Sciencesciencehydrogendronefuelenergylithiumbatteryobsoletefutureh2

Tue Nov 27, 2018, 08:19 PM

Hydrogen allows Drones to stay in the air for up to 4 hours vs. 25 minutes with batteries



HYCOPTER and e-Drone Zero Utilize Hydrogen Fuel Cells to Enable Longer Flying Time

Juan Plaza 11/27/18

The meager 25 minutes of flying time that most multi-copters possess has limited their utility, and it’s why so many different power alternatives to keep drones in the air for longer periods of time are being discussed and explored. Hydrogen Fuel Cells (HFC) continue to shine as the leader of all these power alternatives in terms of extending time in the air (TiTA). Not only are HFC efficient, but they also pollution-free, offering a double whammy to manufacturers aiming at markets that demand longer mission time and low emissions.

Recently, two announcements by well-known HFC manufacturers gave us hope that the drone market is getting ready to adopt hydrogen as a viable option to Li-ion technology.

On November 8, HES Energy Systems announced the commercial launch of HYCOPTER, an industrial-grade multi-rotor drone designed for large-scale industrial maintenance inspections.

HES has a long-standing reputation for producing the world’s lightest and most compact fuel cell systems, which can be as much as 5 times lighter than lithium batteries. Following a first world distance record set in the US by a NASA-backed team from OSU over 10 years ago, HES has been pushing the limits its energy storage technology increasingly further, working from Singapore on various UAV programs and with leading aerospace institutions around the world.

The HES launch statement specifically mentions the fact that the company is currently capable of over 700Wh/kg system-level specific energy and is working to push this limit even further thanks to a variety of novel technologies. Now, HES has merged its core technology with a specially adapted multi-rotor design so that flight durations can extend to 3.5 hours, instead of the typical 20-30 minutes of Li-ion chemistry...more: https://www.expouav.com/news/latest/hycopter-e-drone-zero-hydrogen-fuel-cells/

Clearly, hydrogen drones make battery powered drones obsolete.

Hydrogen for trains, ships, drones, cars, trucks, submarines and weed whackers



"Wasserstoff und Brennstoffzellen sind die Zukunft"

14 replies, 177 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 14 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hydrogen allows Drones to stay in the air for up to 4 hours vs. 25 minutes with batteries (Original post)
Aquila Nov 27 OP
Iron Condor Nov 27 #1
Aquila Nov 27 #2
Iron Condor Nov 27 #3
SatansSon666 Nov 28 #5
Iron Condor Nov 28 #6
SatansSon666 Nov 28 #8
Iron Condor Nov 28 #9
SatansSon666 Nov 28 #10
Iron Condor Nov 28 #11
SatansSon666 Nov 28 #12
Iron Condor Nov 28 #13
SatansSon666 Nov 28 #14
Iron Condor Nov 28 #7
oflguy Nov 28 #4

Response to Aquila (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2018, 08:34 PM

1. Hydrogen has to be produced

and part of the laws of thermal dynamics is: Power input is always greater than power out. Of course if that were not the case then we could simply produce a perpetual motor or other power source.

So, the question is: What is the ratio of power-in/power-out with respect to hydrogen vs petro fuels? And where is all that power coming from? How much pollution and other environmental damage is being done? Questions I bet you have not examined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iron Condor (Reply #1)

Tue Nov 27, 2018, 08:47 PM

2. You should be more careful with your bets

Too bad we couldn't have actually bet. I would have won.

It is hilarious how many posters here are 5 minute "experts" on things they know absolutely nothing about. Another example of "American Exceptionalism"

~50 kWh = 1 Kg H2










Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 27, 2018, 08:53 PM

3. Your post doesn't answer everything I asked.

Even if I were to accept what is essentially advertisement promotion as factual data it still doesn't answer everything I asked.

Also, if hydrogen is able to be as cost effective, safe and deliver power on a level competitive with petro fuels. I don't have anything against it. But you have not answered all the questions I asked. Just a part of it if I accept what you posted as factual data.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iron Condor (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 08:16 AM

5. There is kinetic and potential energy.

Energy required to produce hydrogen is producing a potential energy, which isn't the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 08:27 AM

6. And energy doesn't come from nothing, kinetic or potential

It takes energy to split a water molecule. The chemical bond between the atomic valence of each atom in a water molecule is not going to split spontaneously by themselves. It requires energy.

And any potential energy created will follow the laws of thermal dynamics and be less energy out than it took to create it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iron Condor (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 08:47 AM

8. Yes.

It takes more energy to break the hydrogen bond in a water molecule than the amount of energy released when it bonds back to water.
Once you've broken the bonds in that thermodynamic system the potential energy is stored in another thermodynamic system.
You still won't get the "lost" energy back but it doesn't mean it's totally pointless to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 09:01 AM

9. And I never said it was pointless

I just asked what's its ratio of power-in/power-out compared to peto fuels and to what degree of impact does it have on the environment which also has to take into consideration environmental impacts the amount of power used to produce hydrogen fuels. That's what I asked.. I even subsequently said I wasn't necessarily against hydrogen fuels if they were competitive enough with petol fuels with respect to regarding all aspects of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iron Condor (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 09:10 AM

10. If the source of energy is clean then it doesn't really matter.

Tho goal is to slow down the burning of fossil fuels.
Nobody is going to change the laws of thermodynamics and entropy.
Even IF it takes more energy to produce hydrogen to burn as long as the energy used is cleaner.
This is all fairly new but everyone jumps in
.
THERMODYNAMICS!!!
As if it proves their point. Not saying you do that, but people get that far and stop there figuring they've made their point and it can never be disputed.


Edit.
It's like unless there isn't a molecule of co2 released in any stage of producing hydrogen, it's all pointless because it isn't "green" enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 09:24 AM

11. The goal (as in the reason) why folks such as yourself to slow down the burning of fossil fuels

Last edited Wed Nov 28, 2018, 10:06 AM - Edit history (1)

is because you believe the burning of them is causing "man-made" climate change. However that argument doesn't sufficiently stand up to scientific scrutiny. When the historical data is examined it cannot be shown that the climate change is anything else other than what has happened numerous times in the past and the current change occurring is just mediocre to minimum in comparison. Additionally, since the industrial revolution we have had cooling periods in direct contrast to the human CO2 argument.

So while the pursuing the development of other fuels is perfectly fine. The only real reason its good for is one of economic competitiveness. This is good because of the potential to drive down costs of other fuels in a potentially more competitive fuel market. The climate change argument would be a not necessary reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iron Condor (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 10:10 AM

12. There are cyles for sure.

The cycle seems to be speeding up.
All because of us? No.
Co2 emissions certainly don't help. No matter what loons like Watts say.
It isn't a mystery how the greenhouse effect works and what gases cause it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 10:14 AM

13. Again, the change occuring today is just mediocre to minimum

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 10:25 AM

14. There is far better data than in those graphs.

I am busy right now but if I think of it later I'll post some up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SatansSon666 (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 08:29 AM

7. Edit... Dupe

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aquila (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2018, 07:12 AM

4. I love James May's logic

If you have a waterfall, you can use the electricity it can generate to make hydrogen, since you weren't using the waterfall for anything anyway.

Am I the only one that sees the logical fallacy here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Sciencesciencehydrogendronefuelenergylithiumbatteryobsoletefutureh2