The hydrogen industry is gearing up to play a major role in the global clean energy transition — especially in the most difficult sectors such as aviation and steel production. As they grow older, they begin to hear more about colors. Black hydrogen is produced by coal gas. Gray comes from improving natural gas. Brown is prepared by partially lignite, or brown charcoal, with high oxide. Currently, 96 percent of H2 production falls into these waste categories.
Of course, green, hydrogen is produced by clean, renewable sources, especially by electrolysis. That is the ultimate goal, but economics is not ideal right now. Like many places, dirty things are cheap. Green Hydrogen finally arrives and even overcomes cost inequality, but that takes a lot of time and investment.
During that time, one of the “low emissions” was an alternative to “blue hydrogen.” Methane is a gray hydrogen produced by steam modification, but additional carbon storage and storage has been added to reduce emissions.
Relatively new concept, currently being developed commercially by only two companies – Shell Factory in Canada and another airline in Texas.
But a new report from Cornell and Stanford University researchers warns that some applications, such as resource alternatives, are a dangerous middle ground that includes hidden “refugee emissions” that make the atmosphere worse. Coal.
Speaking specifically about the use of hydrogen to generate heat – for example, when heating homes, cooking, or burning in gas-fired power plants, the report states that “perhaps surprisingly, greenhouse gases are blue hydrogen. More than 20 percent of natural gas or coal is burned for heating and 60 percent more than diesel for heating, again in our estimates.
When natural gas leaves the earth, it escapes as much as “emissions.” This report contains 3.5% methane emissions, which remain in the atmosphere for 20 years.
When you talk about climate change, you hear mainly carbon dioxide, but methane is very, very bad. One ton of methane has a rapid heating effect of 100 tons of CO2, according to the report. Over a 20-year period, that effect has been slightly reduced, but still 86 times worse than carbon dioxide.
“This is the first attempt in a peer-reviewed paper to examine the greenhouse gas emissions of greenhouse gas emissions from carbon dioxide and non-combustible methane emissions,” states the report.
Blue Hydrogen is a major problem, so the carbon sequestration process requires energy, and this energy is produced using natural gas. Thus, when all emissions from the recycling process are captured to produce blue hydrogen, the added methane emissions completely eliminate nine to 12 percent of any environmental benefits.
And it gets worse. “Our Analysis” reads the draft of the report: Although this is true, the use of blue hydrogen seems to be difficult to determine due to climatic factors.
Taken here: Green Hydrogen provides a lot of energy in areas that are difficult to deplete and certainly plays a role in the transition to clean energy. But blue hydrogen does not seem to be the acceptable transition to zero in the race.
The study was published in the journal Energy Science and Engineering.