The future of the energy sector lies in the "Hydrogen Economy". The transformation has already started as the big automobile company like Hyundai launched its transformation concept to Hydrogen Vision and carbon neutrality roadmap by 2040. However, the concept of the hydrogen economy is not only limited to the usage of H₂ as fuel but also the production technique utilized for H₂ production. Still, about 60% of the world's H₂ is obtained from steam reforming of methane (SRM). The SRM technique used still uses fossil fuel-based energy to heat up the reactors, resulting in "Grey Hydrogen".
Which could be the best technique for H₂ production (i.e., green H₂ production)?
The production technique is OK (may be improved by further development on catalyst design in future).
However, the focus on reactor design may solve the problem. The R&D on solar power reactors to make them techno-economically viable is required. So, the reactor design needs to be focused that can utilize energy from wind or solar energy for green H2 production.
Question is even more general. What does "best" mean in your question? Economic view, ecology view, energy needs view? Answer are not the same. From economic is the best decompose methane (harakiri for ecology and energy needs point of view). From ecology view is better electrolysis and bio production. From energy needs view is the best some biologic process where H2 (not methane) is the result. I think.
Dear Roman Fiala
Many thanks for adding your suggestions to the discussion.
I already mentioned in the question "best technique for H₂ production (i.e., green H₂ production)?" i.e., the best green hydrogen production technique that could be commercialized, as I also cited the "Hydrogen Vision and carbon neutrality roadmap" of Hyundai.
Thank You!
Dear Mohammad Yusuf ,
Ok, I was focusing for your final question. Actually, green is also shot cut for another point of view (politic view) and this also waving between economic and ecologic. To answer your question ... I think it is that technique where hydrogen is produced not from fossil fuel (of course) and it is produced that way that H2 is final product without such a like methane inter step. If not we can use methane as we do now, for producing heat and electricity a CNG as we do with higher yield than transform it to hydrogen. It is electrolysis (and place where is not possible to use electricity directly and elsewhere) and bioproces where H2 is the result. Why I prefer methane instead of H2 when methane is produced ecologically? Because we have this technology spread everywhere and we can do it immediately. We need dramatically reduce CO2 emission but actually we do opposite: Cars are always bigger and bigger. Still needs more of electricity (not less), green parts and ecosystems capturing CO2 on the Eart surface are disappearing and so on.
For very large amounts of H2 Fluidized Bed Syngas (and H2) production with CO2 capture and cavern sequestration may be appropriate - until we run out of suitable caverns to store the CO2.
Many thanks for adding your views to the discussion Sir Rick Manner
However, could you kindly suggest are you referring the man-made caverns or natural caverns (salt caverns, along with depleted gas reservoirs and aquifers).
Which would be a better option for CO2 storage (in terms of economy and safety for long-term storage)? Since it is also recommended to have a cavern near the source of CO2, as transportation is another issue.
Thank You!
But you could put some of it into the holes that you took all that coal out of,
- Badges
- Science topic