Ann: Appendix 4C - quarterly, page-42

Why not just use the hydrogen in a fuel cell to produce power directly?

This is another example of the gas industry trying to paint itself as a transition fuel that is much less CO2 intensive than coal.

This is true when you actually burn the gas, but the real problem is the fugitive methane escaping into the atmosphere from the production and distribution chain. Methane is a far more potent GHG than CO2. While it does break down in the atmosphere (half life somewhere between 6 and 10 years), for the first 20 years after it enters the atmosphere the GHG effect of both the CO2 produced from burning the gas and the associated fugitive methane emissions along the supply chain mean that gas as a fuel is as bad for the climate as burning coal (that's why methane emissions from landfill or waste water treatment are often simply flared since the CO2 that produces is much less damaging than the unburned methane would be). And with the current rate of warming, the next 20 years will be pivotal to the future livability of our planet.

Of course our Government knows better, so they are underwriting new gas generation projects (because otherwise they wouldn't get built - the people who lend the money know that fossil fuel generation does not have future long enough for them to get their money back).

End Rant.