Economists map out economically viable path to renewables-based hydrogen production

[OKIsItJustMe]

https://www.tum.de/nc/en/about-tum/news/press-releases/detail/article/35259/

Economists map out economically viable path to renewables-based hydrogen production
How power-to-gas technology can be green and profitable

26.02.2019, Research news

Hydrogen production based on wind power can already be commercially viable today. Until now, it was generally assumed that this environmentally friendly power-to-gas technology could not be implemented profitably. Economists at the Technical University of Munich (TUM), the University of Mannheim and Stanford University have now described, based on the market situations in Germany and Texas, how flexible production facilities could make this technology a key component in the transition of the energy system.

From fertilizer production, as a coolant for power stations or in fuel cells for cars: Hydrogen is a highly versatile gas. Today, most hydrogen for industrial applications is produced using fossil fuels, above all with natural gas and coal. In an environmentally friendly energy system, however, hydrogen could play a different role: as an important storage medium and a means of balancing power distribution networks: excess wind and solar energy can be used to produce hydrogen through water electrolysis. This process is known as power-to-gas. The hydrogen can recover the energy later, for example by generating power and heat in fuel cells, blending hydrogen into the natural gas pipeline network or converted into synthesis gas.

…

In Germany and Texas, up to certain production output levels, such facilities could already produce hydrogen at costs competitive with facilities using fossil fuels. In Germany, however, the price granted by the government would have to be paid for the generation of electric power instead for feeding it into the grid.

…

https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0326-1

[NNadir]

1. It would be impressive in ENGINEERS were making this claim.

It's 2019. We were at 412.40 ppm average dangerous fossil fuel waste in the planetary atmosphere last week. Ten years ago we were at 388.42 ppm.

Ten years ago, right here, we were hearing the same bullshit, usually presented by people who don't know shit shinola about Engineering or Energy.

The economists and their could statements - conditional wishful thinking without a shred of reality behind it - are clueless.

Electrolysis is a highly inefficient process, and the wind industry is useless and trivial even without wasting what little it provides.

Here's something called reality.

In this century, world energy demand grew by 164.83 exajoules to 584.95 exajoules.

In this century, world gas demand grew by 43.38 exajoules to 130.08 exajoules.

In this century, the use of petroleum grew by 32.03 exajoules to 185.68 exajoules.

In this century, the use of coal grew by 60.25 exajoules to 157.01 exajoules.

In this century, the solar, wind, geothermal, and tidal energy on which people so cheerfully have bet the entire planetary atmosphere, stealing the future from all future generations, grew by 8.12 exajoules to 10.63 exajoules.

10.63 exajoules is under 2% of the world energy demand.

2018 Edition of the World Energy Outlook Table 1.1 Page 38 (I have converted MTOE in the original table to the SI unit exajoules in this text.)

The entire wind industry, after decades of mindless cheering by people who have no respect for and no knowledge of engineering, doesn't produce even 1/4 of the amount by which the dangerous natural gas industry grew in this decade.

On the whole damn planet, the wind scam, combined with the solar scam, produces less than 1/13th, about 7% of what the entire industry produces. Natural gas isn't going away. It's growing, and a big, big, big, big reason for that is the idiotic "wind will save us" crap that people who know nothing hand out.

What should we do? Throw another few trillion at this crap while 7 billion people per year continue to die from dangerous fossil fuel waste and biomass waste even without climate change?

Ten years from now the same assholes will be handing out the same line of bull. We'll be at well over 430 ppm there, steaming toward 450.

The ethics of this tired worn out fantasy is appalling.

You know what a conservative is? It's a person who refuses to change his or her mind about anything and keeps repeating the same stuff over and over irrespective of the outcome.