2 ms·
That's excluding carbon capture, which is expensive. Blue hydrogen is being talked about a lot but isn't being produced at any scale worth talking about current
by jillesvangurp 3y ago
That's excluding carbon capture, which is expensive. Blue hydrogen is being talked about a lot but isn't being produced at any scale worth talking about currently. Most hydrogen is grey hydrogen and a tiny amount of it is green hydrogen.
This system proposes using hydrogen to create natural gas. Using grey hydrogen for this doesn't make any sense. It would be more efficient to just use the gas directly. You'd end up with more gas for less money. Even if you capture the carbon and somehow manage to get some cheap blue hydrogen it still doesn't make sense. Especially if you then go and burn the gas and dump the carbon back in the atmosphere. This plan only makes sense with green hydrogen. Which remains expensive.
- bryanlarsen 3y agoThey also claim to do carbon capture for $250 per ton.
- fransje26 3y ago> Most hydrogen is grey hydrogen and a tiny amount of it is green hydrogen. They specifically explain that they produce fossil-free natural gas, i.e. the hydrogen they use is not grey hydrogen.