Binden-supported “blue” hydrogen may be more toxic than coal, study finds

The largest infrastructure bill approved by the United States Senate and hailed by Joe Biden as a key tool in tackling climate change includes billions of dollars to support cleaner oil that can be more polluted than coal.

The 1tn infrastructure package, launched on Tuesday, will cost four billion dollars to develop “pure hydrogen” by creating four new regional centers. The White House Bill has pushed the climate agenda and hydrogen fans have made it a low-emission option for fuel, trucks, aviation and even heating.

But a new study has found surprisingly high emissions from a product called “blue” hydrogen, a difference that is strongly influenced by the fossil fuels industry and perhaps falls under the definition of pure hydrogen in Senate law.

It involves the division of blue hydrogen gas into hydrogen and carbon dioxide and then the capture and storage of CO2 To keep the planet warm. But this process involves accidental release of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, and it uses a lot of energy to separate and then store, some of which escapes.

This means that hydrogen production actually produces 20% more greenhouse gases than coal, typically 60% more fossil fuels, which burn for heat, and 60% more than diesel fuel, according to a new paper published in Energy. Journal of Science and Engineering.

“It’s amazing, I’m amazed at the results,” wrote Mark Jacobson, a Stanford University researcher. “Blue hydrogen is a good bargain for the oil and gas industry, but it is carbon-free. I don’t think we should spend our money on such false solutions.

Hydrogen Council, which includes oil companies BP, Total and LLL, has said that hydrogen “plays a key role in global energy transfer,” which is projected to be 18%. Total energy demand by 2050.

Dozens of gas companies in the United States have begun production of hydrogen or are testing the functioning of existing gas pipelines, which some climate activists say is a step toward building a global fossil fuel infrastructure. (IPCC) report, urgently need to move to net zero emissions.

But others are more daring about using hydrogen to help lower emissions in some rigid pollution sectors. Mike Fowler is not a “hydrogen panacea” or a silver bullet, but it does seem to be important to alleviate “hard-to-choose” sectors such as “long-haul heavy freight, international shipping and some heavy industry sectors”. , Director of Advanced Energy Technology Research in the Air Force.

There is a “green” hydrogen that can be used to make hydrogen from water using only renewable energy, but this option is not directly funded by the infrastructure required to pass the Democratic House of Representatives.

“We look at that bill and we see huge contributions to fossil fuels that are not compatible with severe climate change,” said Carol Muffat, chief executive of the International Center for Environmental Law. “Congress has done its best to mention green hydrogen and therefore this funding will help boost the fossil fuels industry. The potential effects of these technologies are constantly being exaggerated, even when they are diminishing.

The current ICC report warns of “irreversible” impacts if emissions are not significantly cut, and that methane, especially in oil and gas exploration and animal husbandry, contributes significantly to the current global warming. In the short term, however, if the most potent greenhouse gas methane is cut off in this decade, global warming will be depleted by 0.3C by 2040.

Progressive Democrats hope to fight more methane, as well as other greenhouse gases, in the upcoming 3.5tn reconciliation bill, which includes tougher climate action than the infrastructure law.

“This budget decision will be an investment for the next generation of our people and our planet,” said Ed Markey, a Democrat who helped work on the Green Accord alongside Alexandria Occio-Cortez.

Leave a Comment