Under-estimating oil demand, page-10

Yes as you say it does look like initially (at Kiwnana - WA) WPL talking about SMR produced H2 with Carbon capture and carbon offsets. SMR is a well established H2 technology but produces a lot of CO2 and not sure how long they can get away with carbon offsets which are often ineffective at sequesting CO2.and Chevron (at Barrow Island) have not covered themselves with glory over carbon capture. I suspect that pyrolysis is the real goal where H2 can be produced without emissions but as of yet is not a proven process (BASF are in the lead but local HZR still a possibility).

WPL's Tasmanian H2 venture to me is the biggest risk since it is meant to be cold water electrolysis powered by wind and firmed by hydro. Wind only has about 33.3% capacity factor (see HERE for USA) in Tasmania it may be a bit higher. This means that a dedicated wind generating plant only provides an average of about 8 hours nameplate power over 24 hours and the plant capex has to be amortized over 1/3rd of the life of the plant (about 20 years) - so 7 yrs. At about 48kwh/Kg H2 this gives about US$5 - US$6/kg of H2 compared to about US$1.5/kg H2 for SMR the economics just doesn't work - I suspect it will never get off the ground unless heavily subsidized. More than 70% of the cost of producing H2 from cold water is electricity - it has to be cheap and available 24/7/365 (or thereabouts) to justify the capex for the plant (generating, electrolysis and water production). Capacity factors for wind (and solar) can be improved by using pumped hydro (which Tasmania has) but this is also used by the grid and in short supply (and also does not come free). Batteries can also be used o improve capacity factors bu also are not free (i.e they add to capex) and furthermore have a short life of about 8 years (and capacity declines from 100% to about 70% of the 8 year period) and thus need overbuild and shorter amortization.

The WPL Oklahoma H2 prospect has the same issues as Tasmania if the power source is renewables but here the USA is experimenting with high temperature steam electrolysis from nuclear reactors (see HERE and HERE) which is much more efficient than cold water electrolysis and a nuclear reactor has a capacity factor of about 90% and about 40yrs to 60yrs life thus transforming the economics. Small Modular Reactors (unfortunately also called SMR's) will have higher capacity factors due to a longer refueling cycle - unfortunately nuclear reactors are illegal in Australia.