From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
h/t Doug Brodie
From Hydrogen Insight:
A large green hydrogen project being developed in Spain by EDP is in line for subsidies via the European Hydrogen Bank. But Hydrogen Insight has learned that the Portuguese energy firm is considering an exit from the process, amid a lack of clarity for potential offtakers around regulations to drive demand.
Full story here.
This goes to the heart of why investors are reluctant to build hydrogen and carbon capture projects, in spite of the obscene subsidies on offer.
We have of course already seen BP pull the plug on their Teesside Hydrogen/CCS plant and the collapse of the Acorn carbon capture scheme in Scotland.
The concern of all three projects is whether there will be sufficient demand for their products. Hydrogen, is of course, ridiculously expensive compared to gas, even without carbon capture. So who on earth would want to swap gas for hydrogen?
Similarly, why would businesses pay to pipe their CO2 away?
In theory, companies will have no other choice, as natural gas will either be banned or priced out of the market by punitive carbon taxes.
But all these taxes will do is force businesses to pack up and move abroad. So, what then for EDP’s hydrogen plant or BP’s hydrogen power station?
Worse still, for these investors, is the risk that future governments will abolish Net Zero completely, or at the very least keep carbon taxes low. In that event, their business model is completely shot.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More atmospheric CO2 can’t cause catastrophic runaway global warming. Wind and solar don’t work stop building them. Remove wind and solar from the grid. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators. Build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators.
Global warming isn’t what’s driving this; that’s just a scapegoat. They want the West to fail.
But why would anybody actually want that?! Russians come to the UK because . . . our culture is . . . a hell of a lot better place to bring up one’s kids? You’re (debatable now) not going to be put behind bars because you have an opinion?
Indians Chinese Russians Africans Pakistanis Arabs (who have fleeced there own people) flock here to be . . . “seen” – because they’re here, with massive Swiss bank account, they are automatically and suddenly very civilised fellows, as long as YOU – and we know who YOU are, and we know that she will be belted in the face later – walk behind me.
I’m most definitely NOT a race-ist. BUT, I am most definitely a . . . CULTURE-IST.
Collin you are absolutely right but I think you are referring to the average guy. If the average guy is well informed they will always choose liberty, freedom and so on. The people pushing CAGW are anything but your average guy, they think government is superior to the rest of us that only government can handle the complexities of our modern society. So yes the CAGW Frankensteins do want us to fail.
“But why would anybody actually want that?! “
You would have to ask the people actively trying to destroy it.
This is the problem with government; its decision are made on a whim with no solid reasoning. Markets don’t reverse 180° like governments do. Natural events, no matter how unexpected, are localized and coverable by insurance and loans, unlike political decisions.
Amen. What the government giveth, the government can taketh away.
Have you seen the number of rich politicians? There is no whim and there is solid reasoning.
Until the next election.
The point is, markets change from 49-51 to 51-49 between two similar products without 180° reversals in company fortunes. If the Ford F-150 were to suddenly drop to #2, it would not bankrupt Ford. CDs took a while to replace LPs, then MP3s took a while to reign supreme, and vinyl is making a comeback. Markets have time to adjust to these realities, unlike politics.
This article would be more rounded and informative if it contained a bit more detail about why Hydrogen production and Carbon Capture is so unattractive.
Those of us familiar with the details are growing, but the vast bulk of the public do not have the detailed awareness of why those energy and energy related activities are not going anywhere, other than onto Climate Alarmists Christmas wish lists.
98% of the public has zero idea about anything to do with energy
IMHO Hydrogen has a future, but requires thinking of it as an energy store. Surplus energy generated by renewables stored as Green Hydrogen. There is already an infrastructure to store ‘gas’ and to distribute it. Fuel cells can revert the hydrogen to electricity or it can be used to generate thermal energy.
However, since I don’t believe there is a climate crisis or any shortage of fossil fuels within the foreseeable future, I would not put my money into it. I expect a resurrection of coal, which can generate some petrochemical products, with oil as a feedstock for the many essential products we take for granted.
In the previous climate panic of the early 70’s I surmised that oil was too valuable to be simply burnt. This was when it was stated by the experts that oil would run out by 2000! It will run out, but purely based on economics – not politics.
You can’t use existing gas infrastructure to transport hydrogen. Well, you can, but not for long, and not without huge risks.
What is the current market for it, outside of political fantasy?
I deliberately used ‘gas’ in inverted commas to allow for variations of mix.
Also, I believe a lot of the gas distribution network, which might suffer from hydrogen embrittlement is being replaced by – wait for it – plastic pipes made from oil!
I heard something about new fracking proppant technologies leading to greater field production efficiency and life. Oil running out by 2000 is going to be even more fantastically wrong.
Just guessing, but I suspect most of the world hasn’t even started with fracking- when they do, the world will be drowning in dirt cheap oil.
Exactly the point of my third paragraph. Economics (read – Money) always wins. But as resources change, so do prices (not costs), so from a renewable and storage and distribution perspective Hydrogen has a future, just when though.
Someone might find a way of (controlled!) fusing Hydrogen molecules ( or Deuterium or Tritium), but not any time soon. Would love to see it though.
