Scam Alert: Hydrogen Hoax – The Next Great ‘Renewable’ Energy Fraud

Posted: April 4, 2021 by oldbrew in Critique, Energy, hydrogen
Tags: ,


Prof. Ian Plimer’s warning: “We have the DNA skills now to identify a person from a tiny little piece of meat. And that’s what would be left if you have an accident in a hydrogen-driven vehicle.”



Wind and solar power’s hopeless intermittency has forced rent seekers to engineer yet another fraud: hydrogen gas – which is to be purportedly produced using wind and solar’s occasional and chaotic output. Where wind and solar have never made any sense, the hydrogen proposition is completely bonkers.

Defying the laws of physics and thermodynamics – just for starters – the economics would make hydrogen gas produced using already heavily subsidised wind and solar the most expensive energy in human history.

And yet, the same class of dimwitted politicians are signing up in feverish earnest, as if they’re about to back a surefire Melbourne Cup winner.

As with wind and solar power, it’s the same too-good-to-be-true pitch directed at the starry-eyed, gullible and naïve. All, of course, in the name of obtaining a stream of taxpayer back subsidies that will outlast religion.

STT, always ready to rain on the renewable energy…

View original post 2,605 more words

  1. Gamecock says:

    Awesome picture!

    What is that structure?

  2. Graeme No.3 says:

    The first automatically operated wind turbine, built in Cleveland in 1887 by Charles F. Brush. It was 60 feet (18 m) tall, weighed 4 tons (3.6 metric tonnes) and powered a 12 kW generator.

    It takes 9 tons of water to make a ton of hydrogen.
    The bit I like is the suggestion (elsewhere) that off-shore turbines in the North Sea could use their electricity generation for hydrolysis tand produce hydrogen and pipe it ashore. Hasn’t someone told them that hydrolysis of sea water produces chlorine?

  3. Gamecock says:

    Thx, Graeme.

    You get 8 tons of oxygen with your ton of hydrogen. You can probably safely vent it to atmosphere at sea. And hope the wind doesn’t blow it back over your equipment. It is extremely corrosive. And can cause non-combustible things to burn.

    “Hasn’t someone told them that hydrolysis of sea water produces chlorine*?”

    I never heard of that. Certainly if you remove the water from sea water you get miscellaneous salts and chemicals. I would have expected sodium chloride residue. Lots of it. A real big problem amount of it.

    *Should electrolysis of sea water produce chlorine, that’s not much of a problem. Dump it back in the sea. Chlorine evaporates quickly from water. In a few minutes. I assume there would be free sodium if you have free chlorine. Sodium in water can be quite exciting. There are YT videos.

  4. ivan says:

    At least they would find that a hydrogen based society would go with a bang 😉

    Joking aside, it appears these idiots will buy anything without first thinking about it which leads to the conclusion that they can’t think.

  5. Graeme No.3 says:

    Suggest the Solway process for further reading. The chloride ion (in salt) replaces some of the hydroxide so less oxygen.
    Chlorine gas is about 3 times as heavy as air, so it would form a cloud near sea surface, and you wouldn’t want to be downwind of those wind farms. The results might please David Attenborough and Prince Charles (and similar neoMalthusians) but….not survivors.

  6. Graeme No.3 says:


    Sorry, my memory is failing, it’s the Solvay process and not what you asked about.

    “Despite the abundance of sea water, it is not commonly used for water splitting. Unless the water is desalinated prior to entering the electrolyzer — an expensive extra step — the chloride ions in sea water turn into toxic chlorine gas, which degrades the equipment and seeps into the environment.

  7. oldbrew says:

    ‘The hydrogen revolution in the skies’ … looks unlikely.
    8th April 2021

    The energy density of liquid hydrogen is only about a quarter of that of jet fuel. This means that for the same amount of energy it needs a storage tank four times the size. As a consequence, aircraft may either have to carry fewer passengers to make space for the storage tanks, or become significantly larger.

    ‘or become significantly larger’ – which means more fuel to fly more weight. In any case, costs per passenger shoot up, meaning higher fares.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s