Ein wasserstoffbetriebenes Lufttaxi flog 523 Meilen und stieß dabei nur Wasserdampf aus
https://www.popsci.com/technology/hydrogen-power-air-taxi/
Ein wasserstoffbetriebenes Lufttaxi flog 523 Meilen und stieß dabei nur Wasserdampf aus
https://www.popsci.com/technology/hydrogen-power-air-taxi/
26 Kommentare
A flying-car-like vertical takeoff aircraft created by Joby Aviation has completed a first-of-its-kind, 523 mile test flight using hydrogen power.
The aircraft, which reportedly left only a trail of water vapor in its wake, is being pitched as a more environmentally friendly alternative to traditional gas powered jets for mid-range, regional travel.
Though questions remain about hydrogen power’s long-term viability at scale, the test flight proves it’s possible to retrofit existing electric powered aircraft with hydrogen fuel cells to effectively extend their range.
The question is what was emitted during the production of hydrogen.
So what will be the flight routes be, assuming they’re permitted to fly across cities? What’s the plan in case of emergencies like mechanical or electrical failure etc?
Production of hydrogen is most commonly done via hydrocarbons, from something like natural gas.
Overall, more CO2 is released into the atmosphere, producing the hydrogen that way, as compared to if you had just went ahead and used/burnt the natural gas instead!
In short: using/burning the natural gas is far more efficient and better for the environment, rather than turning it into hydrogen fuel.
——————————–
That said, that’s NOT the only way you can produce hydrogen fuel.
You could do so with solar panels, and/or wind turbines, by splitting water molecules (into hydrogen and oxygen).
You could also use a nuclear power plant to do the same.
And then when the hydrogen fuel is burnt and consumed, it then recombines with oxygen, restoring the water molecule once again.
In a case like that it’s a pretty clean energy supply and cycle!
————————————
But for now, don’t be fooled.
By far, the vast majority of hydrogen gas/fuel is being produced via natural gas. And in that case, the question is mainly… why?!
Might as well just burn the natural gas instead. Again, it’s way more efficient, and it’s much easier working with natural gas than hydrogen gas.
——————————–
NOTE: there are actually some use cases for burning the hydrogen instead of natural gas, such as for example if you’re running engines inside an interior space with people inside walking around next to those engines.
There’s actually many forklifts that run on hydrogen for example, inside of warehouses. So that the byproduct of running the hydrogen burning forklift engine like that is just water, rather than noxious gases, such as carbon monoxide, which can cause carbon monoxide poisoning in enclosed spaces.
But other than that… not really much point of burning hydrogen instead of natural gas… For now.
It’s called a air taxi although there isn’t enough space for passengers it uses hydrogen fuel derived from non renewable natural gas . No commercial applications planned.
No, it did not.
It did not flew 523 miles emitting only water vapour.
It is modified electric airplane and it used mostly electric energy stored in batteries.
Only fraction of energy used in flight came from hydrogen stored in the airplane.
It makes it fake news.
Same kind of PR bollocks as BEV cars, never talking about how much CO2 was produced making the electricity in the battery cells and the production of the hydrogen on board.
Remember that like current EVs, this is just deferred emissions. Energy was still needed to crack water, and unless it was all through solar or other renewables, there are still emissions associated with it.
OK, so how is it going to counter low air tempereture issues? We all know what happens to the water vapour once it gets cold.. It turns in to ice.
My understand was that storing hydrogen requires a LOT of weight because of the pressure you need to store it as, so being able to make a *flying* vehicle travel 500+ miles with it sounds very impressive. Hence why I am extremely annoyed the articles says nothing about how they approached the problem of storing it.
Cool except hydrogen fuel costs 6 times the amount of gasoline
You have to include the emissions of producing the hydrogen. That takes a lot of energy, and isn’t „just water“ at the plant.
Op please don’t lie
LOL sure but tell me how much energy was wasted in producing the hydrogen that was used for this flight.
Spoiler: a lot more than you think.
I didn’t see them say how fast these things go. Probably slower than regular planes, right? Are they at least a faster than cars?
Just build trains! Sheesh. All this complexity to fly a hundred miles an hour when we could be working on all-electric bullet trains running on solar or wind power, then instead of one or two passengers at a time the train could move hundreds. You know what these planes are flying over? It’s all the special interests and red tape that makes it impossible to put down proper infrastructure.
I mean it cool and all. With no bad emissions, but you still have to go to a gas station to fill it up at whatever the price they demand for it
I’d rather plug in at home and pay 1/10th the price with electricity
I remember some years ago another hydrogen-powered air taxi flying 226 000 miles
Hydrogen is mostly producing by refining natural gas, which is a fairly inefficient process, so its likely that this aircraft produced more pollution than a conventional aircraft.
Awesome. Get the rich assholes like Bill Gates to start using these things, and after they’ve got 10,000+ hours of flight without any incidents, the rest of us peons will think about using them.
The thumbnail is fake you cannot see the water exhaust plume. It’s invisible
Narrow usefulness with the net cost of producing hydrogen fuel being too high.
Yikes, hydrogen. And I thought flying on a Boeing was scary.
It really doesn’t matter what the vehicle emitted. How much pollution was produced during the manufacturing process of that hydrogen?
This is bound to get someone murdered, the patent snatched and locked away forever…
Man as time goes on I’m more and more against flying cars, barring some kind of antigravity scifi shit that works without power flying personal transportation seems terrible.
Imagine losing a belt on your car but it’s 100 feet in the air, or an engine stops working.
Uhg here we go again. BEV drone flew for just as far emitting only drone farts.