample of hydrogen obtained by plasma-chemical decomposition, which will be adapted for hydrogen filling stations. The main advantage of the method is that carbon is obtained in condensed form: it does not need to be buried, which means that it would find practical application. Now such hydrogen is called "turquoise", and it can become cheaper than the "blue" obtained by classical methods of working with methane "- Yuri Dobrovolsky, head of the Competence Center of the National Technological Initiative on the basis of the Institute of Problems of Chemical Physics (IPCP) RAS, Yuri Dobrovolsky -" It is necessary to bring the cost of hydrogen refueling up to 3-5 dollars per kilogram, so that hydrogen transport begins to outperform even diesel. The current price allows you to win only against electric buses: the price of hydrogen supplied in cylinders can go up to $ 30-40 per kilogram "https://nauka.tass.ru/nauka/11594161

[Kotofeich]

Quote: tralflot1832

And where they will take hydrogen, again in Russia, We got it already, then our gas is dirty, hydrogen will also be totalitarian! In 2050, everything will be paid in rubles and yuan! And at a special rate!

Nord Stream 3

[tralflot1832]

In view of the fact that China turned to face Airbus and back to Boeing, the Europeans will fly first on our hydrogen.

[mark1]

In the picture, an airplane similar to the Tu-404 (in the background), but they are not recognized - they will say they thought of it themselves (like A400 and An-70)

[rocket757]

... But Airbus has already announced the timing of the transition of civil aviation to hydrogen

Not soon, it's a fact. By then either or, there are options.

[grandfather_Kostya]

I don't see anything "green" in hydrogen. When it is produced, carbon is released, when a lean mixture is burned, there is no economic benefit, and the optimal mixture burns at such a temperature that a breakthrough of nitrogen oxides is byproductive!

[Jacket in stock]

And what, Airbus started to make engines?
It seems not.
If Hewlett or Rolls get him a hydrogen engine, then we can have a plane.

[Jacket in stock]

And so the topic was promoted, now a lot of money is being invested in hydrogen, developments are progressing.
Recently, an auto project was advertised for solid hydrogen, a metal hydride in the form of a paste.
From the tank it is squeezed out in dosed amounts into the reactor, where pure hydrogen is released by catalysts and immediately into the furnace. No heavy cylinders for you, no leaks, no fires, respectively.
And the refueling process is like in an office printer - I took out an empty box, inserted a new full one.
If something like this is brought to a really working one, then, perhaps, we will fly on hydrogen before 2050.

[bk316]

If something like this is brought to a really working one, then, perhaps, we will fly on hydrogen before 2050.

This is just the case showing all the bullshit of the greens.
Try calculating the full cycle carbon footprint of such a fuel, from mining to disposal of the cartridge, from hydrogen production to delivery to refueling. Cry ... Well, yes, water vapor is also a greenhouse gas, as it was rightly noted here.

[Fedorovich]

Is it okay that water vapor is also a greenhouse gas?

[bk316]

Is it okay that water vapor is also a greenhouse gas?

He seems to have a weaker effect.

[Fedorovich]

In fact, its contribution to the greenhouse effect on Earth is 60-70%

[S. Sergei]

Quote: For example

The guys flew on hydrogen:

Well, maybe it's in fig?

And life teaches nothing. Hydrogen proponents believe that in the days of shuttles there was almost a stone age, and now industry and science have gone so far that now hydrogen can be harnessed to the safety of water. Surely during the time of the shuttles, they also talked about the times of the Hindenburg airship. Well, those, in turn ...

[Vadim237]

Shuttles were created back in the 70s and then the level of materials science of computer design and everything else was not even close to the current ones - but I agree that hydrogen is best used in hypersonic aviation and astronautics, but not in subsonic airliners - it is easier to use electric motors or a combination of kerosene electric drive ...

[Real Pilot]

Quote: Petro_tut

And below, at the airfield or somewhere else, they burned several tons of the same kerosene to obtain hydrogen charged into this plane.

Took from the socket from the photovoltaic panels

This is certainly possible!
But how many planes, and these are large wide-body airliners, can such an airport send a day?
It is clear that a lot of hydrogen will be required. Of course, it is possible with generators, panels, and from the network ... But you will have to produce it on the spot, it will not be delivered. And how many storage containers do you need ...

[zwlad]

All this is nonsense. And projection!
A couple of accidents with hydrogen aircraft or hydrogen infrastructure at an airport in the future will put a fat point on this direction.

[tTshka]

Mmm ... over time!

[Pandiurin]

If the plane is making an emergency landing, then the following services are alerted on the landing strip:
- firefighters
- rescuers
- doctors

If the "hydrogen" aircraft requests an emergency, the airport will need to alert instead of many services to only one service - air defense.

In principle, convenience is evident, staff reduction and, as a result, costs.