Iron ore price, page-53775

"On face value, a fair point … but being a nascent industry of considerable potential future value, green hydrogen needs a leg up against behemoth incumbent fossil fuel producers."

Except it isn't actually a nascent industry, is it?
Hydrogen manufacture for industrial purposes has been around for decades.

Problem is that it is devilishly expensive (and inordinately difficult to handle, transport and store (it's a teeny, slippery molecule that is highly prone to leakage [*], and is colourless and odourless making leaks impossible to detect without instrumentation) which is why it has never seen mainstream commercial application.

And now we have politicians thinking they have somehow picked a winner, when for decades it hasn't even been runner in the race.

In my long-made observation that the road is littered with the carcasses of what were at one stage thought by government bureaucrats to be "winners".


[*] And given its potent reductant properties when it leaks, hydrogen reacts with hydroxyl radicals (OH), thereby eliminating what is the main methane sink in the atmosphere. As you know, methane is a very powerful greenhouse gas. Also the resulting higher concentrations of water vapour (H + OH = H2O) in the atmosphere also act as a GHG.

Moreover, because it is impossible to monitor comprehensively we don't even know how much hydrogen leakage occurs from existing hydrogen applications.

So to rule out the climate risks from a rapidly expanding hydrogen industry is naive, to the point of being dangerous. The unintended adverse consequences of going full-bore hydrogen might more than serious than the cure it theoretically presents.

For fuller edification, read here:



Full paper: https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/9349/2022/

.