4 ms·
I guess I have two answers. First, it is not always most convenient or efficient to produce energy where you use it, and electricity needs to be generated rela
by jonnycomputer 3y ago
I guess I have two answers.
First, it is not always most convenient or efficient to produce energy where you use it, and electricity needs to be generated relatively nearby where it is used, and transit lines can be expensive to build. For example, deep offshore wind seems to look like a more and more promising option, but you need some practical way to get that energy onshore.
Second, electricity is just not practical for some modes of transportation; notably cargo ships and airplanes. And these represent significant CO2 and other pollution emission sources.
Also, hydrogen is a chemical feedstock with plenty of uses besides as a source of energy.
- _aavaa_ 3y agoHowever much the HVDC lines costs, it will be cheaper per energy at the destination than going electricity -> fuel -> electricity. I agree about hydrogen having plenty of uses. In fact it has so many uses that it currently represents a decarbonization problem. We have 90 million tones of hydrogen used every year, which the vast majority coming straight from fossil fuels. Replacing that with green hydrogen should be top priority before we consider new use cases.