Hydrogen is not the renewable energy you’re looking for

Climate change is now a problem that the majority of us are currently beginning to recognize. This severe problem, which will continue to escalate, is driving the energy sector to create a more clean, sustainable future that could halt the irreversible and detrimental impact of fossil fuels. We have begun to think outside of the box by replacing environmentally harmful energy with various “clean” energy types, including utilizing hydrogen.

Hydrogen is often touted as the next big source of clean energy, especially in Japan. It is now becoming more commonplace to see hydrogen centers, such as around Morinomiya station in Osaka. However, this push for a fuel alternative may be somewhat premature, and hydrogen alternatives may not be as clean as the general public might be led to believe.

Many think hydrogen as a clean alternative to fossil fuels, and is a source of energy that is still quite immature in terms of development and use. This type of energy involves using hydrogen compounds to generate clean energy with economic and environmental benefits. Unfortunately, using hydrogen as a source of clean energy is currently not a smart idea, especially due to detrimental effects on the environment via the production of “clean” hydrogen energy. This energy source emits water vapor when used instead of greenhouse gases, so it is understandable why governments around the world, including Japan, would like to progress in this industry.

It is also necessary to note that only a tiny fraction of the hydrogen produced can be called clean hydrogen. Approximately 0.2% produced may be considered clean energy, while the rest (grey/blue hydrogen) is produced using fossil fuels (coals and natural gas). It is now obvious why hydrogen is nowhere in the ballpark of being regarded as a safe alternative to fossil fuels. Moreover, it would be ironic to call hydrogen sustainable when producing it is just as damaging as using unsustainable resources.

Japan is realizing that the country needs other alternatives to push away from fossil fuels and a feasible plan to do so. Moreover, the country has carved out preliminary plans to have at least 10% of the energy used in Japan originate from hydrogen by 2050. This is a big push to make sure the energy source is a large part of everyday life. Moreover, the country invested almost 300 million dollars to fund both research and development of hydrogen. However, corporations may be prematurely advocating hydrogen, which is neither readily mature for the market nor environmentally friendly to produce.

As of now, many companies such as BP are lobbying governments to push for the development of “clean” hydrogen. Unfortunately, the issue of less concern is how costly or environmentally devastating going that route might be. Types of hydrogen being touted for use are green and blue hydrogen. Green hydrogen, as you may already be aware, uses renewable energies to produce hydrogen. Blue hydrogen, on the other hand, is derived from methane and natural gas. Blue hydrogen is promoted as a better alternative since the emissions can be captured and stored underground, as well as it is cheaper to implement. However, this may be worse than burning coal. A study published by Energy Science and Engineering states that blue hydrogen has a carbon footprint 20% larger than burning gas or coal. While many energy companies are lobbying for the use of blue hydrogen, this may be a detrimental step forward that could be seen as a giant leap backwards.

Obviously, using hydrogen is not a catch-all solution to provide clean energy that many lobbyists and companies would have the general public believe. Michael Liebereich, an independent analyst and advisor from the U.K., is a proponent of decarbonization and is attempting to help us and governments understand the reality of producing hydrogen by using his self-made guide – the Hydrogen Ladder. This guide highlights cases in which using hydrogen (the top of the ladder) creates greenhouse gases for the production of, for example, ammonia-based fertilizer. The bottom of the ladder points to industries where it makes little sense to use hydrogen due to cleaner alternatives, such as electricity. This bottom half includes several modes of transportation, such as metros, heating, and cars.

Let’s take a step back and think about the use of hydrogen-powered cells for cars. Although companies such as Toyota have already released automobiles that are powered by hydrogen fuel cells, such cells are terribly inefficient. Furthermore, battery-powered vehicles will always beat out hydrogen due to remarkable advances made in the past, used in the present, and will soon be discovered in the future. The infrastructure is already cementing itself around the world to provide battery-powered vehicles. Unfortunately, this cannot be said for hydrogen since there is little to no infrastructure to produce green hydrogen on a large scale. In other words, it is safe to say that hydrogen-powered vehicles hasn’t found a place in a sustainable society. It will take at least several decades for hydrogen to even become a feasible source for a greener future.

Compared to 20 years ago, citizens and their respective governments have taken positive steps in the right direction to understand the detrimental effects of our modern society. However, many energy corporations are attempting to push hydrogen as an alternative to fossil fuels. Consequently, this may be leading many to believe, incorrectly, that hydrogen might be a solution. Pushing for a sustainable society in which hydrogen plays a vital role is a long way off, and pro-hydrogen fossil fuel corporations to be clear and transparent about the dangers posed by both grey and blue hydrogen.