Military Review

Hydrogen in aviation: now for hypersound

54
Hypersonic satellite carrier from Australia. Source: naked-science.ru

Fuel high-tech



Hydrogen is an almost ideal fuel, and for most engines.

For example, it provides a very high specific thrust impulse, that is, an excellent ratio of engine thrust to mass fuel consumption, for jet engines. This is a direct consequence of the record energy intensity and small mass of hydrogen.

In terms of calorific value, this fuel is three times higher than aviation kerosene. In the combustion chamber, hydrogen also behaves well - it burns steadily and does not create harmful pulsations. A bonus for engineers is the high cooling capacity of the fuel, which increases the performance of engines.

And, of course, the main advantage of hydrogen in our age of total "greening" is its environmental friendliness - in the exhaust there is water vapor with a small admixture of nitrogen oxides.

However, hydrogen is friendly to nature only at the stage of combustion in the engine - the production of this substance is associated with considerable energy costs. But more on that later.

The idea of ​​using liquid hydrogen paired with liquid oxygen as a fuel was proposed by Tsiolkovsky at the beginning of the last century.

With all the advantages described above, the lightest substance in the universe has a lot of disadvantages.

First of all, the high costs of obtaining and liquefying gas - on average, one kilogram of hydrogen is 20–80 times more expensive than one kilogram of the best aviation kerosene.

Difficulties are added by the technology of storing such fuel, which you simply cannot pour into a tank. Even in the most modern tanks for hydrogen, accidental leakage is not ruled out. Therefore, at first, restrictions on the use of hydrogen fuel were purely technological in nature.

The idea of ​​using hydrogen as a fuel was seriously thought about only after the war - the Cold War and the space race just arrived. Research almost simultaneously started in the United States and the Soviet Union, but over time, the technological initiative passed to the Americans.

The skepticism of domestic engineers was associated primarily with the extreme danger of operating various types of hydrogen engines. The slightest depressurization of the fuel system led to the combination of hydrogen and oxygen into "explosive gas". So, when testing domestic rocket engines on hydrogen, it was necessary to carry control points at least 1 meters away.

Filled with 2-3 tons of liquid hydrogen, the propulsion systems were infernal machines in case of emergency situations.

Despite this, the United States managed to launch the Atlas-Centaur launch vehicle in November 1963, which was the first in the world to have an oxygen-hydrogen upper stage.

Later, the Space Shuttle used marching engines of a similar design.

In the Soviet Union, the oxygen-hydrogen engine RD-0120, developed for the giant Energia launch vehicle, became most famous.

Tu-155. Source: edicthai.com

Closer to the topic of this article, another world achievement of Soviet engineers is the world's first cryogenic-fueled aircraft Tu-155.

It took to the air on April 15, 1988 with "hybrid" power plants. The fact is that one of the three engines, located on the right, was replaced by a hydrogen NK-88.

Evaluate the complexity of the design of the Tu-155 according to the memoirs of Valery Solozobov, who participated in the construction of a unique machine:

When designing the flying laboratory, it was necessary to significantly change the layout of the Tu-154 and solve a number of complex technical problems. In the rear part of the fuselage, where the passenger compartment was located, a sealed compartment was equipped, and a cryogenic tank for 20 cubic meters was installed in it. meters of liquid hydrogen with screen-vacuum thermal insulation, which for a long time keeps the temperature in the tank below minus 253 degrees Celsius.

The development of the Tu-155 was a by-product of the Energia-Buran program, which also created a hydrogen engine, albeit a rocket one.

In the late 80s, the USSR planned to create an entire industry for the generation of hydrogen, which is why its price should have fallen to a level acceptable in civilian transportation. It remains only to find those willing to board the plane with several tons of liquid hydrogen on board - even the most inexperienced passengers remembered the Hindenburg tragedy, which buried the airship industry for many years.

