วีดีโอ

In propper old school engineering (what do you put in - what do you get out) diesel engines are the future.....but the powers that be killed them. Imagine a straight 6 diesel with a turbo and a nitrous oxide capture a re-injection. Probably too nerdy for this channel but folks, we are being conned at every turn.

Net Zero is a global elitists code word for socialism, giving them control over the people for wealth inflows , these people types think they own the planet and us! So after Russia working hard to pull themselves out of Marxism and the west through ‘the great reset’ are being nose led directly back into that! Delaying peoples mindsets while the laws are put in place to take control where the governments become simple middle management where the two class modern slavery system allows the ‘lucky’ few to move around and travel on their own free will while the others are controlled with biometric surveillance and you will be refused access to your CBDC if you dare speak out being treated like crap! Research it! Hence all the items that do not make sense ini recent policy!

It all boils down to fooling the public whilst fleecing them of their money. One Big Moneygrab for the Unicorn believers. Thanks Greta.😠

Are those new gas powered generating stations only being allowed because we may only have 10 years of gas supply left in the North Sea, giving a convenient excuse to convert them to hydrogen, import hugely expensive LNG from America or cancel the ban on Russian gas. Obvious answer to me would be start fracking and stop relying on imported electricity, or the gas to generate power in the UK.

On percentages, if something doubles in cost, that's a 100% increase and it costs 200% of what it was before. The "increases" in the video didn't subtract the original 100%.

One US gallon of gasoline has a density of 2.85769 kg, 13% (0.3715 kg) is (efficient) hydrogen, 87% (2.48619 kg) is (inefficient) carbon, 0.3715 kg of hydrogen * 33.33333 kwh of hydrogen energy = 12.38333 kwh of hydrogen energy per gallon. So my gas tank holds 21.4 US gallons, (61.15 kg) and 13% (7.95 kg) is hydrogen. Fuel efficiency for my machine is 513 miles ÷ 21.4 gallons = 24 miles per gallon. But, I can increase efficiency simply by converting miles per gallon of gasoline to miles per kg of hydrogen, 513 ÷ 21.4 ÷ 0.3715 = 64.53 miles per kilogram of hydrogen. Or I can decrease efficiency by converting to miles per kg of gasoline, 513 ÷ 21.4 ÷ 2.85769 = 8.39 miles per kg of gasoline. Or electric, 513 ÷ 21.4 ÷ 12.38333 = 1.94 miles per kwh. Or I can convert to, 7950 ÷ 513 = 15.5 grams of hydrogen per mile. So I’m already burning hydrogen and it’s all good and I really don’t care about any problems shell might have with production, until the gasoline is in my tank, it ain’t my problem.

Good luck with your operation Paul and keep up the good work. Thank you.

Is there only one knob in the climate change/net zero energy department trying to control CO2?

Hi Paul. We seem to go round in ever decreasing circles , till eventually we will discover that physics and thermodynamics have to be the deciding factor . The energy contained within a fossil fuel per given unit has no existing rival , and definitely not one that doesn’t produce more carbon in its production . But this is totally lost on those who are trying to achieve the impossible , of course we may one day find a way but that’s years away if ever . Meanwhile we have to live and prosper to get to the future in the first place . As a point of interest Paul a certain Lord has a new video out , if you can manage to track it down ? 😀👍

Co2 is the gas of life. But like in 2020 most people are easily fooled by bs.

Thankyou Paul, please don't give up the fight. You're my my main source of info when I try to wake up friends and family to the climate con.

Greener-than-green, nuclear enabled hydrogen (NEH) will ultimately be the only way hydrogen is manufactured. It will never be burned to generate electricity; it will only be distributed by a gas network; it will not be used for domestic/commercial/etc. heating and hot water; it will allow diurnal load following of electricity demand; it will eliminate all forms of energy storage other than that required for an operational gas grid; it will be used for all forms of transport, meaning aviation also (note the light weight data): th-cam.com/video/OFb7mLlYLaw/w-d-xo.html Nuclear power for all electricity generation and the manufacture of NEH will [eventually] eliminate the 'evils' of burning fossil fuels (FFs). By the end of this century, I can stick my finger in the air ☝ with the best of them [energy analysts/consultants] and say, with equal probability of success, existing technologies (Gen III+ nuclear power plants; PEM and SOEC electrolysers; carbon capture and utilisation) will reduce FF burning by ~75% and eliminate it completely by 2120: colinmegson.substack.com/p/how-nuclear-enabled-hydrogen-neh The argument that the USA's decarbonisation efforts are virtually pointless in the face of China's build out of coal plants, is forceful and valuable to wealthy, influential FF-interests. Perplexingly, because it is never used, an alternative, super-powerful argument exists for the USA: Some $500 billion per year* can be saved by a 100% nuclear-powered grid through eliminating the costs of pollution from FF generated electricity. Collaterally, millions of premature deaths/vile illnesses can also be saved: colinmegson.substack.com/p/are-usas-politicians-completely-mad * The one proviso - are the researched cost figures anywhere near correct for 2024?

