Thought this might be of interest...
Shell unveils world's largest offshore wind plan to power green hydrogen | Recharge
Shell unveils world's largest offshore wind plan to power green hydrogen | Recharge
World's Biggest Green Hydrogen Project...
- Thread starter GeeJayW
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Electrolyzers are the way forward, I’m currently working on a marine project based around Siemens Electrolyzers for Hydrogen production and a multiple proton exchange fuel cells for electric generation.
The vessel will still have to have diesel generators until the rules change, but early tests show 94% operation is possible on Hydrogen power, and making our own Hydrogen means no refuelling, so the vessel will self sustain largely. There are a few logistical challenges to overcome, mainly the size of the reverse osmosis plant to produce freshwater from sea water to be used as electrolyte, this plant is very large compared to diesel electric/battery set ups, and also has a bigger power demand overhead, but it’s far superior to battery electric technology, with MTBF for all the major components being double current battery life spans and 6 times diesel generator life.
The only major hold up is that we are currently waiting on type approval for a new Halide (modified CFC and HcFC free chain breaker) fire suppression system, as currently only Halon is suitable for Hydrogen fires, but it’s been illegal for 20+ years at sea due to putting holes in the ozone layer.
This is the future of transport, because it requires no infrastructure changes.
https://assets.new.siemens.com/siem...7fcef435ced002103.silyzer200-broschure-en.pdf
The vessel will still have to have diesel generators until the rules change, but early tests show 94% operation is possible on Hydrogen power, and making our own Hydrogen means no refuelling, so the vessel will self sustain largely. There are a few logistical challenges to overcome, mainly the size of the reverse osmosis plant to produce freshwater from sea water to be used as electrolyte, this plant is very large compared to diesel electric/battery set ups, and also has a bigger power demand overhead, but it’s far superior to battery electric technology, with MTBF for all the major components being double current battery life spans and 6 times diesel generator life.
The only major hold up is that we are currently waiting on type approval for a new Halide (modified CFC and HcFC free chain breaker) fire suppression system, as currently only Halon is suitable for Hydrogen fires, but it’s been illegal for 20+ years at sea due to putting holes in the ozone layer.
This is the future of transport, because it requires no infrastructure changes.
https://assets.new.siemens.com/siem...7fcef435ced002103.silyzer200-broschure-en.pdf
OP
OP
In a way it's a shame that Halon (bromochlorodifloromethane or BCF if I recall) had to be banned. It's brilliant at putting out fires. Something like 90% of the Halon that got out into the atmosphere and caused damage to the ozone layer, was released during fire training exercises. Had it been mainly used for fighting actual fires...
Last edited:
Both the Shell and Siemens ideas look great, but both were under way before the oil prices crashed - I wonder if the economics of the projects will now suffer and they will get delayed? E.g. Shell could probably afford to trial an uncertain future energy project when it was earning good profit at $60 / barrel, but can it afford it now at $30 when most of its businesses will be struggling to make any profit? More broadly, is the energy transition now going to be slower? Maybe this was in Putin’s plan for pushing down the oil price? Or maybe I’m just overthinking it! 
OP
OP
^^ I don't know either.
Indeed... chemical chain breakers are an absolute must where risk of Hydrogen fires exists. The technology is safe, but the Marine industry has learned hard lessons from past mistakes (Herald, Piper Alpha, Scandinavian Star etc) so the back up systems are taking longer to develop.
I have experienced an economiser/stack fire on an old steam ship that became a hydrogen fire and its pretty scary, but that didn't have 30 bar pressure behind them at the time. The German Navy patrols have been using a similar propulsion system for some time, but all the ships Siemens allowed us to visit had both Co2 and Halon 1301 suppression systems.
Both the Shell and Siemens ideas look great, but both were under way before the oil prices crashed - I wonder if the economics of the projects will now suffer and they will get delayed? E.g. Shell could probably afford to trial an uncertain future energy project when it was earning good profit at $60 / barrel, but can it afford it now at $30 when most of its businesses will be struggling to make any profit? More broadly, is the energy transition now going to be slower? Maybe this was in Putin’s plan for pushing down the oil price? Or maybe I’m just overthinking it!
It certainly feels like majors such as Total and Shell are so heavily invested into this such that they need to continue. If, as everyone says green revolution has to happen in 20 years, there is no way these companies can risk being sidelined and investors bailing out. It might seem noble, but oil stocks are and will be needed for some time to come.
OP
OP
Well, it looks like Shell have been looking at this for quite a while, like over twenty-years.
Shell Hydrogen opens hydrogen station in Iceland
Should I be sceptical of large wind farms going to poach 'green' energy from our planet? Do my 'O' level physics energy laws still apply?
Historically, the energy industry has not been very good at spotting long term 'unintended consequences' with energy sources.
Fossil fuels and industrial smog, oil burning and greenhouse gasses etc. If we are taking energy from wind, what other part of our eco system is missing out on that energy, and has anyone any idea of the likely consequences?
I understand that the percentage 'removed' will be very small, but then so was (volumetrically) the amount of plastic we dumped in the sea....and that didn't go too well.
'Who knows where the wind goes?' to quote the late, great Sandy Denny.
Historically, the energy industry has not been very good at spotting long term 'unintended consequences' with energy sources.
Fossil fuels and industrial smog, oil burning and greenhouse gasses etc. If we are taking energy from wind, what other part of our eco system is missing out on that energy, and has anyone any idea of the likely consequences?
I understand that the percentage 'removed' will be very small, but then so was (volumetrically) the amount of plastic we dumped in the sea....and that didn't go too well.
'Who knows where the wind goes?' to quote the late, great Sandy Denny.
grober
MB Master
Its possible that the Siemens technology was first developed for submarines prior to today's climate concerns? Perhaps another example whereby the normal design and development budgetary constraints don't apply to the same extent? Best expressed perhaps in that many projects flourish in an atmosphere where its not so much- "Can we afford to do this? " --as "Can we afford not to!"-- SAME PROBLEM-DIFFERENT MINDSET.
Type 212 (class) Diesel-Electric Attack Submarine
Type 212 (class) Diesel-Electric Attack Submarine
Last edited:
grober
MB Master
On a more mundane level that might have practical conseqences from someone who finds another consortium building a windfarm just upwind [ prevailing] of your own one.
Its possibly already a factor in large scale projects to harness river/estuary hydro power whereby silting and flow diversion/reduction becomes significant problem in the longer term?
