Hydrogen, the universe’s most abundant element, is often hailed as the fuel of the future, a clean and renewable energy source that could help combat climate change. But is the hype around hydrogen energy justified, or are we chasing a mirage? Aviel Verbruggen, a researcher at the University of Antwerp, Belgium, has delved into the science, politics, and economics of hydrogen to separate fact from fiction. His findings, published in the journal Energies, reveal a stark reality that challenges the prevailing optimism around hydrogen energy.
Verbruggen’s research begins with a stark assessment of our climate situation. “The irreversible loss of climate stability overarches all energy facts and choices,” he warns. This sets the stage for a critical examination of hydrogen’s role in our energy future. The researcher argues that while hydrogen’s combustion produces only water vapor, the process of generating hydrogen is far from clean. “Producing one energy unit of green hydrogen needs a minimum of 1.4 units of renewable electricity,” Verbruggen explains. This inefficiency, coupled with the energy-intensive processes of transporting and storing hydrogen, raises serious questions about its viability as a large-scale energy solution.
The study highlights the discrepancy between ambitious hydrogen projects and their actual feasibility. For instance, the EU’s proposed Hyrasia One project in Kazakhstan aims to produce 11 million tons of green ammonia, a hydrogen derivative. However, Verbruggen contrasts this with the 20,000-ton green ammonia project by Yara in Norway, which has already been realized. The Norwegian project serves as a reality check, illustrating the significant gap between announced megaprojects and practical achievements.
One of the most striking findings is the environmental and financial performance of hydrogen derivatives like ammonia and synthetic hydrocarbon fuels. These derivatives, often touted as part of the green hydrogen solution, come with substantial subsidies that mask their true environmental and financial costs. Verbruggen argues that these subsidies divert resources away from more effective and sustainable energy solutions.
The commercial impacts for the energy sector are profound. The hydrogen energy economy, as currently envisioned, is not a sane energy economic option. It would result in a wasteful continuation of fossil fuel use via blue hydrogen, which is produced from natural gas with carbon capture and storage. This process, Verbruggen argues, is a distraction from the deployment of beneficial distributed renewable electricity. “The hydrogen energy economy prolongs the use of fossil fuels and distracts societies from deploying the beneficial distributed renewable electricity economy,” he states.
The research also sheds light on the political and economic interests that drive the hydrogen narrative. Verbruggen points out that the 2014 putsch of the EU’s energy conglomerates showcased how concentrations of money and power can negate and obstruct appropriate solutions. The study suggests that the simplest and most effective way to leverage solar and wind resources is to build generation units all over each country and electrify as many energy services as possible, such as battery-powered electric cars.
As we grapple with the urgent need to address climate change, Verbruggen’s research serves as a crucial reminder of the need for clear-eyed assessment and practical solutions. The hydrogen energy economy, as currently envisioned, may not be the panacea it is often portrayed to be. Instead, a focus on distributed renewable electricity could offer a more straightforward and effective path towards a sustainable energy future. The research published in Energies, or Energies in English, underscores the importance of critical evaluation and pragmatic decision-making in the energy sector.
