![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
For some applications like spacecraft where weight is critical, it does make sense to use hydrogen fuel cells as a battery. But usually it doesn’t make sense.
For some applications like spacecraft where weight is critical, it does make sense to use hydrogen fuel cells as a battery. But usually it doesn’t make sense.
I’m surprised it’s only 10x. Running a prompt though a llm takes quite a bit of energy, so I guess even the regular searches take more energy than I thought.
As opposed to a lot of super compressed gas to haul around? I didn’t think this super niche use case justifies a whole different technology.
Scuba tanks only go up to 5.5ksi. I think you’d need more like composite over wrapped pressure vessels (COPVs) for 10ksi. Those are relatively new even in spaceflight. SpaceX discovered some new physics when their AMOS-6 mission exploded on the launch pad in 2016 due to oxygen freezing inside the composite layers.
Here’s some more info on carbon fiber tanks vs COPVs https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/taibc7/in_our_experience_copv_gainpain_flattens_out/
Yeah batteries would probably work. A large battery bank can have 1kwh of capacity, and induction stoves are about 1.5kw. Which means you could run a stove for about 40min. You could bring more for longer. I’m sure by the time you can’t get propane, batteries will have gotten much better too.
But they can still sell hydrogen, they can’t really sell solar panels. Even encouraging people to keep burning things (like hydrogen) benefits gas since it slows down electric alternatives to gas heating.
As I said, huge pressures. You’ll need super heavy or super exotic tanks.
I obviously don’t know all the cases, but if extending the life a second time is cost comparable to renewables, yes we absolutely should do it.
Portability is hard for hydrogen since you hadn’t liquify it without huge pressures and cryogenic temps, so you need big tanks. But cooking stoves does seem like a pretty good use case.
Fun project! But replacing gas with hydrogen seems really tricky. Hydrogen is much harder to transport without leaks because it’s such a tiny molecule. Electric seems better than trying to still burn hydrogen.
Or at least not decommissioning old ones. A dollar invested into new solar or wind goes further than new nuclear right now, but we’ll see if it tips more towards nuclear once the grid is a higher percentage intermittent and needs a lot more energy storage with it.
Modular nuclear reactors seem really cool though for replacing large long term generators like at construction or excavation sites.
But you can measure how much of the power of a grid is generated with fossil fuels at a particular place and time. For example, if they have more data centers where energy is cheap like from hydro or geothermal, then the carbon footprint will be less than if they were just using average power statistics.
I wonder if this is taking into account the energy mix of the particular data centers, or just using the average energy mix?
There are 16 thrusters on the service module and they only need like 4. One is malfunctioning. They’re trying to diagnose the problem to fix it for next time since the service module burns up on reentry.
Stick enthusiasts !stick@sh.itjust.works
Prehistoric gif coming in!
4.8kg per day gives 1.75 tons per year, giving an 800% increase. That’s still really big, thanks for tracking down the numbers.
48 tons per day, so it’d need to be less than 0.08% aluminum to double it.
Yeah you’d need to put up fewer sats per launch. But they might still have enough lift capacity on starship to do that.
I dread when the scammers will start using LLMs and voice models for their scamming. They could afford so many more calls.