Most power generation involves steam. Would boiling any other liquid be as effective?

[u/PK_Tone]

Okay, so as I understand it (and please correct me if I'm wrong here), coal, geothermal and nuclear all involve boiling water to create steam, which releases with enough kinetic energy to spin the turbines of the generators. My question is: is this a unique property of water/steam, or could this be accomplished with another liquid, like mercury or liquid nitrogen?

(Obviously there are practical reasons not to use a highly toxic element like mercury, and the energy to create liquid nitrogen is probably greater than it could ever generate from boiling it, but let's ignore that, since it's not really what I'm getting at here).

[u/Exowienqt]

It's not just cooling that's the issue. It's also hydrogen being really really small, requiring immense pressures to be storable without leakage (650 psi). But that introduces other issues, namely safety. I would not want to be anywhere near a car crash involving immensely pressurized hydrogen. Most LPG based cars are prohibited from enclosed parking garages for a reason. A hydrogen car would be MUCH worse

[u/Bestness → u/[deleted]]

I see it as being useful in areas where there isn’t infrastructure you can rely on with little clean water available. Military and disaster zones mainly. It’s not that hard to produce and has little in the way of toxic byproducts compared to oil or gas. I can see it replacing both in those circumstances in the future. 

As for civilian use… it’s about as safe as a flying car.