Blue hydrogen 'worse than gas for the
climate': landmark study's damning verdict
Recharge News,
by
Andrew Lee
Original Article
Posted By: earlybird,
8/12/2021 2:44:40 PM
Blue hydrogen has “no role in a carbon-free future” – and is actually up to 20% worse for the planet than burning gas or coal to produce heat, according to what is claimed as a landmark academic study.
In the week that the United Nations declared “code red for humanity” over the climate emergency, researchers from Cornell and Stanford universities in the US branded the blue variety of hydrogen beloved of the fossil fuel sector as a “distraction” that could divert focus away from genuinely green technologies.
Blue H2, produced using natural gas with carbon capture and storage (CCS), is a key plank of the energy transition strategies
Reply 1 - Posted by:
hershey 8/12/2021 2:47:36 PM (No. 876637)
Ah yes, the UN again...running around screaming 'the sky is falling, the sky is falling' just like Chicken Little....wankers...
14 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
earlybird 8/12/2021 2:48:21 PM (No. 876639)
From the NYT (which is behind paywall):
“To call it a zero-emissions fuel is totally wrong,” said Robert W. Howarth, a biogeochemist and ecosystem scientist at Cornell and the study’s lead author. “What we found is that it’s not even a low-emissions fuel, either.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/12/climate/hydrogen-fuel-natural-gas-pollution.html?
Back to the drawing board...
3 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 8/12/2021 3:09:17 PM (No. 876680)
At least blue H2 IS a source of energy. Grey H2 is not a source of energy, its just a form of energy storage, just like a battery. I suppose these same "experts" think electric cars that run on coal are great.
7 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
JHHolliday 8/12/2021 3:13:38 PM (No. 876688)
More UN BS. That organization is now run by brutal African dictators, Marxist fools and one-worlders. Evil and corrupt to the core.
11 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
JL80863 8/12/2021 3:20:51 PM (No. 876705)
It must be the DELTA Variant of H2.
12 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Bur Oak 8/12/2021 3:24:38 PM (No. 876710)
Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is necessary for life. Producing, distribution, and burning hydrogen for fuel is inefficient and thus uneconomical.
19 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
DVC 8/12/2021 3:25:35 PM (No. 876711)
CO2 is good for the plants. Plants are THE foundation of life on this planet.
Just stop the fake "science" baloney and burn the natural gas (methane) directly in heating homes and for industrial purposes. Use coal for power. Solar is good for a remote traffic sign, or a remote cabin with very limited electrical needs. Wind.....is a joke beyond pumping water in remote sites, where the 'output', water can be stored in large tanks for cattle, etc. Solar and wind are intermittent, weak, expensive. Stupid to use them for more than remote, small uses.
Hydrogen is another bad joke. There is NO hydrogen fuel. 100% if it is created with energy intensive processes. Start with 100 units of energy, then magically, you can have 10 or 30 units of energy. These morons make most of the energy just disappear in waste.
Put in 100 units of energy in nat gas into your furnace.....keep 97 units as warmth in your home. For cooking.....100%. The old ways were the smart ways. The new ways are political BS, scamming everyone to enrich a few.
23 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 8/12/2021 3:29:45 PM (No. 876717)
This uselessness of hydrogen was pointed out in an article in Scientific American back in the 90s, IIRC. WAY BACK when SciAm was still a open minded science magazine. It has been a leftist propaganda rag for a very long time, captured and converted in "the long march through the institutions".
I have been studying alternative energy methods and science since college in the early 70s. I have built hybrid vehicles in grad school research back in the middle 70s, wood fired homes in the 70s, solar home in the 90s. Don't be fooled by the scammers.
12 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
joew9 8/12/2021 4:06:10 PM (No. 876740)
I wish he would do the same kind of deep analysis of solar and wind.
6 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
montwoodcliff 8/12/2021 4:18:57 PM (No. 876754)
This is known as grifting for grant money. “What can we think of next to keep Federal money flowing in to finance our overvalued university and unnecessary department?” That is why we see all these “scientific” papers.