Hi Paul, thank you for your excellent and detailed work - it is appreciated. My house is probably one of the closest to the proposed Hynet scheme in Cheshire. On thursday they are hosting an opportunity to go and ask questions. This is not a public meeting or presentation but you walk in and talk to them. They are clearly scared of a community debate and meeting. I will be raising this with my MP and the local councillors. Do you have any advice on questions to ask from the Hynet team?

Paul Burgess. Am I right in thinking that these flywheels will be driven at speed by an electric motor fed by the grid and when the grid falls the momentum of the flywheel will drive said motor except it will now be a generator or alternator feeding into the grid ? What speed will this flywheel spin at under normal healthy conditions ? Will the magnetic drag of the alternator slow the flywheel speed right down very quickly. Am I right in thinking this ? Cheers

Unfortunately, subjects such as science and engineering have taken a back seat with our political class and education system. This is why many of us are in for a rude awakening in the coming years. It’ll probably be too late by then. Thank you for keeping us informed Paul. Much appreciated.

There is the theory that the Hindenburg disaster was a staged event to end the cheap, efficient form of transport (in favour of far more profitable fossil fuel engined craft) and that the numerous airships (many thousands it is rumoured) were never usually filled with hydrogen at all.

Despite Alstom's "defective" German trains, hydrogen fuel cell trains would save huge infrastructure and train costs for the Trans-Penine route that would otherwise be electrified. Many existing tunnels are too small to accommodate catenary. New tunnels would be much smaller and bridges would not need to be reinforced to carry the 2,500V overhead catenary or trains to have pentograms and associated onboard equipment. The economics are not as simple as described here.

Hydrogen does make sense for jet engines because of its significantly higher energy density than aviation fuel. Carbon fibre tanks are old hat. Graphene based tanks are under development for air frames, reducing the weight of the aircraft thus improving operational efficiency. The notion is to use excess wind energy that we are paying for anyway for when wind turbines are switched off when demand is low (something you have criticised previously).

Another great video and thank you for all the work you put into your videos , it does make it much easier for a layman such as me to understand and thank goodness for all your good knowledge on these subjects .

They're going to bankrupt us and they don't seem to care.

The rich making money on ir

Excellent video, Paul - I did laugh out loud (in a sarcastic cackle-kind of way) at the 100kw of energy used to produce 38kw!! 🤦‍♀

You are a national treasure, good luck with your eye surgery.

Another pyramid scheme.

Great content . Just to echo what you said . There is no way to keep hydrogen liquid above -240 c , so inorder to carry reasonable amount s of hydrogen fuel you are left with very high pressure vessels .

Net Zero is just an excuse for the rentseekers and shills to extract as much $$$ from governments and citizens.

Absolutely Paul.The only successful application of Hydrogen as a fuel has been ballistic Missiles and Space rockets.Its applications are very limited by its extreme cost and difficulty to handle and store.When Boris Johnson announced they were adding hydrogen to out natural gas supplies I couldn’t believe what I was hearing.Not a single ‘journalist’ questioned it.

Hi Paul I agree and disagree at the same time let me explain, pumping hydrogen or transportation around the country is stupid for all the reasons you stated. However, because we are paying wind farms to stop production of electricity when the wind blows too much this is also stupid. So what I would propose is one large electric to hydrogen conversion plant with storage on site and when the wind does not blow the hydrogen can be converted back to electricity. The grid could divert excess power to he plant when it is oversupplied and call on it for power when required. Yes I know and understand we lose about 70% of the energy, but for load balancing it could work. Of course not building all these stupid windmills is the real answer but our current energy minister is hell bent on building the dam things so if he gets his way the hydrogen balancing might be the only way to stop paying these wind farms to do nothing. What do you think?

How does carbon created from renewables = net zero? All those wind turbines and batteries in electric cars creates a lot of carbon in their manufacture.

Thanks Paul and good luck with your opp, hope your peepers are shipshape very soon. These green schemes have got to be scams to harvest government ie our money into these scammers hands, so many of these schemes make no logical sense.

It’s carbon Capture again. How I laughed. Do they run on rainbow fairy dust? Unicorn farts?

Thank you for this very practical and informative video , i have not seen these subjects in previouse Hydrogen subject matter , i myself spent many years involved in automoive ICE development And as you said there is no problem to begin whith appart from perhaps ICE component quality vs cost ,planned obsolescence ect in fact ICE engines have never been so clean and we can make them cleaner without the nonsence being proposed many thanks for this super information.

Bollocks advert,😂just pure propaganda 🙄

From the earliest time when man discovered fire, the burning of wood, hydrocarbons have been the natural carrier for hydrogen combustion. Hydrocarbons are a natural miracle to easily and safely store hydrogen. Hydrogen gas requires a lot of energy to produce and has poor energy density at atmospheric pressure. Storage requires extreme high-pressure containment, which requires a great amount of energy to achieve. Hydrogen traction vehicles require extreme high pressure tanks to withstand pressures of 10,000 PSI to enable them to be made small enough. Much like an EV's battery weight, hydrogen fuel tanks also add additional weight to a vehicle. This added weight has to reduce payload or reduce range or both. The energy required to produce and store pure hydrogen as a combustible fuel source is greater than its output. The law of entropy is at play here. The least amount of energy transitions the more efficient a process is. Hydrogen's high energy requirements make it impractical and too costly for everyday use.