In a rational world, why would anyone produce renewable energy?
“IMHO Hydrogen has a future, but requires thinking of it as an energy store.
Surplus energy generated by renewables stored as Green Hydrogen. “
(1) It’s the most difficult gas to make, store safely & economically.
“There is already an infrastructure to store ‘gas’ and to distribute it.”
(2) Not in reality (see (1) above).
“Fuel cells can revert the hydrogen to electricity,”
(3) With enormous losses, circa 80% loss of original energy.
“or it can be used to generate thermal energy.”
Yes & you can also power internal combustion engines
[ The first ICE was powered by Hydrogen, François Isaac de Rivaz in 1806.]
But why would you (see (1) above), when nature has given us hydrocarbons, as that little Carbon molecule makes the process of combustion safer, more controllable & cheaper ??
“Surplus energy generated by renewables stored as Green Hydrogen.”
How do you generate H with renewables? Getting it out of water? Gonna be expensive.
Always reminded of the maxim – expensive for a street urchin and expensive for a merchant banker are not the same.
There is not any current hydrogen gas storage anywhere except for places that need it on site. It is extremely hard to store hydrogen. Making a hydrogen pipeline is nigh impossible. No company in the world would take the risk.
Is there any market for hydrogen? AFAIK there isn’t. We certainly don’t have any method safe enough to transport it. I suppose hydrogen fuel cells might just be a very small market, but I’ve not seen any available refilling facilities.
Petroleum refining and chemical production, along with welding applications are most significant. Niche fuel cell applications exist as you mention.
I use hydrogen for quartz glass blowing and gas chromatography carrier and detector gases.
And all those lorries which carry multiple red bottles seem to pass unnoticed.
We can begin a new fleet of Hindenburgs! Think of the CO2 savings.
For potential investors, subsidies are or should be a bright flashing red flag with sirens sounding. How long before the grift is exposed, the subsidies get pulled, and the whole thing collapses? “Green hydrogen” would be laughed off Shark Tank.
“Green hydrogen” would be laughed off Shark Tank.
Maybe not. Isn’t Mark Cuban still on it?
There already exists a “magic” molecule to transport hydrogen efficiently and safely from one place to another. Fortunately, it is abundant and cheap. It’s called methane: CH4. Any attempt to separate the C and H in that molecule, to maintain the potential energy in each element, requires energy that is only partially recovered when the elements are finally used. That harsh reality dooms all attempts to create a “hydrogen economy”, notwithstanding all the other problems associated with storing and using pure hydrogen.
They seem to want to be able to turn us off by preventing our movement (escape) and freezing us to death. Even if there is no sinister intent to do this, a natural Carrington like event could be the end to most of us if our systems become fully electrified.
https://coloradosun.com/2025/12/02/colorado-natural-gas-emissions-caps-xcel/
‘The final targets are “a meaningful win for Latino and working-class families who deserve clean air, lower energy bills and healthier homes,” said Christo Luna, deputy Colorado director for the nonprofit advocacy group Mi Familia Vota. “This decision moves Colorado closer to an equitable transition away from fossil gas.”’
I knew CO was a ‘blue’ state, but was previously unaware that its citizens had gone completely mad.
Not most of its citizens, but a switch to mail in ballots, etc., allows enough illegals and dead people to vote the crazies into office.
The question is posed why would anyone pay to take their CO2 away – only one good / economic reason – to inject into oil reservoirs to enhance recovery .. it’s been done for decades but the CO2 sources have generally been geologically created & trapped CO2
I fail to understand the rationality of expending energy to crack methane into hydrogen .
More valuable use I’ve seen for the irregular power of windmills , which traditionally on farms was to lift water , is making ammonia fertilizer .
CO2` sequestration has NO use except collecting taxed money .
“Most valuable use I’ve seen for the irregular power of windmills , which traditionally on farms was to lift water”
It still is in more sensible places.
Tenerife uses the irregular power of windmills to power desalination & pump water to reservoirs, not to power the grid. Their grid is run by oil, gas & solar.
From that above article:
“Hydrogen, is of course, ridiculously expensive compared to gas, even without carbon capture.”
Furthermore, hydrogen is ridiculously troublesome to use in an any practical, common-world sense. It has:
— a propensity to leak out of “sealed” systems and, most commonly, plumbing connection fittings, due to its very small molecular size,
— a very wide range of ignition/flammability in air, and can ignited by just static electricity discharge as demonstrated in the Hindenburg airship disaster of 1937,
— a tendency to embrittle many common steel alloys, thus requiring special alloy (expensive) metals for storage vessels and for plumbing-to-point-of-use, and
— a very low energy density if stored as a gas, even at pressures up to 100 psia . . . thus, requiring either (a) very high, 3000 psia or higher, expensive and dangerous-if-even-slightly-damaged pressure vessels, or (b) maintenance at cryogenic temperatures (-420 °F or lower for storage tank pressures up to 30 psia) to achieve the much greater energy density of liquified hydrogen.
Sure, NASA and aerospace rocket launch companies have learned how to store, transfer and use hydrogen—even liquid hydrogen—safely and reliably, but there is small chance of all the required safety measures and technologies to do so transferring over to widespread commercial applications at any acceptable cost.