[HN Gopher] Skeptical About Electrical
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Skeptical About Electrical
        
       Author : prostoalex
       Score  : 15 points
       Date   : 2021-11-11 16:41 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.planeandpilotmag.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.planeandpilotmag.com)
        
       | bklyn11201 wrote:
       | For anyone else like me wondering why hydrogen is difficult for
       | airplanes (not mentioned in the OP article):
       | 
       | from https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210401-the-worlds-
       | first... --------------
       | 
       | Hydrogen has higher energy by mass than jet fuel, but it has
       | lower energy by volume. This lower energy density is because it
       | is a gas at typical atmospheric pressure and temperature. The gas
       | needs to be compressed or turned into a liquid by cooling it to
       | extremely low temperatures (-253C) if it is to be stored in
       | sufficient quantities. "Storage tanks for the compressed gas or
       | liquid are complex and heavy," says Finlay Asher, a former
       | aircraft engine designer at Rolls-Royce and founder of Green Sky
       | Thinking, a platform exploring sustainable aviation.
       | 
       | And there are other challenges. The energy density of liquid
       | hydrogen is only about a quarter of that of jet fuel.
        
         | ncmncm wrote:
         | Probably you will want liquified H2. So, we need volume
         | manufacturing of aerogel, for the tanks. If we don't go to
         | wholly new airframes, we will need to sling the LH2 tanks in
         | nacelles under the wings, like the engines, because the needed
         | tankage volume won't fit inside normal wings. (With a new
         | airframe with more internal space, the tanks could be inboard,
         | but maybe you don't really want big tanks of LH2 inboard.)
         | 
         | The LH2 would be electrolyzed on demand at the airport, using
         | power delivered by transmission lines from all over, banking
         | LH2 when the sun is out or the wind is blowing, when it is
         | cheapest.
         | 
         | Once these planes start flying, it will become impossible to
         | compete with them, because the smaller mass of fuel needed
         | translates to substantially more freight, both total capacity
         | per flight, and per unit-cost of fuel. But there are still
         | things to work out, so there will be an interim need to
         | synthesize jet fuel from atmospheric CO2 and H2, which should
         | soon get cheaper than extraction.
         | 
         | It would be helpful if somebody were to come up with a good use
         | for all the waste oxygen everyone is going to be producing.
        
         | PostThisTooFast wrote:
         | Not to mention that compressing or liquifying gas takes a
         | shitload of energy to begin with.
        
       | aplummer wrote:
       | This is an industry we will be trying to improve for several
       | hundred years from now at least. Very good chance electric
       | airplanes are not feasible today, or tomorrow, but this is a long
       | game. Maybe it won't be typical batteries, and very likely not
       | lithium ion batteries.
        
         | PostThisTooFast wrote:
         | I think it'll age pretty well. I want electric airplanes to be
         | viable, but come on.
        
       | thehappypm wrote:
       | I don't really buy the main counter arguments here.
       | 
       | First, the current tech as stated in the article is short
       | flights, like an hour. That's actually a niche that's already
       | marketed--luxury flights to Martha's Vineyard, Tahoe, Bar Harbor.
       | People are already paying for these flights today.
       | 
       | Second, the heat issue. Batteries do suffer from cold weather but
       | if it's an hour flight, with the batteries dumping their full
       | charge, between thermal heating and simply insulating your
       | battery it can stay warm.
        
       | sokoloff wrote:
       | I likewise don't get the breathless exuberance over the prospect
       | of electric airplanes. Weight matters a little bit in cars.
       | Weight matters one hell of a lot in light airplanes.
        
         | kurthr wrote:
         | Fuel and Maintenance costs, they're about 10-20% and 30% of
         | total costs (flight/ground crew, landing/taxes, and
         | amortization make up much of the rest) respectively. Combined
         | they are a huge portion of potential cost reduction.
        
       | LittlePeter wrote:
       | I have mostly questions...
       | 
       | Are we at the theoretical limit of energy density in current
       | batteries? How much more progress can we make, in theory? Could
       | it be that in 20 years we find drastically better materials for
       | batteries? Materials which would make electrical flight feasible.
       | 
       | Assuming high energy-density batteries are coming, shouldn't you
       | start now with developing electrical airplanes to be one step
       | ahead of competition?
        
         | evandijk70 wrote:
         | Assuming that higher energy-density batteries are possible is
         | an extremely big ask. Yet somehow, plane companies are valued
         | as if there is a commercial business case. I think long-range
         | (over 2000 km), big airplanes are as far away as fusion power
         | plants. Maybe even further, as fusion does not require any
         | theoretical breakthroughs. You don't see big valuations for
         | companies purporting fusion power generators, but for some
         | reason, you do for electric planes..
        
         | jareklupinski wrote:
         | jumping on with one more question: would there be an advantage
         | to lining the wings/flat surfaces with solar cells and patching
         | them into the powertrain, helping drive even higher efficiency
         | gains during optimal weather?
        
           | dsign wrote:
           | I did the math for that one, though not exactly for an
           | airplane, but for a boring land vehicle (think Ford Traffic).
           | I assumed futuristic photovoltaics with 40% efficiency, a
           | factor of 0.7 to account for angle-of-incidence
           | inefficiencies, pretty much all of of the van covered in
           | panels, for an area of about 16 square meters, similar to the
           | wing area of a glider Schleicher ASW 22 (I couldn't find the
           | wing area of a Cessna 172).
           | 
           | The result I get is somewhere from 3 to 8 kilowatts. A quick
           | search in the Internet shows that a typical car has engine
           | power starting at 130 horsepowers, which is 95 kilowatts. A
           | van the size of a Ford traffic probably uses twice as much,
           | and the Cessna uses 132 kilowatts.
           | 
           | So, no, I don't think we are getting aviation as it exists
           | today with solar panels and batteries, but one hour twenty
           | minutes in good weather will be enough for some recreational
           | pursuits.
           | 
           | I also did the math for sailplanes with solar panels. That
           | looks better, if all you are looking for is activating the
           | propeller for a small fraction of the total flight time, or
           | having an aircraft that can go very slow (that, in fact, has
           | been done). I'm just an amateur, but my opinion is that,
           | without solving the energy density issue, about 98% of the
           | aviation we enjoy today will be gone.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-11 23:02 UTC)