I think they want the high costs. That works for the super rich people so they can control the rest of us. None of us will be able to afford transport with the massive rising costs. I think we should stick to oil and gas, because that is the way forward.

The oceans are cooling? Really? Your graph (00:38) shows the daily global temperature of the oceans to be at record highs through July and within 0.1 C of the highest ever recorded for August. 2024 will be the warmest year on record. This cooling you claim could not be anything to do with the onset of the La Nina phase of the ENSO cycle could it? That is baffling no scientists, it has been predicted for months. According to the European Copernicus Climate project report issued on 3 October 2024 " Ocean surface temperatures continue to break records, globally and regionally." She (Zharkova) is a "truth teller". Nothing could be further from the truth. Please have explain why in her original paper (2015) and her presentations about it on this subject she makes several false claims. For example, she claims to have been the only one to have predicted that solar cycle 24 would be weaker than solar cycle 23. She points to a paper that has over 100 estimates of SC24 and the majority of them were lower than SC23 and many of them got a lot closer to the eventual peak than she did. She also claimed that SC25 would be lower than SC24. It surpassed SC24 months ago and her estimate was about 90-100 and the peak is currently 141 and still rising. So much for her claim of 2% accuracy (another falsehood). Please also have explain why in her plot of solar activity, she shows that the dates of the MWP, the LIA, the Maunder Minimum and Dalton Minimum all align perfectly with her model apparently validating it (so she claims). Unfortunately, she got the dates of all of these completely wrong. They in fact invalidate her model and does not support it. These are just a few of the errors in her work. She continues with this fairytale because she refuses to admit she is wrong, not because she believes she is right. I.e, stubbornness.

Good luck with your ooeration and thank you for all the informative videos.

Great work once again Paul. Hope your operation is successful and look forward to more factual information. All the best.

I'm told that if just the thwaits glasier alone melts is will raise sea level by 10 metres, swamping all our nuclear power stations and everything else. Since this one and all the others as far as I can see are melting and breaking up at a rapid rate both from warmer. temperatures from above and warmer waters from below. Can you tell me where these growing glasiers are to put my silly mind at rest so I can be as relaxed as you. I think the exon scientists were bang on in the 70s and 80s before they were silenced

The lunacy of all these fringe renewable solutions never ceases to amaze me! How on earth is it possible that so many politicians all over the world are taken in by all of this? There is no way in hell that I will own a hydrogen car or use a transport fleet, whether bus, train, or airline. All you have to do is send out thousands of copies of the Hindenburg explosion video to convince everyone of how futile and stupid the idea that hydrogen is an alternative fuel for any normal transport is.

😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 that movie sooo funny it's as tho they have never looked at the periodic table 😂🤣😂🤣 using same pipes! 😂🤣 it's a low carbon gas 😂🤣😂🤣

Hi Paul, for hydrogen in aviation a better example would be Tu-155 experimental jet that flew 5 times on hydrogen, not the gimmick in the video.

Hydrogen, if invested in, has the power to completely destroy our economies.

Thanks Paul!

Standing Under Nature Net Zero Agenda 2030 th-cam.com/video/6fyOF9VOhaY/w-d-xo.html

But it works perfectly fine in SimCity

I just can’t get over the slick presentation on hydrogen as the wundarfuel of the future. As though the thermodynamics and engineering of the process was oh SO Simple!! It’s like the human race has been so silly as to burn hydrocarbons when hydrogen was the amazingly versatile energy we’ve been looking for all the time. Heavens above is our futures going to be cold and hungry - with occasionally explosions of hydrogen - adopting this dystopian hydrocarbon fuel free future. Who thinks up the drivel?

Thanks, Paul. I await, with a certain amount of glee, the moment when the 'rock' [=every Government's abject failure to ever admit to making a mistake] meets 'a hard place' [=reality]. Something's got to give soon.

I received 2 leaflets amongst this morning’s mail. One was about Public consultation meetings for the Mersey Tidal Energy project and the other was information on how to prepare for power cuts. Ironic or what. Hydrogen is yet another bonkers “Net Zero” idea. Good luck with the operation Paul

I agree with you about all things except the biggest one, that climate change isn't happening. If it isn't then how come we have these effects. We have no snow or real winters anymore. We have every single glasier melting and retreating. We have rain on Greenland. We have sea surface temperature at 5 degrees c above normal, which is a huge anomaly. We have shrinking sea ice volume and no multi year ice. We have temperature records falling day after day. We have more moisture in the atmosphere leading to poor summers and higher rainfall events. These are just a few things that seam to prove the climate change theory to me. I'd also like to say that even if it wasn't happening then we are still poisoning the environment and killing off all the flora and fauna which we rely on for survival with our growth and activities. Where are the insects and the birds and why are you not concerned about the 6th mass extinction that is taking place at a rapid pace. You seam very relaxed that everything is a OK while anyone with eyes can see that we are in deep trouble caused by our overshooting of our planets carrying capacity.