102
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2026
102 points (99.0% liked)
Green Energy
4557 readers
194 users here now
Everything about energy production and storage.
Related communities:
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Where did they get the helium? We need to embargo it as the US has the single largest strategic supply of helium on the planet.
Thats why helium balloons are so cheap. Technically it should be way more expensive.
I honestly don't get why they don't just use hydrogen for unmanned blimps like that; better lift and can be produced relatively cheaply on site via electrolysis. And with modern membrane materials the fire risk is minimal.
Probably a regulation issue only 🤦
It's probably because it's safer as an experimental proof-of-concept.
Hydrogen leaks extremely easily, and there are large amounts of electricity going through it because of power generation, static electricity from wind in certain conditions, and, in case of hydrogen, electrolysis. All of this can be managed safely, but it takes a lot of blind faith in the engineers to assume it will all be managed safely on the first go.
If this one burned down in the most predictable way imaginable, the bureaucrats that greenlit it will look bad and the project will likely be delayed or canceled.
But if this one works, they can (request state permission to) develop a second design that uses hydrogen, and when that design works well they can start mass producing those without dependence on natural gas extraction.
You could go the SpaceX route and build multiple designs that you expect to fail catastrophically so you can get to building ones that work faster, but that takes a lot of faith from the people funding you, and a lot of willingness to generate pollution.
Yes, and these blimps are something where the optics are VERY important to getting funding. Its not a rocket where blowing up is the expectation.
Its china, you really think they have regulations? And if they did they would be enforced if the system is making money?
But I agree, hydrogen is way cheaper and more efficient for unmanned dirigibles. Also I wonder how well it would burn at super high altitude w/ the limited oxygen?
And even if it did burn the fire would be out well before it hit the ground. Not like the Hindenburg that was low to the ground and its outer coating was massively flammable.
Fun Fact: The reason why they had to use hydrogen was we (the US) clocked them as an enemy prior and refused to sell helium to them. Sound familiar?
Presumably from their natural gas operations, similar to everyone else.
Also had the largest strategic reserve, we sold it off during Obama and Trump pt I AFAIK
Why embargo it ? What does it accomplish ?
Its a strategic asset, the reason why it was stockpiled was for rocketry (nobel gas/low boiling point). So handing it to your enemy doesnt make a lot of sense to further their endeavors imo
Wait, China is an enemy now ? The West is historically responsible for climate change and its continued existence, how is it (and the US) not the enemy ? Are we going to solve anything if we still think in terms of good guys/bad guys ? I don't think that's a point of view that makes sense in a solarpunk space. I'm surprised to see that here.