As a result, the Tu-155 made five flights in a hydrogen configuration, after which the NK-88 engine was redesigned for compressed natural gas. However, the calorific value of blue fuel is no longer three times higher, but only 15% higher than that of aviation kerosene.

But with storage, certain difficulties remain - the tanks must constantly hold minus 160 degrees.

However, compressed gas did not live up to expectations, and aircraft still use kerosene.

Now, certain hopes are associated with hypersonic machines, in which hydrogen can open up in a new way.

From Australia with hypersonic


Recent ones news about hydrogen engine building came from where they did not expect - from the Australian Hypersonix Launch Systems, which is only a little more than three years old.

Nevertheless, developers are proposing a revolution in the form of the concept of a hypersonic satellite delivery aircraft into orbit. Delta Velos is powered by four Spartan hypersonic ramjet engines.

Interestingly, for combustion, hydrogen does not require a supply of oxygen on board - the necessary oxidizer is extracted from the air stream at a speed of more than M = 1. The specially designed air duct of the Spartan engine compresses the incoming air to such an extent that the injected hydrogen in the combustion chamber immediately ignites.

At the same time, combustion is maintained at a supersonic flow regime - this is the key parameter of the engine.

For several years now, specialists from the domestic TsAGI have been doing something similar as part of their work on hydrogen ramjet engines.

According to Hypersonic, they have bigger plans, after all, the Spartan engine has been in development for about 30 years and even made more than a dozen suborbital flights. Obviously, other people were engaged in fine-tuning the motor - the company itself, we recall, is only three years old.

In order to put a hypersonic engine into operation, an upper stage is required. This role is performed by the oxygen-hydrogen Boomerang, which, after running out of fuel, separates, spreads its wings and glides to the base. All in the best traditions of Elon Musk.

History is being started only for the sake of a 50-kilogram satellite in the belly of the hypersonic Delta Velos, which, at an altitude of several tens of kilometers, will go into free flight, and the carrier will return home. The maximum speed at the peak of the trajectory is planned from 5 to 7 Machs.

Spartan hydrogen engine. Source: naked-science.ru

So far, this is only a theory, but the Australians promise a practical implementation next year.

True, so far only in a miniature form factor - the prototype will be a reduced scale copy of the Delta Velos with a wingspan of 2,8 meters. A real hypersonic carrier of satellites will already have a span of 12 meters.

If all goes well, the first full-fledged technology demonstrator should fly in 2024. At the same time, the project may have several development options - this is a military embodiment, and a civilian hypersonic aircraft capable of crossing the Pacific Ocean in a couple of hours.

Hydrogen in aviation: now for hypersound
Delta Velos. Source: naked-science.ru

Such a bold use of hydrogen is explained, first of all, by the global "green" strategy - the leading countries are switching to the electrolysis synthesis of a substance.

Solar panels and wind generators were chosen as a source of environmentally friendly electricity. Hydrogen should become a kind of energy accumulator for periods of forced downtime of windmills in calm.

It is from such storage facilities that they plan to refuel their hypersonic and extremely “green” drones Hypersonix Launch Systems.

However, hydrogen will still be economically disadvantageous.

Firstly, the high cost of electricity from wind turbines and solar panels in the coming decades will not compete with the generation of thermal power plants, and even more so, state district power plants and nuclear power plants.

Secondly, to obtain hydrogen from water electrolysis, expensive distillers are required - plain water from the lake is not suitable for such high-tech. And this is also an additional cost.

And if the production of "green" hydrogen really becomes massive (at the cost of incredible costs), then where to dispose of hundreds of thousands of tons of brine left after the distillation of the original?