8 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
NYbob 8/12/2021 4:42:21 PM (No. 876773)
'Carbon free future,' so all vehicles will soon be running on iron wheels? What fluids will Tesla use to cool it's motors and fill it's brake lines? Oh, the brakes will be electric, but the wires won't be wrapped in a carbon based material? All the plastic in the car will be silicon based? All the packaging materials and protective wraps will be what, if not carbon based? Every stove, oven and home heating unit will be 'carbon free'? No, they won't. While lunatics pretend to offer the answer, billions of tires collect in landfills or are dirty burned and 'recycled' plastic is buried in landfills or stored in buildings, waiting for a dioxin free method of disposal.
4 people like this.
Hydrogen is hydrogen. It doesn't come in colors. It is the most abundant element in the universe.
Greenies are the stupidest MFs on planet Earth.
8 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
paral04 8/12/2021 5:35:53 PM (No. 876809)
And power to charge EV's is created from what? The UN is useless and needs to be disbanded. When you have people from countries with horrible human rights records in charge the whole ting is a joke.
6 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
SkeezerMcGee 8/12/2021 6:16:04 PM (No. 876840)
This study's conclusion is a logical first step to assert we need much more
There are many ‘colors’ of hydrogen – each referring to how it is produced.
Green hydrogen is the only variety produced in a climate-neutral manner.
Scientists assign colors to the different types to distinguish between them.
Hydrogen can be grey, blue, green, pink, yellow, or turquoise.
Green hydrogen (or “clean hydrogen”) is produced by using SURPLUS renewable energy sources, such as solar or wind power through the process of electrolysis.
It currently makes up about 0.1% of hydrogen production. 1/10th of one percent!
Clean hydrogen isn’t scaling fast enough to deliver on its potential, in part due to LOWER fossil fuel and CO2 prices.
1 person likes this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Debrawr 8/12/2021 6:20:17 PM (No. 876844)
Because they don't really want clean energy...they want to keep the masses under control.
Why else do they flaunt jetting around on their private planes?
5 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
SkeezerMcGee 8/12/2021 6:20:57 PM (No. 876848)
This study's conclusion is a logical first step to assert we need much more SURPLUS clean energy production because Green hydrogen (or “clean hydrogen”) is produced ONLY by using SURPLUS renewable energy sources.
I hit the "submit" button too soon.
1 person likes this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
curious1 8/12/2021 7:09:36 PM (No. 876885)
Yet another article from the clown car group whose mantra is 'Science is HARD!' so we prefer unicorns...
3 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Nashville 8/12/2021 10:34:54 PM (No. 877040)
Hydrogen is a ‘PITA’ to store or transport.
Being the smallest molecule, it is in the real world, hard to contain.
3 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
rikkitikki 8/12/2021 11:22:58 PM (No. 877058)
And all of this to reduce CO2 emissions which have no causative impact on climate....just sayin.
Until the climate greenies can explain the last several dozen ice ages, the subsequent interglacial warm periods, and why the current glacial thaw is not just a continuation of the last interglacial warming....then their theory of AGW is not even a theory...it's a speculative guess with no foundation in fact.
3 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
DVC 8/13/2021 1:22:34 AM (No. 877084)
All true, #18, but you understate the case. It is also extremely flammable. The spark energy required to ignite a hydrogen-air fire is far lower than the spark energy needed to ignite a gas-air fire. So, the slightest static spark sets it off.
And hydrogen causes steel to become very brittle, can easily crack normally strong alloy steel if exposed to hydrogen. No kind of gaskets will seal it in. To really make a joint hydrogen tight, it needs to be welded with the highest grade welding skills, and then x-rayed. EVERYTHING about hydrogen is a literal nightmare. It isn't used for many very real reasons.
3 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
toddh 8/13/2021 8:12:45 AM (No. 877221)
The only renewable with enough heft to create plentiful hydrogen fuel by electrolysis is nuclear power. Every other method releases what these alleged scientists call "pollution."
2 people like this.
To add to #20, compressed hydrogen gas is used in the power generation industry to cool turbines. It is extremely explosive, and can (and has) caused catastrophic explosions if proper protocols and maintenance are not observed. Several power plants have been wrecked by hydrogen explosions over the years when extreme caution is not observed during fueling, injection into the turbine body, or evacuation of the gas prior to maintenance.
0 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
JackBurton 8/13/2021 4:06:36 PM (No. 877760)
Uh, guys?
Nuclear.
Just sayin'.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "earlybird"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)