Despite “promised decisive breakthroughs” on a power plant strategy in 2023, “none of the necessary issues have been clarified,” Russwurm said on Tuesday (16 January)…
In early August 2023, the German government triumphantly announced that the European Commission had essentially greenlit its plan for subsidised backup power plants.
That meant 8.8 GW of dedicated hydrogen power plants, alongside 15 GW of natural gas-powered ones that ought to switch to hydrogen by 2035 at the latest, in total representing about one-third of the German peak power demand of 2023…
Because these plants would likely only produce power in periods of sustained low wind and low sun – known as “kalte Dunkelflaute” – they are unlikely to make a profit without state support. And critically, the annual €7 billion earmarked for this purpose “evaporated” following a ruling from Germany’s top court…
“BloombergNEF estimates that to generate enough green hydrogen to meet a quarter of the world’s energy needs would take more electricity than the world generates now from all sources and an investment of $11 trillion in production and storage.”
There is a concept called EROI, energy return on investment.
“Energy return on investment (EROI) is a ratio that measures the amount of usable energy delivered from an energy source versus the amount of energy used to get that energy resource.”
With an EROI less than one (less than 0.25!) hydrogen is not what one might call a thermodynamic darling.
Thus, hydrogen is no more an energy source, just like electrons aren’t…it is a way to store energy for future use…just like a pumped storage facility or a battery.
The cost of producing and installing electrolysers for green hydrogen production in China, the US and Europe — three of the world’s biggest markets — has risen by more than 50% compared to last year, research house BloombergNEF (BNEF) has found, rather than the gradual reduction its analysis had previously indicated.
German industry, policymakers urge patience on hydrogen conversion https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/german-industry-policymakers-urge-patience-hydrogen-conversion-2024-06-12/
Investor caution about hydrogen as a future source of energy to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases did not suggest slowing resolve to phase out fossil fuels, German industry executives and policymakers said on Wednesday, pleading for patience. They told a conference organized by the Handelsblatt business newspaper that regulatory support for new value chains would bring about a large-scale switch to renewably derived hydrogen energy early next decade.
Germany wants national electrolysis capacity of 10 gigawatts (GW) by 2030. Last month, it approved an acceleration bill to help decarbonize the EU’s lead industry, whose manufacturers are key to future hydrogen consumption.
Critics say that final investment decisions on only 300 MW of projects, according to data presented by utility E.ON, indicate of possible failure, while reliance on future bulk imports is nebulous.
Do they still plan to eliminate internal combustion engines? If yes will electric trucks meet the need in Europe? Or will they need hydrogen fueled trucks.
Much of their infrastructure was destroyed in WWII. Theirs is relatively recent (compared to some of our gas lines laid using muskets left over from the Revolutionary War). Blending hydrogen into their gas lines fits well with current infrastructure. Reduces the need for customers everywhere to rebuild for electric or whatever.
Hydrogen is expensive and getting more so as seen upthread. Last year a German court ruling cut back government transition spending, and now their auto industry is staring at subsidized Chinese EVs. Government spending will be directed toward EVs rather than hydrogen, and the unfavorable EROI of hydrogen will slow private investment.
I suspect we won’t have answers to your questions for some time.
And the German auto industry is asking for exemption for “green” diesel fuel and gasoline. Remember SAF jet engine fuel. Feasible but very expensive. Could make hydrogen look economical.
@WendyBG summed it up perfectly in the first post in this thread. Hydrogen will always been the high cost solution. The only case I can think of where it might make sense is using renewable energy that otherwise would be curtailed to generate hydrogen and burn the hydrogen later.
There is a proposal to do just that on a large scale. But it seems like a heavy lift to build out vehicle fueling infrastructure.
I think we know of two situations where hydrogen might be appropriate. One is portability as in heavy trucks where high capacity batteries will be heavy and limit the payload that can be carried. Another is intermittency. Hydrogen can be made when surplus electricity is available as from wind and solar and the hydrogen can be stored for later use.
Ten years from now we will probably know which of these strategies works best. And of course further innovation can improve some of them more than others.
There are a lot of uses for hydrogen, particularly in a green economy so I believe hydrogen production will be a big industry in the near future. Hydrogen for example can replace coke to produce green steel and can be used to produce ammonia, an important ingredient in agricultural fertilizers.
It may take another decade or even two, but I think green hydrogen production will come from three major sources.
Onshore wind. Hydrogen production can alleviate the waste caused by wind intermittency. This would just require more efficient hydrogen production methods but is moving along, with the first commercial wind to hydrogen plant receiving local government approval in Nova Scotia. Controversial N.L. wind-powered hydrogen project approved | CTV News
The cost of producing and installing electrolysers for green hydrogen production in China, the US and Europe — three of the world’s biggest markets — has risen by more than 50% compared to last year , research house BloombergNEF (BNEF) has found, rather than the gradual reduction its analysis had previously indicated.
This sounds like a good idea…at first. But then if you spend all the capital to build out hydrogen production and then just use it for a few hours per day or on some other intermittent basis it is going to take even longer to pay back the installation costs.
Yes, you get a ~free or low cost fuel source, but what else could you have built instead?
Unless you think inflation is forever, this is temporary. One needs to look at China.
China accounts for the largest share, with 40% of global electrolyzer investment, while Europe is less than a third of global investment and the US has around 15%.