L R AS Published on Sunday 10 January 2021 - n° 345 - Categories:hydrogen
The vision of hydrogen by I. Overland
A vision of hydrogen
I. Overland, director of the Norwegian energy research centre, speaks out on hydrogen
The enthusiasm for hydrogen is due to the awareness of the Paris agreement, climate change and the success of clean technology companies. But the cost of hydrogen needs to become competitive with other solutions in several areas, such as seasonal/networked energy storage, high-temperature industrial processes, heavy road transport, shipping and aviation. If hydrogen proves to be the cheapest option in several areas, its future will be promising. If it wins in only one area, it will probably not be so important, although it may still have a market.
Countries with abundant RE resources have advantages over others in the production of green hydrogen. A lot of space is also needed because the facilities are large. Thus, Algeria could supply Europe with hydrogen.
If RE makes each country less dependent on other regions, hydrogen can replenish dependence on countries with abundant energy resources and space. Only disadvantaged countries can produce their own hydrogen if prices become too high. There will therefore be a variable dependency.
Climate concern is too strong for fossil fuel companies to manipulate the trend. In the longer term, everything will depend on competition between technologies and their profitability. Blue or turquoise hydrogen, which uses natural gas, will probably continue to be cheaper than carbon capture from exhaust fumes and could prove more cost-effective than green hydrogen. If the existing natural gas pipeline infrastructure can also be reused for hydrogen without the costs becoming too high, it could become a very attractive option for rapid decarbonisation.
Hydrogen poses the problem of starting the process: should we wait for a demand from heavy industries to produce hydrogen? Or should hydrogen be produced before demand arises? For mobility, lithium batteries have been found to be much more suitable for vehicles, whereas hydrogen is more suitable for long-term storage or industrial processes using high temperatures.
Hydrogen can compete with other modes of electricity storage. Only the development of electric mobility will require so many lithium batteries that seasonal storage will be provided by hydrogen.
Battery technology is evolving rapidly. For example, cobalt is already on the way out. So the life cycles and social and environmental issues related to batteries will change. So hydrogen has an advantage, but it is shrinking and we don't know to what extent it will shrink further in the future.
The technologies will be essential. Competition on hydrogen technologies is expected to become quite fierce. However, it is not exactly a war. It will be more like the competition between Apple, Huawei and Samsung in mobile telephony.
If there is one thing certain, it is that solar and wind power will develop. Currently, floating offshore wind is particularly dynamic, but there is a lot of research going on into different photovoltaic technologies that could potentially give a massive boost to solar. Hydrogen is probably another piece of the energy transition puzzle that could help it accelerate.
What is most likely to cause a sudden shift is locked fossil fuel assets.
Countries whose economies are largely based on fossil fuels could face serious shocks in the next two to three years. This also means that the issue of blue and turquoise hydrogen is decisive. If blue and turquoise hydrogen are not viable options, it will reinforce the collapse of fossil fuels. On the other hand, if blue and turquoise hydrogen proves profitable, countries with the largest reserves of natural gas could have very good prospects.
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/01/05/the-geopolitical-impact-of-hydrogen/
PV Magazine of 5 January 2021
NDLR Time is not included in this brilliant analysis. It is said that the price of hydrogen will have fallen by 2030, but that it will not be competitive until 2050. However, we must already wait ten years to perceive a first significant drop in its cost. This is because all the projects for the construction of electrolysers have a commissioning date from 2025, not counting the delays in construction. Between now and then, the world will be, as at present, the user of hydrocarbons as the main energy producer.
Another aspect evoked but delicate to implement is the profitability of hydrogen production when there will not yet be any use of this energy. Who will launch into the use of this new, as yet unprofitable energy? Who will pay the difference between the new and the old energy? Who will continue to produce at a loss when the future does not seem to be brightening? In a word, who will see the use of hydrogen in the population of 2020?
