On 13/08/2019 23:37, John Rumm wrote:
Indeed, although while hydrogen fuel cycle efficiency is horrid[1], it
does have some quite attractive aspects that allows it to be used and
deployed in much the same way and with similar infrastructure as used
for petrol/diesel - quick refilling, bulk road/rail distribution as well
as manufacture on site.

No. NONE of those things are in any way simiar to carbon based fuels.
It is te smallest atom you can get.
It leak through the smallest of holes
It is highly explosive.
It has a very low flashpoint
It needs to be kept under pressure.
It chills when it expands
It is extremly low energ dnsity by VOLUME so nees massive tanks.


It only makes any sense with abundant nuclear generating capacity
obviously.

It doesnt make sense even then. Kerosene level hydrocarbons are like
lithium based batteries. They are at the top of the curve between good
and bad compromise.

In terms of energy per unit VOLUME, nice balance between utility and
safety, cleanlisness of burn, they are all 'about right'

Nuclear power shpuld MAKE 'fossil' fuel....

--
€œwhen things get difficult you just have to lie€�

€• Jean Claud Jüncker