Yeah, keep shoving your head up your own ass. Maybe you'll see daylight if you shove hard enough.
You're going from "we can just run existing gas turbines with hydrogen" to "this one specific gas turbine can use mostly hydrogen fuel but still needs 30% natural gas". Again 90% was peak not average hydrogen concentration.
Companies are looking at developing natural gas turbines that run on 100% hydrogen. But they're targeting 2030 or 2040. Are you going to tell GE and Seimens to shove their head up their ass, too?
Keep fucking that chicken.
Hell, your own source says:
> Similarly, the goal of 100 percent hydrogen combustion capability will be achieved step by step, test by test. “With hydrogen-fired gas turbines we can easily avoid the ‘valley of death’ where brilliant inventions die before they even scale to full potential,” says Larfeldt. “The same turbines can be used with different percentages of hydrogen in the fuel mix, with brown or green hydrogen. Existing gas turbines can be retrofitted to the latest standards. It’s an organic evolution.”
So your own source disagrees with you.
I guess I'll keep "fucking that chicken" along with GE and Siemens and the companies that actually build gas turbines.
> So your own source disagrees with you.
Did you miss the "in 2030" part?
Yes, keep fucking that chicken.
And remember just how far up your own asshole you are with this: You've reject 90% hydrogen gas turbines, future gas turbines of only nine years from now, or even steam power plants running on 100% hydrogen. At this point your rationale is so dishonestly unfair it allows zero wiggle to justify any kind of electric cars. So time to admit you were wrong, not red herring your way out of this.
Im going to bed now, and I should have realized I was being trolled much sooner.
I was going to ban your account as well, but on a closer look it seems that the other commenter was being far more vicious, so I'm not going to do that right now. But perpetuating a flamewar like this is still absolutely against the rules—especially the interminably tedious tit-for-tat sort, which this one was. No more of this, please.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful.
The fundamental problem is that you have created an argument that's so up your own asshole that it doesn't sense, and if applied to anything else nothing is green. All because you can't admit you were wrong. Everything else you're saying is just a red herring.
> Im going to bed now, and I should have realized I was being trolled much sooner.
You're projecting again.
Yet again, you originally said we could use gas turbines for hydrogen storage. Not steam turbines. Of course steam turbines can easily be run off hydrogen, you don't need compressor blades, combustors, or anything special. Just a source of heat, a boiler, and a steam turbine. This is less efficient, so there's good reason to develop hydrogen gas turbines.
You're the one who first brought up steam turbines when you changed the goal posts to saying we could repurpose coal plants instead of gas turbines.
And good night.