And will the projects of hypersonic hydrogen shuttles, which consume fuel like crazy, aggravate the situation?
Author:
54 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 26 January 2022 05: 43
    +4
    There were articles in Technique-Youth, Science and Life in Soviet times about the hydrogen TU-154 ... all this was perceived as a breakthrough into the future ... but alas, it did not take place.
    So far, there are no serious alternatives to kerosene, coal, oil, natural gas ... humanity has not grown up to hydrogen yet.
    Thanks to the author for the article. hi
    1. Avarron
      Avarron 26 January 2022 17: 41
      +2
      I wonder how, in your opinion, humanity should grow to hydrogen, if you do not work on it? It is only the Bible that the Lord personally dictated to a host of writers; people have to grow up to everything else by painstaking work.
  2. datura23
    datura23 26 January 2022 06: 16
    +6
    the chemical properties of hydrogen in any state of aggregation will NEVER allow it to be a fuel for mass use. It cannot be safely stored. Molecules are so small that ANY material is a sieve for them, and its reactivity corrodes ANY material.
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 26 January 2022 06: 31
      +6
      Yes, and it can be effectively extracted only with the use of nuclear power plants, and the entire "world community" demands the cessation of their operation. It remains to hope for the curbing of thermonuclear energy, but then why would there be hydrogen?
      1. Avarron
        Avarron 26 January 2022 17: 43
        0
        Russia is an exception from this "entire world community", which means that Russia will supply the whole world with hydrogen fuel.
    2. astepanov
      astepanov 26 January 2022 11: 34
      +1
      Quote: datura23
      Molecules are so small that ANY material is a sieve for them, and its reactivity corrodes ANY material.

      Don't talk nonsense. An ordinary children's balloon or the shell of any airship perfectly retains hydrogen. Ordinary steel or plastic pipelines at chemical industry enterprises transport hydrogen in hundreds of thousands of cubic meters and often at enormous pressures - and there is not the slightest sign of corrosion. Ammonia production requires a combination of high pressure and temperature - and steel reactor columns do an excellent job of this, working for decades. You should have looked into the holy calendar, or something ...
      1. Ren
        Ren 26 January 2022 11: 40
        +2
        Quote: astepanov
        Don't talk nonsense. An ordinary children's balloon or the shell of any airship perfectly retains hydrogen.

        As I understand it, we are talking about liquefied hydrogen, but everything is not so simple there.
        Hydrogen liquefaction temperature - -259,14 °C, boiling point - -252,87 °C. hi
        1. astepanov
          astepanov 26 January 2022 14: 39
          +5
          The lower the temperature, the lower the reactivity and diffusion coefficient, so hydrogen at minuses does not react with anything and does not diffuse through the shells.
      2. datura23
        datura23 27 January 2022 11: 56
        0
        what time
      3. datura23
        datura23 27 January 2022 11: 59
        +1
        you do not know what materials the pipes have? What is the procedure for replacing them? Don't talk nonsense.
  3. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 26 January 2022 07: 18
    +4
    There have been proposals to use hydrides to store hydrogen. They are safe to use, hydrogen extraction is simple, the process of refilling the machine is as simple as replacing an empty box with a fresh one, like a cartridge in a printer. For a car, it seems even theoretically possible.
    For missiles and aviation it is not clear.
    1. astepanov
      astepanov 26 January 2022 11: 50
      +3
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      There have been proposals to use hydrides to store hydrogen.

      The largest amount of hydrogen can be stored in hydrides of light elements: lithium LiH, sodium NaH, magnesium MgH2, as well as in borohydrides, for example, LiBH4. It is not difficult to calculate the weight content of hydrogen in these compounds: for example, in LiH it is 12,5%, in MgH2 - 7,7%, in LiBH4 - 22%. Hydrogen from these substances can be obtained either by their thermal decomposition or by reaction with water. Thermal decomposition leads to the production, in addition to hydrogen, of extremely flammable alkali metals, and in the case of LiBH4, also of impurities of self-igniting and extremely toxic borohydrides. During the reaction of hydrides with water (structurally, the reactor is similar to the one in which acetylene is obtained from carbide) and more hydrogen is released, but the waste is expensive to process. So while this path is not for a mass car.
    2. astepanov
      astepanov 27 January 2022 12: 17
      +1
      Quote: datura23
      you do not know what materials the pipes have? What is the procedure for replacing them? Don't talk nonsense.

