Ignorance and pandering to dopey politicians and stupid ignorant public.
Ignorance and stupidity explain the great bulk of terrible outcomes in the human realm. I have suffered my share.
Why do the XOM, COP and such big oil veer towards hydrogen so as to have life beyond carbon?
I was Big Oil (BP Oil International) in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1980s I was Mr Where to From Here, among other things. My boss in 1986 had been a paid up hydrogen enthusiast when he was with Shell in the 1970s. I explained to him why hydrogen was still a bad idea.
For a while I was keen on methanol made from supercheap methane. Or better still, gasoline from methane in a single step using zeolite catalyst. But that didn't get done during my time though BP acquired some zeolite talent with the purchase of SOHIO = but the guy I was excited by went into crude oil trading which I thought was a waste of rare talent.
Mobil built a gas to gasoline process in NZ but it was via an inefficient methanol step. The gasoline was good quality but too expensive.
Today I saw Shell advertising in Formula E. BP has wasted mega$bucks on electric car recharging. Zed Energy has wasted big money on bad ideas in NZ.
The oil industry is prone to doing stupid stuff to pander to stupidity. Greenwashing is the word.
I've been an electric car fan since 1986 but not at any price. Petrol cars have been amazingly improved. Electric cars are still not competitive, especially if they pay the same tax as petrol cars.
Producing and distributing hydrogen is s matter of dollars and sense.
At Luton last year I went to the electric car show. Toyota had an impressive hydrogen car driving around. Hydrogen distributors had their methods on show.
The car was loaded stem to stern with expensive engineering, albeit beautifully designed. A petrol car is beautifully simple and cheap by comparison.
Delivering 40 000 litres of petrol is cheap, safe and quick. Delivering equivalent hydrogen not so much.
40,000 litres of diesel is much safer.
Tesla has the right idea. Batteries and capacitors are the way to go, not hydrogen.
If photovoltaics are the energy source, then pump it straight into car batteries rather than through electrolysis and hydrogen handling in trucks to distribution points.
Same for nuclear, wind, geothermal etc.
But this is all just a matter of dollars and sense.
Newbies think hydrogen is new. They have simplistic cartoon ideas about CO2 and climate.
Back in the 1980s, I was pushing ( successfully) for BP to make more money ftom environmental concern. Until then the oil industry aimed for cheap to avoid capex. I argued for clean, performance, quality, and legislation against lead and other toxic emissions. BP Ultimate was born.
The false premises that most people believe are:
1 Earth was in balance (CO2/climate)
2 500 ppm CO2 will be catastrophically cataclysmically calamitous.
3 The climate models are science not bullshit.
4 If everyone gives their money to the government to save them things will be great.
Qualcomm has been the best way to cut CO2, not hydrogen. Aviation is down, commuting is out, driving to malls fading. Online work from home via Qualcomm is all the rage, ordering online via Amazon replacing malls.
And pretty soon there will be high resolution, low latency, 3D reality from anywhere to anywhere at low cost. With artificial intelligence coming up fast for symbiotic thinking and self management with Cyberspace assist.
Mqurice |
