I’ve been looking into renewable energy and other options relative to nuclear (not a big fan because of the waste), solar, wind, and thermal. Hydrogen fuel cell technology has popped up a bit and I’m wondering how this works. With my basic understanding, hydrogen is used as input and water (two hydrogens and an oxygen) are the output.
How does this reaction happen?
Is it not widespread because it’s energy intensive? If not, why haven’t more industries adopted this technology?
If so, why is so energy intensive and how much energy does it produce?
What’s holding us back from going balls deep into hydrogen fuel cell technology when the by products are clean (even usable) and the input is so abundant in the universe and on earth?
With the abundance of input material, It seems like this technology could be useful once we get to Mars as well.
Disclaimer: This isn’t for a class or anything. I’m a 31 year old bioinformatician just looking into a new interesting topic and wanted some context from someone with more knowledge.
In: Technology
Additionally, hydrogen production is an inherent process of nuclear reactors. Radiolysis reactions of ionizing radiation and water results in H2 production. Should we implement a mechanism to harness that hydrogen, it would be yet another reason to rely upon nuclear power.
The “nuclear waste” isn’t a scientific issue as much as a political one. The “Waste” generated from nuclear reactors is actually composed of approximately 95% reusable fuel. Other countries, such as France and Japan, already reprocess the “spent” fuel to make it reusable. A long time ago in a galaxy far far away, Congress arbitrarily decided that the fuel from reactors would be discarded instead of reprocessed (due to “proliferation concerns”). This was an extremely short sighted decision that did not consider the possibility of a federal repository failing to be built. Yucca mountain was the US governments Plan A, B, C, and D. Since it is unlikely to ever receive nuclear waste, we should instead begin developing means to reduce the current inventory of waste. If your primary concern against nuclear energy is the waste issue, you would agree that reducing the waste by ~95% is a goal worth implementing.
I will note, I am assuming you are US based (as I am), but the logic behind my response holds universally. Especially since the vast majority of the Nuclear World implemented US strategies on waste handling. My kudo’s go out to those who went against the mold (France, Japan, Finland by my last count. Hopefully
More exist).
Latest Answers