Technology @lemmy.world CrimeDad @lemmy.crimedad.work 2 wk. ago

Scientists propose converting natural gas into hydrogen directly in gas fields

techxplore.com Scientists propose converting natural gas into hydrogen directly in gas fields

Skoltech researchers have found a way to produce hydrogen from natural gas with 45% efficiency right in the gas field by injecting steam and a catalyst into a well and adding oxygen to ignite the gas. Catalyst-assisted combustion produces a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, from which the lat...

72 comments

Fuck hydrogen. Its a fake green product so oil companies can transition as slow as they want while still keeping their strangle hold on our society.
- It depends a lot on where the hydrogen is sourced from. Hydrogen that is generated from electrolyzers using renewable power is completely green (and funny enough, called Green Hydrogen), and is a good way to store excess energy from solar and wind.
  
  Oil companies however want to market hydrogen from drilling and refining, which is dirty as hell.
  
  It's an important differentiation to make though. Hydrogen is not inherently bad and will have plenty of green applications. We just have to make sure it's coming from the right places.
  
  and is a good way to store excess energy from solar and wind.
  
  Is it really that good of a storage method, though? The round-trip efficiency is quite bad when compared to other methods of storage.
  
  Sadly almost all hydrogen currently making its way to market is dirty. I have high hopes for it in the future but it seems like thinly veiled poison at the moment.
  
  And this article is definitely about the dirty kind or at least feels like it is.
- I disagree. We need hydrogen for GHG-free fertilizer and steel production and it's the superior choice for powering vehicles. Regardless, this research is interesting because it could help solve the natural gas problem.
  
  Hydrogen from gas fields is anything but GHG-free!
We're about to make Fracking look like a great idea 😂
Wait. Am I getting this right? They want to inject high-pressure steam and chemicals into a massive underground natural gas reservoir. Then set off a big fire + explosion.

Surely, nothing can go wrong.
- It's called in situ combustion and apparently it's a well established practice in the petroleum industry: https://glossary.slb.com/en/terms/i/in-situ_combustion
  
  So is coal extraction. How long has that coal fire burned under that town? 60 years?
https://xkcd.com/2929/
- I'm no expert, but this doesn't sound like a good idea.
  
  The alternatives are the status quo or severely restricting natural gas extraction. I won't say the latter isn't doable, especially if we can ramp up nuclear power capacity, but there's a lot of baggage there. We should welcome a solution that effectively makes natural gas an emissions-free resource.
- First of all, they spelled Heelys wrong. Second, Heelys are a great idea, even better as an adult in an office with polished concrete floors.
  
  So heely wheels deliberately pluralize wrong?
Yes because igniting fires underground is a GREAT idea!

Centralia,PA would like a word...
- https://lemmy.crimedad.work/comment/836445
This how you realize that there are people around that just want to blow shit up.
What could possibly go wrong?
- This worst case scenario is probably the same as with any reservoir of natural gas (a massive leak and explosion), which is all the more reason to convert it to hydrogen and sequester the weaker, non-flammable GHG byproduct in situ.
- I imagine that suddenly all the co2 stored as gas underground could suddenly come out and being odorless, kills the whole neighboring town
  
  Natural gas is also odorless and able to displace oxygen so I don’t see how it being CO2 underground instead of natural gas changes anything from a risk perspective. Maybe because the molecules are smaller and thus more prone to leaks? I’m admittedly way out of my depth here.
  
  I mean, all that methane coming out would probably be at least as bad, and the cavity had previously been filled with methane.
  
  It'll be a cavern deep under a lot of rock. If it can contain methane for zillions of years, I imagine that it can contain carbon dioxide.
- I'd be worried about the now excess co2 levels disrupting the normal saturation levels in the groundwater.
  
  Sparkling water, on tap!
Yeah, something about this screams at me it's not right.

Why wouldn't this work? What would go wrong?
- Producing hydrogen from natural gas still releases carbon in to the air.
  
  ...which is the whole reason for doing the SMR within the natural reservoir and leaving the CO₂ in there.
carbon monoxide? is that healthy for you?
- In some cases, yes.

You've viewed 72 comments.