The only conclusion drawn by the authors is that it is not cost
effective to produce "green" hydrogen, meaning hydrogen produced from
electrolysis using electricity generated from some non carbon producing
source. They also state the fact that, today, almost all hydrogen is
produced from natural gas.
I completely stand by that conclusion.
While it's theoretically possible to produce "decarbonized" hydrogen, it
can't be done on a commercial scale, let alone a scale large enough to
power America's transportation system. If we were to do so, we would
have to build some tens of thousands of terawatts of wind and solar
electricity production (or nuclear, I suppose). Out of that production,
roughly 50% of the energy would be lost in process of electrolysis and
then electricity from a fuel cell. Until we have so much excess "clean"
electricity, it's more economical and more efficient to use that to
power homes, businesses, and industry connected to the grid ... and EVs,
where the loss is much less than 50%, more like 10-20%.
At some point, we'll probably have enough large scale excess that it
makes sense to produce hydrogen with that excess. But, I believe, the
primary use for that hydrogen will be for backup grid power generation,
not transportation. At that point, we'll be able to have a 100% clean
grid and a grid capable of charging EVs across the country !
Peri
<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
------ Original Message ------
From: "Mark Abramowitz" <[email protected]>
To: "Peri Hartman" <[email protected]>; "Electric Vehicle Discussion
List" <[email protected]>
Sent: 13-Aug-21 00:11:06
Subject: Re: [EVDL] hydrogen isn't green, after all
Only looking at what you posted, you draw a very false conclusion from the data.
You’ve connected fossil hydrogen with that going into a car’s tank. Well, yes,
you can do that, much like you use fossil gas or coal to produce electricity to
run a BEV. But most hydrogen in transportation is not fossil-derived, and the
entire industry is moving towards 100% “decarbonized” hydrogen, with most
believing that “green” hydrogen will be everywhere very soon.
I haven’t looked at the “blue hydrogen” data, so can’t critique it, but the use
of colors really confusing things because if you are looking for GHG impacts,
the most direct measure is a CI score.
Many incentives are there in transportation for 100% Renewable H2, and while I
get 90% renewable hydrogen when I fill my fuel cell electric vehicle (they
*are* electric), I look at the grid numbers and see renewable numbers of as low
as 11%, depending on the time of day. The rest is fossil.
So who is putting out more GHGs?
This is the problem with analysis that don’t analyze the real world as most
would view the data.
- Mark
Sent from my Fuel Cell powered iPhone
On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Peri Hartman via EV <[email protected]> wrote:
For Many, Hydrogen Is the Fuel of the Future. New Research Raises Doubts.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/climate/hydrogen-fuel-natural-gas-pollution.html
...
The main stumbling block: Most hydrogen used today is extracted from natural
gas in a process that requires a lot of energy and emits vast amounts of carbon
dioxide. Producing natural gas also releases methane, a particularly potent
greenhouse gas.
...
And while the natural gas industry has proposed capturing that carbon dioxide —
creating what it promotes as emissions-free, “blue” hydrogen — even that fuel still
emits more across its entire supply chain than simply burning natural gas,
according to the paper, published Thursday in the Energy Science & Engineering
journal by researchers from Cornell and Stanford Universities.
...
The researchers assumed that 3.5 percent of the gas drilled from the ground
leaks into the atmosphere, an assumption that draws on mounting research that
has found that drilling for natural gas emits far more methane than previously
known.
They also took into account the natural gas required to power the carbon
capture technology. In all, they found that the greenhouse gas footprint of
blue hydrogen was more than 20 percent greater than burning natural gas or coal
for heat.
...
Jack Brouwer, director of the National Fuel Cell Research Center at the
University of California, Irvine, said that hydrogen would ultimately need to
be made using renewable energy to produce what the industry calls green
hydrogen, which uses renewable energy to split water into its constituent
parts, hydrogen and oxygen. That, he said, would eliminate the fossil and the
methane leaks.
...
Today, very little hydrogen is green, because the process involved —
electrolyzing water to separate hydrogen atoms from oxygen — is hugely energy
intensive. In most places, there simply isn’t enough renewable energy to
produce vast amounts of green hydrogen. (Although if the world does start to
produce excess renewable energy, converting it to hydrogen would be one way to
store it.)
...
-----------
I'm glad to see this published mainstream. People don't seem to think about
the source for hydrogen, only about the the aspect of filling a tank in a few
minutes and driving off. Long live EVs !!!
Peri
<< Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >>
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [email protected]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [email protected]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
