Bad News for "Green Hydrogen."

[NNadir]

Apparently scientists are not authorized to pretend the 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't exist.

Journal tells author it’s retracting three papers for concept that ‘violates’ law of thermodynamics

A physics journal has informed an embattled rocket scientist that it will retract three of his papers, citing concerns raised by the retraction of another of his papers last year.

All three articles appear in Physics of Fluids, published by AIP Publishing, and describe a phenomenon called “Sanal flow choking.” As we reported last year, some scientists have denounced the concept as “absolute nonsense.” The researcher who coined the phrase is the lead author on all papers, V.R. Sanal Kumar, a professor of aerospace engineering at Amity University in New Delhi.

The papers are:

“The theoretical prediction of the boundary-layer-blockage and external flow choking at moving aircraft in ground effects,” published in March 2021 and cited 24 times, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science.

“Universal benchmark data of the three-dimensional boundary layer blockage and average friction coefficient for in silico code verification,” published in April 2022 and cited 12 times.

“In vitro prediction of the lower/upper-critical biofluid flow choking index and in vivo demonstration of flow choking in the stenosis artery of the animal with air embolism,” published in October 2022 and cited 11 times.

AIP Advances, which is owned by the same publisher, retracted a paper by Kumar last year...

It's too bad; "flow choking" could have been used to make hydrogen I'm sure.

We need a slick produced video to rescue the papers.

Seriously, one wonders how the papers got published so as to require a retraction.

[Klarkashton]

1. Then again "flow choking" might not be used

In making hydrogen. WTF?

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. My God you're desperate.

Please document how this is at all relevant to the issue of “green hydrogen.”

https://www.reuters.com/science/study-sees-lower-chances-milky-way-crashing-into-andromeda-galaxy-2025-06-02/

Study sees lower chances of Milky Way crashing into Andromeda galaxy
By Will Dunham
June 3, 2025 12:37 PM EDT

…

Well, I guess that does it for nuclear power…

[NNadir]

4. Since I'm aware of the second law of thermodynamics, not an asshole seeking...

...to rip the seafloor up for so called "renewable energy," like say, um prominent antinuke Benjamin Sovacool...

Sustainable minerals and metals for a low-carbon future

Subtitle:

Policy coordination is needed for global supply chains.

...while pretending to give a shit about the acidification of the ocean, I'm trying to have something called "wit" about scientific fraud.

Of course, if one lacks wit, one might not be intelligent enough to grasp an attempt at wit, whether successful or eye rolling.

To be perfectly clear, I regard all the bullshit about "green hydrogen" to be a massive case of scientific, economic, intellectual, and moral fraud, and the appeal to this particular fraud - I monitor "Retraction Watch" regularly - "green hydrogen" is represented by something called "analogy."

I really, really, really couldn't care less however whether people of limited insight and highly selective attention - and let's be clear, I consider any asshole who carries on about nickels and dimes because of the expense of rebuilding the nuclear infrastructure they worked all their lives to vandalize, and say, Fukushima, to be people of limited insight and horribly low ethical status - get it.

As it happens, scientific fraud is on my mind, because I'm reading Charles Piller's Doctored, about fraud in Alzheimer's.

One time here, I commented on Piller's article in Science in connection with commentary here, referencing a publication by the so called "science editor" at Daily Kos, who wrote that Alzheimer's would have been cured if the fraud hadn't taken place. I pointed out this was nonsense, the same amount of money spent on the amyloid plaque hypothesis as a causative etiology as a result of the fraud was spent on another avenue may not have resulted in a cure: The disease has proved intractable through multiple approaches to addressing it, and "more money" in a different area may not result in success. (For full disclosure, I have worked, peripherally, with scientists working on Alzheimers, focusing on anomalies connected with the APOE4 gene expression.)

DailyKos is a website run and owned by an antinuke. Over there they used to carry on with a vast series of posts about how much they admired James Hansen, the famous climate scientist, until he said something that they didn't like, that nuclear energy saves lives. I reference the paper in question often here, repeating it whenever some antinuke asshole carries on here about his work:

Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power (Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (9), pp 4889–4895)

Again, I confess that I repeat it often, not that repetition of anything, be they facts or references or data, can get through thick heads. (I have had antinukes whine about my repetition of data they don't like.)

