Hydrogen has multiple problems.
The first is the market in the context of large-scale production for trade.
Hydrogen has always been used for industrial purposes, but is generally produced in-situ from either electrolysis (small amounts) or natural gas (large amounts).
However, in the context of using it as a fuel, the market itself is uncertain given the alternatives of using electricity directly or through batteries, or using synthetic fuels.
Trains exist and are widely used. Hydrogen trains have been built, but they are not common. Synthetic fuel can certainly be done.
A battery-powered bus was created. Hydrogen is also made. Synthetic fuel is also an option.
And so on. How to actually move trains, ships, aircraft and even buses in the future remains unsolved. There is a mix of alternatives, and in some cases there is a direct conflict. For example, using hydrogen to power a train can electrify almost any rail line, such as when competing with other ways to move the train.
Similarly high-grade industrial heat. Hydrogen vs. electric arc furnace. Then use induction heating, and if the intensity is low, use simple electrical resistance heating.
There is uncertainty as to what future role gas networks will actually play, even for residential and commercial use. Some people do not claim anything. We are completely electrical, but there are many detailed problems in itself. It’s easy to die in one place and much more difficult in another. With a dense life, a limited capacity electrical network, and a hot water system designed for hot water, it is relatively attractive to go to Europe, which somehow holds reticulated gas.
Keep in mind that the best technically (engineering) solution is not always the most practical in other ways. From a technological efficiency standpoint, the use of electricity is prioritized over hydrogen, but commercial outcomes can vary significantly. Technology efficiency is not always the best method, including other factors. There are countless examples of this throughout the economy.
Those who are trying to quantify the size of the market at this time are, at best, based on the hypothetical scenario of talking about which technology wins and is actually adopted, or only one. A specific buyer, not the entire market. In the worst case, they are just pulling numbers out of the air.
On the production side, hydrogen is an element and the product is the same no matter how it is obtained. Electrolysis of water or reformation of fossil fuels or biomass (especially natural gas-CH4) produces the same final product.
How to produce it is a matter of resources, economy, environment and politics. From a technical point of view, the final product is the same regardless.
Electricity as a source:
Electricity from any source + water> electrolysis> hydrogen and by-product oxygen. If not needed, oxygen can simply be released into the atmosphere.
Natural gas as a source:
Under pressure, natural gas (methane, CH4) + steam (H2O) at about 850 ° C reacts to produce hydrogen (H) and carbon monoxide (CO). Or, more accurately, CH4 + H2O> CO + 3H2
Next, the steam under CO + pressure (H2O) from the first step reacts to produce hydrogen (H) and carbon dioxide (CO2). Or, more accurately, CO + H20> CO2 + H2
This process can be slightly modified to work with other hydrocarbon sources such as ethanol and oily liquids.
Coal as a source:
Coal + oxygen (O2) + steam (H2O)> carbon monoxide (CO) + carbon dioxide (CO2) + hydrogen (H2).
Then the second step of using CO + steam, following the process of producing hydrogen from natural gas.
Production from hydrocarbons produces a stream of concentrated CO2 waste. Because it is concentrated, it is easy to inject into a depleted gas reservoir rather than releasing it into the atmosphere. This is technically very difficult to recover and store, unlike, for example, the relatively very lean CO2 emitted from the chimneys of power plants.
It takes me to an elephant sitting on the driveway:
It is not my intention to make such political comments, but I must say.In the Australian context, everything related to energy production and use Include Issue politically. This is a country that chooses a prime minister based on his thoughts on power generation. Even people in the industry seem to think it’s overkill and listen enough, but that’s the reality.
Then there is controversy over supplying natural gas to southeastern Australia, exporting gas from other states, and supplying oil as long as we are still using it.
Moreover, in some states, water itself is subject to much the same politics with all sorts of controversy, some true but many false.
I state that it seems that hydrogen is quite likely to get caught in everything, so in fact it is relevant to all lots. It’s a gas made from electricity and water-it checks many boxes on the tribal political checklist.
Therefore, be cautious about investing. You understand it technically and economically, but you don’t want to be on the now rather long list of people who are politically stuck on something related to energy.
Investigate the company and its projects very carefully to see if it has any political impact.
Hydrogen | Australian Stock Forum
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/hydrogen.35955/ Hydrogen | Australian Stock Forum