      Yes, I know what material the pipes are. Unlike you, as a chemist, I constantly have to work with gases and therefore I know their properties. At our plant, ordinary steel gas-water pipes made of St-3 steel were used to supply hydrogen from electrolyzers to furnaces, the only difference was in the shut-off valves. The total length of the pipes was approximately 2 km. For all the time while he worked there (about 15 years), no one changed these pipes. Service - regular painting, mainly where the line ran along the street.
  4. Konnick
    Konnick 26 January 2022 07: 59
    -1
    Everything is fine, ideal fuel .... but, the combustion temperature is 3000 degrees. Here are the problems, as well as with a nuclear jet engine, heat-resistant materials. As for the rest, everything has long been known since the last century, only new materials do not appear to tame the hydrogen flame.
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 26 January 2022 09: 53
      +5
      Everything is fine, ideal fuel .... but, the combustion temperature is 3000 degrees.

      1. Konnick
        Konnick 26 January 2022 09: 55
        -4
        So what? What is the problem? What do you show rocket fuel for disposable engines that work for minutes, and show the table for air vents.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 26 January 2022 10: 08
          +2
          I showed you the temperatures in the combustion chamber. Or do you think that hydrogen in the combustion chamber of a rocket engine gives a higher temperature than in the combustion chamber of a ramjet?
          1. Konnick
            Konnick 26 January 2022 10: 16
            -7
            And why did they give it? That temperature is not a problem?
            1. Undecim
              Undecim 26 January 2022 10: 25
              +2
              Solved problem. The mode of operation of the scramjet engine of the Delta Velos Orbiter stage is identical in time to the mode of operation of the rocket engine of the upper stage of the launch vehicle.
              1. Konnick
                Konnick 26 January 2022 10: 27
                -3
                Solved problem. The mode of operation of the scramjet engine of the Delta Velos Orbiter stage is identical to the mode of operation of the rocket engine of the upper stage of the launch vehicle

                Actually, the article is about aviation, and not about space rocket science. I repeat once again - Do not compare with DISPOSABLE hydrogen engines, the problem was solved in the 60s of the last century.
                1. Undecim
                  Undecim 26 January 2022 11: 47
                  +2
                  Actually an article about aviation

                  Actually, the article is about rocket science, since the Hypersonix Launch Systems project deals exclusively with launching satellites into orbit. And the author "added aviation" completely off topic, mentioning the Tu-155 out of place.
                  If the author wanted to talk about "hydrogen aviation" - these are completely different projects and you need to start from 1957 and the Martin B-57 aircraft.
                  And the space startup Hypersonix Launch Systems has nothing to do with aviation.
          2. astepanov
            astepanov 26 January 2022 14: 50
            +1
            Quote: Undecim
            Or do you think that hydrogen in the combustion chamber of a rocket engine gives a lower temperature than in the combustion chamber of a ramjet?

            Of course, less. In the RD, a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen burns. In a ramjet - a mixture of hydrogen and air, and in the air - about 80% of nitrogen, and part (and very noticeable) of the heat of combustion of hydrogen is used to heat nitrogen. Roughly speaking, 1 kg of nitrogen is consumed per 32 kg of burnt hydrogen, and the temperature of the combustion products drops.
            1. Undecim
              Undecim 26 January 2022 17: 09
              +1
              Of course, less.

