> Hydrogen is currently impossible to generate efficiently (from an energy perspective) Thermolysis of water at high temperature directly driven by a nuclear r

> Hydrogen is currently impossible to generate efficiently (from an energy perspective) Thermolysis of water at high temperature directly driven by a nuclear reactor. Roughly a thousand tonnes of hydrogen per gram of uranium. Admittedly, this is somewhere between entirely theoretical and barely prototyped at the kilowatt scale in research reactors. But Atomic Energy Ltd. of Canada was investigating it as an application of their next generation CANDU design before it was shelved. Or use some other source of heat. Concentrated solar power has been proposed. https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-production-thermochemical-water-splitting https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-production-th... The economics are not necessarily favourable vs. fossil fuels. But they're not horrible either. Even something more conservative, like standard electrolysis of water, driven by traditional nuclear power, would be something like 2x - 5x more expensive than current hydrogen sourced from natural gas. In locations where electricity is very cheap, it is sometimes competitive already. Fossil fuel prices never really represented their full cost. We were paying far more than we thought.