I reveal to you the facts and myths about hydrogen
Because hydrogen and CCSU (Carbon capture storage and utilization) must be part of an effort of research, technological development and energy efficiency aimed at specific fields, specific sectors and specific areas of the country. Gianni Bessi's post
When I read an article on CCSU (Carbon capture storage and utilization) in one of the Ravenna newspapers, I realized that the topic was closer to local communities than I had thought: in short, CO2 capture together with hydrogen are the two big ones. hopes or options explored and to be realized for future decarbonisation. Hydrogen seems to me to garner great acclaim and champions. The CCSU, on the other hand, divides a bit.
There are many reports, analyzes, relationships that alternate exaltations and ferocious criticisms, but surely both the potential and the unresolved criticalities to be overcome exist for both technologies.
Let's take the 'first hope', the one that only has consensus. Although it cyclically passes from the shadows to the spotlights, hydrogen collects a rain of interventions that hypothesize a revolution that sees it as a protagonist as imminent. On the logistical level, its realization, that is to produce, transport, store and distribute on an industrial scale, sees enormous costs to be overcome. A revolution to be such must have a start date. When will that be for H2?
Who produces hydrogen today? The oil industry. And it also plays a very important role in improving its (precious and irreplaceable in our consumption) derivatives. And still today 95% of the hydrogen produced derives from the processing of the Oil King and its cousins coal and gas.
If its standard and high-volume production were possible, do we think that these companies would not make it their core business? Why shouldn't they?
And it is from here that the narratives on the conflict of interest of oil companies etc etc are born, but forgetting the simplest fact. If there is a profit or a profit, someone who embarks on a revolution in history will always be there. Yet in our case there is something wrong or that is not resolved?
And so I come to the costs (and other problems) and here another reasoning automatically comes out. But if the goal of Zero Carbon, and therefore zero pollution, is achieved with hydrogen, the high production costs would not be offset by the large savings possible in some sectors thanks to the reduction of pollution, such as the socio-sanitary one. So … the answer must always be found in the conspiracies directed in the shadows by the Oil King and his cousins …
Here then is that the seduction of hydrogen remains irresistible, indeed it becomes a revolutionary accelerator when it is accompanied by its production thanks to renewables.
But even here the accounts must be done well. With renewables it costs even more to produce it: so?
The answer could be that even if the production of hydrogen has very high costs, the monstrous environmental costs saved would compensate for the effort. Then go on with renewables. And even here who has the know-how to produce hydrogen? Who has the means, men, resources if not the oil companies? And we return to the conspiracy.
Then there is always 'the nuclear objection', in the literal sense: perhaps it is better to produce hydrogen thanks to the energy produced by the fission of the atom. Is this the right formula to achieve zero impact? There are those who support it.
At that point the CCSU would no longer be needed, because CO2 is also zero impact: our Queen of the global debate between the EU carbon border mechanism 'duties' proposals with Kerry's stop during his visit to Brussels and with today's CO2 quotations at an all-time high that point steadily above € 40.
60% of CO2 is man-made and is the result of the combustion of the King and his cousins …
And all this CO2 would be better on the one hand to prevent it with energy efficiency, on the other to capture it given the spread of many sources of production. Ironically, here too the problems are the same as for hydrogen: costs, logistics, etc.
Returning to the premise, many talk about hydrogen and CCSU, but those who have been working on it for years at an industrial level (and not just at the R&D level) are those of Eni and a few others …
Finalino: we always end up falling into the classic energy trap where it is not possible to produce energy at low cost but also environmentally sustainable and with zero balance. This is why hydrogen and CCSU must be part of a research, technological development and energy efficiency effort aimed at specific fields, specific sectors, specific areas of the country. No technology should be discarded a priori. So the two great hopes together with other resources or technologies can help us get out of the energy trap of the Oil King society.
It would take an overall effort, that is an alliance and a commitment of resources, minds, political strength of Europe and the United States, similar to the Apollo project for the landing on the moon, to realize what would be a real social revolution before energy or industrial.
Appointment in Glasgow for the next United Nations conference on climate change from 1 to 12 November 2021.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/energia/miti-idrogeno/ on Sat, 20 Mar 2021 09:52:34 +0000.