              Thanks for the correction. Only now I saw that "in the heat of the dispute" instead of "more" wrote "less".
    2. astepanov
      astepanov 26 January 2022 12: 07
      +2
      Quote: Konnick
      combustion temperature 3000 degrees. Here are the problems

      There's no problem. 3000 degrees - this is when burning with pure oxygen, and in a jet engine, oxygen is diluted five times with nitrogen, which absorbs a huge amount of heat and lowers the temperature. As far as - you can count for yourself, the task of the school. By the way, the combustion of kerosene with oxygen also occurs at a temperature of 3000 degrees.
  5. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 26 January 2022 08: 18
    +5
    There are more problems with hydrogen than benefits. Focusing on the world ecological psychosis is futile. It's like the ozone hole over Antarctica, which was hyped by refrigerant corporations in the 1991th century to eliminate competitors. About hydrogen scramjet engines, I can add the following - from the point of view of supersonic combustion, a number of problems are removed there, but many remain. Back in 92-XNUMX (I don’t remember exactly), a CIAM development demonstrator was launched from Baikonur, which proved the possibility of a hypersonic hydrogen combustion chamber. The then sovereign Kazakhs were very offended that they did not agree with that launch (and probably did not pay). We had to hurry, otherwise there would be no launch at all.
  6. Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 26 January 2022 09: 23
    +1
    The author forgot to mention another critical drawback of liquid hydrogen - low density. For hydrogen, this is 71 kg / m, and for kerosene, somewhere around 800. That is. even taking into account the superiority in calorific value, hydrogen will require many times more tanks!
  7. vadimtt
    vadimtt 26 January 2022 09: 26
    +7
    Ideal fuel? Which is extremely inconvenient to store and which, at the first opportunity, seeks to blow the vehicle to pieces? Wow, perfect laughing
    In this spirit, I can add that then the ideal oxidizing agent should be used - fluorine - for sure wassat
    1. Fission power
      Fission power 26 January 2022 10: 39
      -2
      This is the same from the point of view of the specific impulse - the most important indicator for space rockets. And yes, hydrogen as a fuel plus fluorine as an oxidizer has the highest specific impulse of any chemical reaction known to date.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 January 2022 15: 36
      -2
      Over time, the development of metamaterials will solve the problem of "leakage" of hydrogen from tanks.
  8. Illanatol
    Illanatol 26 January 2022 09: 48
    +1
    Quote: Jacket in stock
    For a car, it seems even theoretically possible.
    For missiles and aviation it is not clear.


    But it doesn't work in practice. Concerns Toyota and GM tried, but waved their hand. Expensive, and the weight of such fuel cells is too high (hydrogen itself is less than 10% - the rest is metal). Well, in aviation, weight means especially a lot.
  9. Errr
    Errr 26 January 2022 10: 04
    0
    From the article:
    The story is started only for the sake of a 50-kilogram satellite in the belly of the hypersonic Delta Velos, which, at an altitude of several tens of kilometers, will go into free flight, and the carrier will return home. The maximum speed at the peak of the trajectory is planned from 5 to 7 Machs.
    And it's all? In fact, even the first space for the Earth is more than 23,26 Mach near the surface of the planet, and at a 100-kilometer altitude (on the Karman line) - more than 23,05 Mach. Question to the author: "At the speed of a "space" object of Mach 7, where will this unfortunate entot fly?" lol
  10. Undecim
    Undecim 26 January 2022 10: 05
    0
    Such a bold use of hydrogen is explained, first of all, by the global "green" strategy - the leading countries are switching to the electrolysis synthesis of a substance.

    Well, why do authors categorically refuse to read before writing. The fact that oxygen-hydrogen fuel is preferable for LRE upper stages and upper stages was known long before the "green strategy" appeared.
    With an equal launch mass, an oxygen-hydrogen-fueled space rocket is capable of delivering three times more payload into orbit than an oxygen-kerosene rocket. That's the whole explanation for "bold use".
    1. Evgeny Fedorov
      26 January 2022 11: 57
      +5
      Thanks for the comment. Hydrogen is an extremely expensive fuel. If it is obtained cheaply, it will be environmentally "dirty". In fact, the costs of obtaining and storing hydrogen are higher than the energy effect of using it. Now hydrogen has become fashionable only because electrolysis hysteria is being promoted with its generation from renewable energy sources. Europe and the USA themselves do not know where they are stuck with windmills and solar panels.
      1. Liam
        Liam 26 January 2022 12: 04
        -2
        Quote: Evgeny Fedorov
        Europe and the USA themselves do not know where they are stuck with windmills and solar panels

