[Retric]

Many batteries actually last significantly longer than common hydrogen storage tanks, hydrogen embrittlement is a major issue. Type III and IV tanks have a life cycle of 10 years. https://www.awoe.net/Hydrogen-Storage-LCA.html

Hydrogen has also terrible volumetric energy density. It’s also really heavy until you scale to huge tanks.

[Heston]

Hydrogen's volumetric energy density is about as good as lithium-ion. The cost of replacing a hydrogen tank vs a lithium battery is absolutely massive. You also aren't considering the energy density lost in cold weather for batteries.

[Retric]

Almost the same in the short term requires you to liquify hydrogen and then use it immediately. Because the energy density rapidly goes to zero for any application with a moderately sized tank. On top of which you need a cryogenic tank, costing you even more volume.

Liquifying hydrogen also costs you another ~10-13 kWh /kg where Hydrogen only contains 33kWh if you want heat, but more like 10-15kWh/kg if you want to do useful work. So you’re roughly paying double the energy for the same amount of energy stored.

[rocqua]

How expensive, big, and heavy would a hydrogen tank (farm) be if it had to supply a whole winter for, say, 1million people. I ask because one of the bigger transition issues I see in Europe is load shifting from summer surplus to winter deficits, specifically for heating.

[pfdietz]

On such a scale hydrogen would be store underground in solution-mined salt caverns, not above ground in tanks.

Europe has enough salt formations to potentially store millions of GWh of hydrogen, far more than would be needed.

[_ph_]

Why would you want to store enough energy to supply for a whole winter? Wind energy delivers most power during the winter and even solar contributes a bit. The actual amounts to store would be a fraction of that. Of course, that might be the one single good use of hydrogen as a means of storage, but way less storage is needed than most would think.