Think about it for more than half a second. People are paying for usable energy - miles of range. Mirai shows roughly the same usable energy per volume and how does gasoline get there? By truck, so H2 could be delivered the same way.

Sure. By taking something like fifty times more trips with the same truck, or perhaps 50 trucks and drivers instead.

With high temperature reactions you use the output to heat the input.

There are still energy inefficiencies. There are current commercial Hydrogen production plants available to study. There are many commercial Ammonia plants to study.

I have done a paper on the end to end efficiency of hydrogen production for maritime use WRT Australia as a net energy exporter. It went something like: "What if Australia put up a million square KM of PV Solar Panels. How would How would Australia Export the energy?" I cited sources and had reliable figures of end to end process efficiency.

You started off with your thesis that it has to be liquified and kept at near zero temperatures to be useful.

No, I did not. It is right there in black and white. I said that:

Hydrogen is a low density gas. To make it energy-dense enough to be viable for energy storage, it needs to be liquified.

Which is entirely due to the logistics of getting it from the point of manufacture (say, the Australian Desert Solar Farms) to the point of use.

The idea "We can just make 50 trips!" adds to the cost! You haven't given a single example of a viable logistics method. Hopes and dreams for a magic future don't actually solve any problems.

I am all for advances in electrolysis, but so far the gold standard is Polymer Electrolyte Membrane cells. The worlds biggest plant is 20 MW, which is tiny. The individual cells are expensive and they wear out. The Magic 8Ball says "Check back in 2030".

Look, I hope you get your golden future of cheap hydrogen energy storage. I hope you get a jetpack too. But right now all you haves are pipe-dreams and Jam Tomorrow, all pushed by the same geniuses that came up with "Carbon Capture" on coal plants; which neatly doubles the coal burned for the same electricity generation. Like carbon capture, any solution which starts by doubling the price of energy is doomed to failure, and hydrogen is much more expensive than double the cost an alternative.

If I were to put down cash, I'd bet that we get an alternative battery technology and plug in Electric Vehicles before we cheap on-site electrolysis. Even a significant improvement in the anode and cathode of LiPo or LiFePo batteries could halve the size and cost of EV battery packs. There are a number of candidates.

Have a great day.

Think about it for more than half a second. People are paying for usable energy - miles of range. Mirai shows roughly the same usable energy per volume and how does gasoline get there? By truck, so H2 could be delivered the same way.

Sure. By taking something like fifty times more trips with the same truck, or perhaps 50 trucks and drivers instead.

With high temperature reactions you use the output to heat the input.

There are still energy inefficiencies. There are current commercial Hydrogen production plants available to study. There are many commercial Ammonia plants to study.

I have done a paper on the end to end efficiency of hydrogen production for maritime use WRT Australia as a net energy exporter. It went something like: "What if Australia put up a million square KM of PV Solar Panels. How would How would Australia Export the energy?" I cited sources and had reliable figures of end to end process efficiency.

You started off with your thesis that it has to be liquified and kept at near zero temperatures to be useful.

No, I did not. It is right there in black and white. I said that:

Hydrogen is a low density gas. To make it energy-dense enough to be viable for energy storage, it needs to be liquified.

Which is entirely due to the logistics of getting it from the point of manufacture (say, the Australian Desert Solar Farms) to the point of use.

The idea "We can just make 50 trips!" adds to the cost! You haven't given a single example of a viable logistics method. Hopes and dreams for a magic future don't actually solve any problems.

I am all for advances in electrolysis, but so far the gold standard is Polymer Electrolyte Membrane cells. The worlds biggest plant is 20 MW, which is tiny. The individual cells are expensive and they wear out. The Magic 8Ball says "Check back in 2030".

Look, I hope you get your golden future of cheap hydrogen energy storage. I hope you get a jetpack too. But right now all you haves are pipe-dreams and Jam Tomorrow, all pushed by the same geniuses that came up with "Carbon Capture" on coal plants; which neatly doubles the coal burned for the same electricity generation. Like carbon capture, any solution which starts by doubling the price of energy is doomed to failure, and hydrogen is much more expensive than double the cost an alternative.

If I were to put down cash, I'd bet that we get an alternative battery technology and plug in Electric Vehicles before we cheap on-site electrolysis. Even a significant improvement in the anode and cathode of LiPo or LiFePo batteries could see the size and cost of EV battery packs. There are a number of candidates.

Have a great day.