        Well, how should they know, they don’t read VO. It is known that in the West there are complete seams with both science and economics. They drag out a miserable existence due to a lack of knowledge in these areas.
        1. Evgeny Fedorov
          26 January 2022 12: 14
          +6
          You're being ironic. The transition to renewable energy is a purely political power decision, which is very loosely tied to real ecology and climatology. They still cannot predict the most complex processes on Earth, but they are already ready to fundamentally change the economy and energy. From the last - in the pandemic year 2020, due to the decrease in emissions, the atmosphere became more transparent and, thereby, the heating of the Earth increased. As a result, the temperature rose. Is this the kind of effect that Europeans expect when they switch to zero emissions by 2050? By the way, after that they plan to reach a negative balance of greenhouse gas emissions.
          1. Liam
            Liam 26 January 2022 12: 25
            +1
            Quote: Evgeny Fedorov
            In vain you are ironic

            Well, how can I say .. in a country that is a recognized world leader in the economy, science and in general in advanced technologies and living off oil, gas and natural resources, they undoubtedly have an objective attitude towards ecology and the transition to alternative energy technologies
          2. Vadim237
            Vadim237 26 January 2022 15: 38
            0
            The most effective way to combat CO2 in the long term is to plant hundreds of billions of new shrub trees on the planet.
            1. Lontus
              Lontus 28 January 2022 14: 00
              +5
              Quote: Vadim237
              The most effective way to combat CO2 in the long term is to plant hundreds of billions of new shrub trees on the planet.

              In general, CO2 does not need to be fought.
              A very useful gas for the biosphere - the more the better.
          3. Kerensky
            Kerensky 29 January 2022 20: 30
            +1
            Going Zero Emissions by 2050?

            And Greta will grow the blades and masts of windmills in the garden. Metal for batteries will help her to mine and melt bunnies with fish ....
      2. Undecim
        Undecim 26 January 2022 12: 08
        +2
        And thank you for the article. There is no hysteria with hydrogen, because the process of earning money and hysteria are incompatible. If we consider Hypersonix Launch Systems, then people saw the prospect of a market for launching femto-, pico-, nano- and microsatellites, which is developing very dynamically, and based on research from the University of Queensland, they created an appropriate space startup, the "greening" of which is purely a marketing ploy.
        As for "hydrogen aviation", it is still very far from any results of commercial use.
  11. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 26 January 2022 10: 19
    -4
    Let them first create at least a prototype, and only then crow
    1. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav 26 January 2022 19: 20
      +1
      excellent, cons from ignoramuses who do not know physics
  12. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 26 January 2022 12: 00
    +3
    I think that this idea is unpromising for more or less widespread use. At one time in the 50s there was the same amount of fantasies and projections on nuclear topics - it seemed to scientists that it was "at hand" for atomic tanks, aircraft, cars, etc. The devil was in the details.
    Hydrogen has this devil in that the temperature difference at the junction of the mixing and combustion areas is simply prohibitive - the material experiences very strong loads, under which any change in specifications can lead to bad things. Hydrogen itself is not suitable for relatively long storage, since, as any cryogenic fuel, it requires severely negative temperatures, it is lost quite a lot due to evaporation, it has the vile property of penetrating through metals, causing their embrittlement along the way.
    A number of this can be eliminated structurally and through modern coatings - but one cannot expect any long-term storage in combination with the convenience of such from hydrogen.
    There should always be a liquefaction plant in the logistical accessibility from hydrogen consumers - and this is still an enterprise, both in terms of energy consumption, and in terms of size and explosiveness. In "home" conditions (and even at some airport) it is impossible to do anything with evaporating V. except to burn it, because a whole cascade of pumps of various designs and cooling systems is required.