I can't by the way, do this at DailyKos. The antinuke in charge banned me for making a true statement, which was that if Jim Hansen's paper just referenced was correct - and I assert it unambiguously is - then opposing nuclear energy is murder.

I'm sure this made the antinukes there very happy, that I was banned for stating - to steal a phrase - "an inconvenient truth." One way to remain comfortable with one's ignorance is to filter information so as to not see anything that conflicts with one's dogma.

Let me repeat one more time: The idea that so called "renewable energy" can address climate change is a more than 5 trillion dollar experiment that has given a negative result: The degradation of the planetary atmosphere is accelerating, not decelerating.

Now, I concede that perhaps my effort at "wit" fell flat, especially with people with no sense of humor and/or people completely lacking in wit. Maybe it represented a private joke that I might have kept to myself.

Nevertheless, the analogy stands: Antinukism, a cult if ever there was one in my view, is a fraud, and it is, again, by appeal to Hansen and many others, a fraud that kills people.

Got it?

No?

I couldn't care less.

Have a nice day.

[OKIsItJustMe]

3. Equilibrion to lead UK study on nuclear-enabled hydrogen

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/equilibrion-to-lead-uk-study-on-nuclear-enabled-hydrogen

Equilibrion to lead UK study on nuclear-enabled hydrogen
Friday, 31 January 2025

Technical and strategic nuclear consultancy Equilibrion announced it is to lead a study to explore how deployment of nuclear-enabled hydrogen production could support the repurposing of the UK's existing extensive gas network for low-carbon hydrogen.

The company has been appointed by Northern Gas Networks (NGN) - the gas distributor for the north of England - and Wales & West Utilities (WWU) - a supplier of gas emergency and pipeline services across the south west of England and Wales - to lead the SHyNE study, which is supported by the Energy Innovation Centre.

Nuclear-enabled hydrogen is recognised by the UK's Low-Carbon Hydrogen Standard and uses the heat and electricity from nuclear reactors to generate hydrogen. Previous studies show that nuclear-enabled hydrogen can reduce costs for consumers, as well as providing resilience in production.

The SHyNE project will develop a deployment roadmap for capacity introduction to meet user demand, looking at estimated production rates, a geographical analysis that considers potential nuclear new-build sites in the context of existing infrastructure, customer demand centres and a techno-economic analysis.

…

Of course, we all know that "green hydrogen" makes no sense, so, by extension, neither does "nuclear-enabled hydrogen."

[NNadir]

5. I do not support the use of existing nuclear infrastructure to make hydrogen. I have written, however, many times...

...about thermochemical hydrogen for the production of the gas for captive use by appeal to process intensification.

Current nuclear reactors are not suitable for hydrogen production because they only produce, in the majority of cases, electricity. If one were to open a science book, one would recognize that electricity is thermodynamically degraded. Electrolysis further degrades the thermodynamics of hydrogen beyond that lost to making electricity.

The role of current nuclear infrastructure is thus to minimize the use of fossil fuels to make electricity, not to generate electricity for wasteful processes.

Being educated, I recognize that the world food supply is dependent on access to hydrogen for use in the Haber Born process. I have also suggested that hydrogen can be used to hydrogenate carbon dioxide to either methanol or dimethyl ether.

I often repeat reference to the 2011 paper by the late Nobel Laureate George Olah on this topic:

Anthropogenic Chemical Carbon Cycle for a Sustainable Future George A. Olah, G. K. Surya Prakash, and Alain Goeppert Journal of the American Chemical Society 2011 133 (33), 12881-12898.

Following this highly cited paper would be a good idea, but good ideas are often buried under bullshit and selective attention. Only a tiny fraction of good ideas make it to industrial scale. Some good ideas are attacked. Hence the destruction of the planetary atmosphere now underway because antinukes opposed a good idea.

[OKIsItJustMe]

6. Existing nuclear infrastructure is thermally inefficient

The majority of the heat generated goes into the environment.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/cooling-power-plants

… currently operating nuclear plants often do have slightly lower thermal efficiency than coal counterparts of similar age, and coal plants discharge some waste heat with combustion gases, whereas nuclear plants rely on water.

