3 ms·
The original study is considering the emissions of the entire hydrogen plant, not just the carbon capture portion. Its a hydrogen plant with a carbon capture p
by rank0 5y ago
The original study is considering the emissions of the entire hydrogen plant, not just the carbon capture portion.
Its a hydrogen plant with a carbon capture piece on top. Not a “carbon capture plant.”
- simondotau 5y agoCorrect but irrelevant. Operation of the plant resulted in more emissions than were captured. The fact that hydrogen was also produced is a net neutral in that equation. If you want to describe this in terms of a hydrogen produced with a particular net emissions footprint, that's fine. It's dirty hydrogen that's been made less less dirty.
- ars 5y agoAnd that's a good thing, not a bad thing. As usual, environmentalists are the environment's worst enemies "dirty hydrogen"? Seriously? We need hydrogen, that's not something optional. They made it better, yet you are calling them names.
- simondotau 5y agoYou're twisting my words. My point is that we should judge this facility on the net emissions required to produce hydrogen, not how those emissions were caused/captured/offset. And once you've accounted for this, talking about the fact they're using carbon capture is marketing fluff; what matters is the overall footprint. This is akin to how "hybrid" cars are perceived. Being a hybrid doesn't make it any greener than a non-hybrid with the same fuel economy numbers.