    Hydrogen has its own niche - as an oxygen-hydrogen propulsion system for space launches, as a fuel for fuel cells. In these niches, its theoretical competitiveness is high, but not absolute. The same methane is much more "compliant" and it is also possible to establish its production outside the earth. The same RTGs and solar panels are much more interesting options for large, long-range or long-term missions than fuel cells.

    Methane outperforms hydrogen in the dry in terms of the variety and ease of production methods.
    1. Liam
      Liam 26 January 2022 12: 12
      0
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      any long-term storage, combined with the convenience of hydrogen, is not to be expected.
      There should always be a liquefaction plant in the logistical accessibility from hydrogen consumers - and this is still an enterprise, both in terms of energy consumption, and in terms of size and explosiveness. In "home" conditions (yes, even at some airport

      The owners of dozens of gas liquefaction and regasification plants, hundreds of gas carriers and tens of thousands of GPL gas stations, where millions of cars refuel every day, are thoughtful and look at your revelations with undisguised surprise ... they seem to be unaware that their infrastructure has not been viable for decades. ...
      1. Knell wardenheart
        Knell wardenheart 26 January 2022 12: 45
        +2
        At one time, part of the car drove around on alcohol, and there was infrastructure. So what ? It turned out not to be economically profitable - it has become a thing of the past or has remained squeezed into some small niches. Hydrogen is used on earth in technical cycles, I do not point out the unprofitability of its use in them - I point out the inexpediency of a large-scale transition to this particular type of fuel, because it is much less convenient for the consumer than classical or the same methane.
        Now in general there are a lot of fans to show off - electric cars, biodiesel. Some like it because they "seem" that it is environmentally friendly, for some it is a fashionable cool toy, someone thinks that it contributes to progress. The vast majority of rides take place in oil refining fractions, the vast majority of infrastructure for them.
        Individual states can support all these flirting with hydrogen at the legislative subsidy level, but comparing what needs to be done to get gasoline into the tank and what is required for hydrogen is heaven and earth.
        Water purification (distillation) - transportation - electrolysis (40% efficiency of large thermal power plants, up to 28% efficiency of solar power plants, windmills ~ 35%, of which the efficiency of electrolysis itself is about 30%) - purification - transportation or liquefaction on site (extremely energy-intensive process) - maintenance of storage conditions.
        At least two stages feature significant EE consumption - electrolysis, liquefaction. If we combine hydrogen production with heat generation, then hydrogen turns out to be very unecological (taking into account efficiency) and it is absolutely incorrect to talk about its advantages in this vein. Also, generation is used to a lesser extent at the stage of purification and storage.
        Compared to wells-transportation-refinery-storage, where electricity is used on a completely incomparable scale only at refineries, hydrogen simply drains liquid fuels into dry ones.
        If we are talking about a really large-scale use of hydrogen for civilian purposes, then it is electrolytic hydrogen that will have to be used, because large-scale consumption exceeds the volume of free and not used in industry hydrogen, methods of chemical production of hydrogen are much less environmentally friendly than electrolysis, methods others are much less productive (and require large areas).
        In this regard, of course, you can point out to me that hydrogen is cool, etc., but this is simply ridiculous. At best, 6% efficiency of liquid hydrogen production, taking into account all process chains - well, well, yes, the fuel of the future, as it is.
        1. Liam
          Liam 26 January 2022 13: 07
          -1
          Would have known how reasonedly About 100 years ago, horse owners described the danger and uneconomical construction of the infrastructure for the production, storage and distribution of gasoline for the automotive industry.