…

Don’t suggest I want to shut down NPP to replace them with coal-fired plants, but, coal-fired plants are notoriously inefficient.

The environmental effects of this waste heat are significant.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/cooling-power-plants#environmental-and-social-aspects-of-cooling

Environmental and social aspects of cooling
Each of the different methods of cooling entails their own set of local environmental and social impacts and is subject to regulation.

In the case of direct cooling, impacts include the amount of water withdrawn and the effects upon organisms in the aquatic environment, particularly fish and crustaceans. This latter includes both kills due to impingement (trapping of larger fish on screens) and entrainment (drawing of smaller fish, eggs and larvae through cooling systems) and the change in ecosystem conditions brought about by the increase in temperature of the discharge water.

In the case of wet cooling towers, impacts include water consumption (as distinct from just abstraction) and the effects of the visual plume of vapour emitted from the cooling tower. Many people consider such plumes as a disturbance, while in cold conditions some tower designs allow ice to form which may coat the ground or nearby surfaces. Another possible problem is carryover, where salt and other contaminants may be present in the water droplets.

…

Wouldn’t it make sense to put that “waste heat” to more productive use than heating the environment?


https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/hydrogen-production-and-uses

…

The role of nuclear power
Nuclear power already produces electricity as a major energy carrier with well-known applications. Operating at very high capacity factors, nuclear energy is well placed to produce zero-carbon hydrogen as an emerging energy carrier with a wide range of applications. The evolution of nuclear energy's role in hydrogen production over perhaps two decades is seen to be:

• Cold electrolysis of water, using off-peak capacity (needs 50-55 kWh/kg).
• Low-temperature steam electrolysis, using heat and electricity from nuclear reactors.
• High-temperature steam electrolysis, using heat and electricity from nuclear reactors.
• High-temperature thermochemical production using nuclear heat.

…

[NNadir]

7. I note that all thermal Rankine systems, including coal that the antinukes in Germany burn...

...are thermodyamically inefficient.

Of course antinukes have zero interest in attacking coal or gas, also duly noted.

It is true that in rare cases, nuclear heat is used for district heating, preventing the consumption of fossil fuels for heating, not that there is a single fucking antinuke here or elsewhere who attacks fossil fuels with the same vehemence with which they attack nuclear energy, but the practice is too rare.

In theory, though not in practice, nuclear energy because of the high temperatures accessible in nuclear fuels, can be used for process intensification. "Can" of course is different than "is," a point I often make. I often discuss this with my son, a budding nuclear engineer focused on refractory materials science. Like me, he doesn't give a shit about specious objections.

The selective attention is, again, noted. Antinukes should not pretend to care about the collapse of the planetary atmosphere. Clearly they couldn't care less.

[OKIsItJustMe]

8. Take your objections to the World Nuclear Association

They’re the “anti-nukes” you’re arguing with.

[NNadir]

9. Bullshit. I am arguing, as always, with "I'm not an antinuke" antinukes, who, as noted, don't give a fuck about...

...fossil fuels.

I note that concern about extreme global heating is a recent "add-on" to the scammers selling wind and solar power. It was always about attacking nuclear energy on grounds they attach to nothing else.

One of the fun things about antinukes, particularly those who pay lip service to "concern" about the climate, is they can neither read nor think very well.

Well, it would be fun, but their selective attention has left the world in flames.

Even were they able to read or think, they would misrepresent, as they have done repeatedly in this forum, what their real focus is.

Usually, in the current example, when confronted with the fact that coal plants are Rankine cycle plants, and thus require the exchange of heat and, in fact, often have cooling towers, they change the subject to something like nonsense statements about what the World Nuclear Association does, writes and advocates.

There are zero antinukes who are familiar with the World Nuclear Association which is a force for fighting ignorance, and only someone who knows zero about nuclear power other than the fact that they hate it - and couldn't care less about fossil fuels - could claim that I am arguing with them.

I'm been staring down antinukes for close to 40 years, ever since I understood the consequences of the failure of the Chernobyl reactor and compared those consequences of everything else. I know their ignorance, their lack of education, their indifference to tragedy very, very, very well. It's why I keep a Word document with standard responses to their bullshit chanted dogma.

Have a nice evening.