Roger Arnold, an independent strength skilled and NGW contributor, interviews Nils Rokke, executive vice president for sustainability at Norway’s SINTEF, on the economics of blue hydrogen [Gas in Transition, Volume 2, Issue 5]by: Roger Arnold
Nils Rokke, government VP for Sustainability at Norwegian investigation conglomerate SINTEF, not too long ago contributed an write-up to Forbes about hydrogen output. The title, Blue Hydrogen Isn’t the Local climate Enemy, It is Portion of the Alternative, properly captures the bottom line of the article. It is a sentiment with which I heartily concur.
Creation of blue hydrogen is significantly far more controversial than it should to be. Christopher Jackson famously resigned his place as chair of the Uk Hydrogen & Fuel Cell Association (United kingdom HFCA), in protest more than the organisation’s assist for blue hydrogen. He thought that blue hydrogen “is at most effective an costly distraction, and at worst a lock-in for ongoing fossil gas use that assures we will are unsuccessful to meet our decarbonisation goals”.
An additional objection, couched in what show up to be goal financial conditions, is that as creation of hydrogen by electrolysis ramps up, the money value of electrolysis tools will drop rapidly. The moment the funds value problem is fixed, an abundance of “nearly free” electrical power from surplus wind and photo voltaic will immediately lessen the price of environmentally friendly hydrogen. Organizations that choose to make investments in blue hydrogen manufacturing could for that reason obtain by themselves holding stranded property. Blue hydrogen will become uncompetitive, and the companies will never recoup their investment. The Global Renewable Energy Agency, IRENA, designed that argument in a latest report titled Geopolitics of the Vitality Transformation: The Hydrogen Issue.
In a prior write-up, I wrote about why I consider IRENA’s forecast is extremely unlikely. That posting centered predominantly on the superior power price of electrolysis and linked carbon footprint issues. Taking electrical power from the grid for electrolysis right before the grid has been absolutely decarbonized is counterproductive – it improves net carbon emissi…