In other words, a boondongle for the fossil fuel industry
https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 ... sil-fuels/
Why am I not surprised? I seem to remember a report in the last few days that 'carbon capture' hydrogen from nat gas has a HIGHER greenhouse footprint than nat gas. (It uses so much extra nat gas in the capture and storage that well leaks from the additional gas production have a higher footprint than the CO2 captured)
https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-tra ... -1-1051084
UK government to subsidise BLUE hydrogen
Moderator: Peak Moderation
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14287
- Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
- Location: Newbury, Berkshire
- Contact:
Re: UK government to subsidise BLUE hydrogen
I saw that paper as well. It's here
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.956
Seems like the oil and gas industry are lying again to preserve their profits. Why should we not be surprised?
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.956
Seems like the oil and gas industry are lying again to preserve their profits. Why should we not be surprised?
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
- adam2
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11001
- Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
- Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis
Re: UK government to subsidise BLUE hydrogen
Agree, blue hydrogen is in general an energy wasting distraction. It would be better to burn the natural gas as fuel without converting it into hydrogen.
Green hydrogen MIGHT have SOME merit but is pointless unless we have a regular surplus of renewably produced electricity. To produce hydrogen from electricity in order to replace natural gas is rather pointless if natural gas is still being burnt to produce electricity.
Green hydrogen MIGHT have SOME merit but is pointless unless we have a regular surplus of renewably produced electricity. To produce hydrogen from electricity in order to replace natural gas is rather pointless if natural gas is still being burnt to produce electricity.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14287
- Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
- Location: Newbury, Berkshire
- Contact:
Re: UK government to subsidise BLUE hydrogen
The study referred to in this article backs up Adam's claim about blue hydrogen being a waste of energy and it says that it is more polluting than burning natural gas.
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez
Re: UK government to subsidise BLUE hydrogen
The chair of the UK Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association resigns in protest at the proposed government subsidies of fossil sourced hydrogen
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... lobby-boss“I believe passionately that I would be betraying future generations by remaining silent on that fact that blue hydrogen is at best an expensive distraction, and at worst a lock-in for continued fossil fuel use that guarantees we will fail to meet our decarbonisation goals,”
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14287
- Joined: 20 Sep 2006, 02:35
- Location: Newbury, Berkshire
- Contact:
Re: UK government to subsidise BLUE hydrogen
I wrote to my MP (Again!) to point out that the oil and gas industry have been lying to everyone for the past 70 years over the environmental harm that their product does and that it would seem that they are still lying to everyone to protect their bottom line. I also suggested that the government should get its advise from scientists in the field and kick lying industry lobbyists out of parliament. I await with baited breath for her reply!!
Action is the antidote to despair - Joan Baez