          And think about how expensive and inefficient the first iron axes were compared to stone ones ... and how difficult it was to establish ore mining ... and stones were lying everywhere and were worth nothing
          1. Ady66
            Ady66 26 January 2022 14: 26
            -2
            You are told about today's realities in the production, storage and use of hydrogen fuel. Now it is environmentally and economically unprofitable. No one is going to slow down progress and scientific research in this area. Everything has its time.
            1. Liam
              Liam 26 January 2022 15: 07
              +2
              Quote: Ady66
              You are told about today's realities in the production, storage and use of hydrogen fuel

              And who is telling me this ... the press services of Rosneft and Gazprom? What else can they say...
              But economists and entrepreneurs from all over the developed world - the EU, the USA, Japan, the South Caucasus and even China - say something completely different. And they don’t just say, but invest trillions in the energy transition .. Earning hundreds of billions every year, the largest automakers in the world probably don’t understand the economy and technologies, once everyone stops producing cars on internal combustion engines and switches to electrics in literally a dozen years.
  13. Tomcat_Tomcat
    Tomcat_Tomcat 26 January 2022 14: 33
    +1
    Hydrogen is an almost ideal fuel, and for most engines.

    For example, it provides a very high specific thrust impulse, that is, an excellent ratio of engine thrust to mass fuel consumption, for jet engines. This is a direct consequence of the record energy intensity and small mass of hydrogen.


    we (mankind) have not yet matured to hydrogen as a fuel applicable on a serious scale. Maybe someday it will become a reality, but not in the foreseeable future.
    It is extremely inconvenient to store, expensive and quite difficult to obtain, from the point of view of ecology, a very dubious benefit (for some reason, the "greens" "see" only the combustion products of end users and do not take into account emissions during the production cycle itself)
    Another important minus follows from the plus, small mass - hydrogen is very light, because its density is low - liquid hydrogen has only about 70 grams per liter, which is more than 10 times less than that of kerosene. Those. much more capacious tanks will be needed to store hydrogen. Moreover, the small mass of hydrogen is more than compensated by the mass of cryogenic tanks for its storage.
  14. KSVK
    KSVK 26 January 2022 15: 06
    +1
    Quote: vadimtt

    In this spirit, I can add that then the ideal oxidizing agent should be used - fluorine - for sure wassat

    Yeah, and hydrofluoric acid at the exit of the engine. Class! good
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 26 January 2022 15: 42
      0
      Why fluorine when it is possible to add finely dispersed magnesium to the combustion process air + hydrogen.
  15. gridasov
    gridasov 28 February 2022 10: 48
    0
    It is ridiculous to read about attempts to achieve hypersonic speeds in the atmospheric environment using mass ejection methods. And not understanding the principles of distribution of magnetodynamic loads. To do this, it is necessary first of all to create a mathematical model of dynamic transformations of complex load algorithms. And to understand how to level the dynamics of distribution or repolarization of the growth processes of these loads. It is necessary to think in processes, not subject static concepts.
  16. SID
    SID 9 March 2022 12: 30
    0
    It seems to be a custom article ... "Hydrogen is our everything!".
    Hydrogen is beautiful when it burns, it produces a lot of energy and does not pollute the atmosphere at all. And it is also inexhaustible and "raw materials" are literally everywhere, and it is not particularly difficult to extract it (hydrogen is obtained in passing in many industries; it used to be pitted, but now it can be collected). But there is also a number of "BUT", because of which hydrogen is still not really used ANYWHERE. And these "BUT" are as follows:
    1. Storage.
    2. Transportation.
    3. Accommodation on board and ensuring the safety of operation.

    Hydrogen has nasty properties: a) high diffusion in the metal lattice; b) high explosiveness; c) huge occupied (relative to other fuels) volume.

    Anyone who has at least a little practical knowledge in the engineering and design field can imagine all the problems that come with using hydrogen as a motor fuel in technology.

    For those who are interested in the topic of hydrogen for technology, take a look on the Internet and answer yourself for a start the question: why did an airplane made for hydrogen take off once, land, and the topic was closed.
  17. Electrical
    Electrical April 24 2022 10: 02
    0
    Another attempt of the system to establish its exceptional need and prove its usefulness! Only through the system and nothing else! It will no longer be possible to distill like gasoline in containers in the garden.