276
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2026
276 points (100.0% liked)
Climate
8950 readers
680 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
maybe but it's a ridiculous thing to do, so let's hope not.
Might as well just electrify. It's a massively inefficient way of making H, storage and transport of H is beyond tricky , H is a GHG so whatever fugitive emissions you have, which there's plenty of with a molecule that small, are ubiquitous.
That said, doing stupid things has never stopped humanity before, so who knows. Every H project in Australia has been shitballed, some are saying make Ammonia now instead but that's ripe with problems as well but it is significantly easier to store and transport.
It's far easier to store and distribute hydrogen than electricity. Hydrogen is not a GHG either.
From an energy point of view, generating hydrogen and burning it later is an absurdly inefficient cycle. It's also a very small molecule that is extremely difficult to contain (understand: leak very easily).
Electricity storage is an issue, but batteries are progressing at a much faster pace than electrolysis. As for transportation, it's also difficult, but in most parts of the world, we either have the infrastructure already in place, or the place in question lack both electricity and gas. In addition to that, electricity can be generated close to the point of consumption with renewables and batteries.
There are really no good reason to stand by hydrogen in a crushing majority of use cases.
It is no more inefficient than many other ideas. Hydrogen is not much more difficult to store than natural gas. In reality, we have more than enough renewable energy to justify making and storing hydrogen.
The narrative of "batteries are progressing" is becoming wishful thinking if not outright delusion. They are not progressing in a way that could actually solve their fundamental problems. Hydrogen for energy storage is necessary for a 100% green grid, as well as many other things. We can make hydrogen close to the point of consumption too.
Hydrogen is a viable option in nearly every situation. And in many sectors, practically the only option.