If hydrogen gas is so clean and carbon free why is it not used to generate electricity.?

Question

If hydrogen gas is so clean and carbon free why is it not used to generate electricity.?

Answer 1

It takes more energy to separate the hydrogen than you can get burning hydrogen.

Answer 2

Hydrogen isn't carbon free because you have to get the hydrogen from somewhere.  If you get it from water (by means of electrolysis), it takes more energy to break the atomic bonds than you get out by burning the hydrogen.  The only efficient way we have of getting hydrogen right now is from natural gas, and the process releases as much CO2 as burning gasoline, so there's no benefit.

It's true that when you burn hydrogen as fuel no carbon is released, but the source of the hydrogen fuel in the first place is the problem.

Answer 3

Okay, some of these answers are a bit scary. I think some genius tried to guess and everyone based their answers on what that person said. No desire to insult any of you.

Hydrogen is the simplest known element and its energy content is the highest per unit of weight of any fuel (52,000 BTUs/pound). While hydrogen always exists in conjunction with other elements, such as in water (H2O), it must be separated from these elements and is therefore considered an energy carrier, as opposed to an energy source.

Pros: Hydrogen is an extremely clean fuel, producing few emissions when combusted directly or in combination with hydrocarbon fuels. When used in a fuel cell, the only byproducts are heat and water.

Cons: Although hydrogen can be procured through electrolysis, it is most commonly separated by a reforming process that uses natural gas and other fossil fuels. Supplies of natural gas are becoming tighter, and coal, one of the most feasible hydrogen feedstocks, is a source of major pollution. The technology to produce, store, and transport hydrogen power at a reasonable cost is not yet in place and likely will not be for some time.

In short, because it is either too expensive, not truly clean, or dangerous.

Answer 4

Hydrogen itself is clean and carbon free--but it is useful for storing energy, not genrating it.

In order to use hydrogen in a fuel cell, first you have to get the hydrogen--pure hydrogen does not occur naturally on Earth.  One method (tha tcurrently used) is to extract it from oil.  That, of curse, doesn't get you very far--you are still using jsut as much oil, more or less. The other (not yet commercially feasible) is to split water into its components of hydrogen and oxygen using electrolysis. But you have to put slightly more electricity in to do that than you will get back by burning the hydrogen with atmosphereic oxygen, as a fuel cell does.

It is useful, as I said, as a way of storing energy--and as such may be the key to pollution-free automobiles. But its not useful for genrating the energy in the first place.

Answer 5

because it would be too expensive to use on that scale and is very volatile

Answer 6

Hydrogen gas is very expensive to produce, it currently sells for about $150 per energy equal to 1 gallon of gasoline. Virtually all fuel hydrogen is made from natural gas.  Making it from water would cost about 4 times as much at current energy prices.  Utilities pay around $40 per ton for coal (8 cents per gas/gallon).

Answer 7

Please do a little research.  You need electrictiy to separate the Hydrogen from water in the first place.  Hydrogen power is not used to generate electricity because you would use more electricity to get the hydrogen than you could then produce with the hydrogen.

Answer 8

All other reasons set aside, the simple reason is that burning oil and coal, building hydro-dams & nuclear plants, are ALL cheaper with todays technology than hydrogen.  When someone comes up with an inexpensive method of producing it, then we will start useing it, but not untill then, unless the government starts subsidizing it, just like they do ethanol now.

Answer 9

What is your source for the hydrogen??? A 10 gal. liquid hydrogen will destroy the whole block if it explodes, and it leaks through almost everything.

Answer 10

Hydrogen can be produced by electrolysis from water and under current circumstances, that process requires either another carbon based fuel or nuclear energy source to drive the reaction. Unfortunately, when these power sources are used, the carbon fuel causes significantly greater problems than it solves and if nuclear energy is used, a higly dangerous waste is produced. Fortunately, the electrolysis of water can be performed by using either wind or solar photovoltaic power once we switch en mass to those energy sources. When solar or wind become our primary energy sources with coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear as mere backups when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine, all excess electricity can be either stored as hyrdrogen gas or used as a carbon free, clean fuel to eventually replace carbon or nuclear polluting energy sources. Since solar and wind are ready to compete with these other fuels, it would be wise to study this more before we make further costly and dangerous mistakes in our energy policy. Hydrogen is very clean and will eventually serve as a valuable backup at power stations for those days when wind and sun are not viable. However, until politicians and big industry stop making cash from the old systems, this outdated rumor about hydrogen with remain unchallenged.

