Explosive gas in Hamilton

Vincent J. Curtis

1 Apr 22

RE: Hydrogen on the horizon for Hamilton.  Op-ed by Bianca Caramento, Manager of Bay Area Climate Change Council.  The Hamilton Spectator 1 April 22 (this is no April Fool’s Joke!)  The BACCC is obvious a political organization, not a scientific one.

Yet again we see an Arts Major telling us what the science is.  The results are predictable.

Let’s start with hydrogen itself.  It is a colorless, odourless, tasteless gas that boils at -259℃.  Hydrogen is neither blue nor grey nor green, as alleged in the article telling us about science and technology.  Hydrogen has an explosive range in air from 18 percent to 59 percent, and a flammable range from 4 percent to 75 percent, enabling it to create lots of blue and grey in the hands of amateurs.

There are no natural sources of pure hydrogen on earth; it has to be created by either the electrolysis of water or the thermal decomposition of natural gas.  To electrolyze water to generate hydrogen, only to burn it to generate electricity again, should properly appear stupid even to those unfamiliar with the Second Law of Thermodynamics.  To decompose natural gas just for the hydrogen, throwing away the carbon, only makes economic sense in certain, high-value added operations.  One such operation is the making of carbon black; but even in that case the hydrogen is captured and sold as a by-product of the process.

In natural gas, carbon makes up three quarters of the mass and more than half the energy of combustion.  That’s a lot to send to waste.

In their dreamy-eyed desire for a hydrogen future, the Bay Area “Climate Change Council” failed to answer three basic questions: at what cost?; compared to what?; and what hard evidence do you have?

Other facts they failed to reflect upon are: 1.5 percent, China, India, and Beer’s Law.

But that science is too tough.

-30-