Answer 11

As someone in the power generation and distribution business, I am very impressed with answers given to this question. So often I see such simplistic responses to this type of question that it shows people haven't really thought through the ramifications. One (of many) things we in the business have to consider is the amount of energy consumed to create the energy. Unfortunately, coal is the winner in that analysis. The other main element is, can we generate enough "base" power to provide for everyone's needs from that source. Coal wins again. As a practical matter, nuclear energy may be the theoretical winner, but the political fight is overwhelming to build those generators. In the long run, what will happen is there will be a more diverse set of power sources. Some will be environmentally superior to goal and gas, as well as coal and gas.

Answer 12

its a total waste of time and energy

Answer 13

The biggest problem is efficiency, hydrogen produces a lot less energy per mole than organic fuels.

The second biggest problem is as said, obtaining it. There are actually many industrial processes that already produce rather a lot of hydrogen as byproducts, which is collected and sold/used. Though this is no where near enough to run a power plant on so hydrolysis of water would prob be the easiest way, however as said this requires more energy than it gives.

The third problem, which isn't as big as some people make out is that it is explosive, which is why there are many safety precautions in place for these types of things, yes there have been devastating events in industry over the years but they are becoming more and more infrequent and there are really fatalities. However its generally useful that it burns as that's what we would be using it for!

Answer 14

it would produce a lot of carbon and be very expensive to produce that amount of hydrogen needed to power a power station.

maybe it might go the other way and make electric cheaper, but then how will all the rich people feel?? come on, would we really want all the rich people to stop making all that money?? lol

Answer 15

Because it is very expensive and very dangerous to handle. Making H2 is a very costly process. H2 is so explosive it requires very expensive and complex systems to store and use it.

Answer 16

It will cause power stations to explode perhaps?

Answer 17

Well, it's only explosive when it comes in contact with oxygen... oh yeah, that's everywhere...

But the other problem: it takes electricity to separate hydrogen FROM oxygen in the form we find most commonly here on the planet Earth--water. So we to 'apply' energy to break it from water in order to use it to power something else. You have to input greater amounts of energy to get back what you need.

Oil: mother nature and time have done all the hard work... but it is still a messy business...

Answer 18

because we have a oil based economy and the people in charge don't what this to end any time soon . even for cleaner and carbon free alternatives basically its all about money and power not the health of  our world . most people who are not  taken  in by the misinformation will tell you the same . sorry

Answer 19

You are right to think that hydrogen could be a clean fuel (for cars) in a sense.

It is clean in the sense that the only emission when it is burnt is water.  But manufacturing the hydrogen is a far from clean process requiring the burning of fossil fuels (and thus the release of carbon dioxide which contributes to climate change).

The only way in which hydrogen could make a positive contribution would be to manufacture it using power from a sustainable source such as wind, wave, tide etc so that the hydrogen would be a way of storing that energy.  But there are lots of problems to overcome first (improving efficiency so that energy is not wasted and improving safety, because hydrogen is so explosive).  And we do not yet have enough sustainable electricity generation to need to store the energy in this way.

Best wishes

Answer 20

At present the procedure for collecting hydrogen cost more than the energy it can produce.  There are also problems with storage and transportation.  Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the Universe, that makes it very attractive as a green fuel.  The bi product of hydrogen used as a fuel is water that also makes it very attractive.  You can be sure that the use of Hydrogen as a fuel will not fall by the wayside any time soon.  Advances in technology will eventually make Hydrogen a viable fuel.  Unfortuneately,  it may be too late to bring about significant change.

Answer 21

Is it highly explosive?..