Connect with us

Published

on

It seems like only yesterday that a mysterious new program called Energy Earthshots was in the works for the US Department of Energy, and everybody was wondering what that could possibly be. The curtain has now lifted and the answer is clean hydrogen. If you’re thinking why clean hydrogen and not green hydrogen, that’s a good question. The answer could make fossil energy stakeholders very happy or very, very sad.

Green Hydrogen Vs. Clean Hydrogen

For those of you new to the topic, hydrogen is the cornerstone of the modern industrial economy. The booming market for hydrogen fuel cells is just one slice of a huge chemical pie that includes agriculture, food processing, and refining, among other areas.

The problem is that almost the entire global supply of hydrogen comes from natural gas and coal.

However, not for long. Low-cost renewable energy has fostered a rosier economic outlook for new and more sustainable hydrogen sources, aka green hydrogen. Most of the activity is concentrated in the field of electrolysis, which refers to systems that deploy electricity to tease bubbles of hydrogen gas out of water.

This is what is known as green hydrogen. Other renewable hydrogen sources include biomass, biogas, municipal wastewater, and municipal solid waste.

The idea of producing hydrogen from reclaimed industrial gasses and plastic waste is also catching on. That’s more sustainable than using virgin natural gas or coal to produce hydrogen, though much of the foundational feedstock is still fossil-based and not renewable.

Then there’s a public relations gimmick cooked up by fossil energy stakeholders, in which you still produce hydrogen from natural gas or coal, but you hook it up to a carbon capture system and call it “blue” hydrogen, which supposedly translates into “clean” hydrogen.

I know, right? We think so, too.

So What Is It, Green Hydrogen Or Clean Hydrogen?

All else being equal, the “clean hydrogen” referred to in the new Energy Earthshots initiative could include support for fossil-sourced hydrogen with carbon capture, as well as reclaimed hydrogen from wastes.

However, last week CleanTechnica eyeballed the Biden administration’s FY 2022 budget proposal, and we took a quick look back the Energy Department’s green hydrogen initiatives during the administration of former President and accused insurrectionist Donald Trump, and then we connected the dots to current Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm’s pronouncements about renewable hydrogen earlier this year, and our conclusion is that when Energy Earthshots says clean hydrogen, they may be leaving a bit of wiggle room for fossil sources, but probably not all that much.

Get Ready For The Hydrogen Shot

The name “Earthshots Initiative” is a play on the successful 20th century Moonshot venture that shot US astronauts into space before anybody else got there, and the Energy Department’s early 21st century Sunshot Initiative, which launched during the Obama administration with the goal of bringing down the cost of solar power.

Energy Earthshots aims to replicate that all-hands-on-deck frenzy of collaborative innovation to tackle the energy challenges of the early mid-century period, which will make or break the ability of humankind to save itself from catastrophic climate change.

The Energy Earthshots Initiative aims to “accelerate breakthroughs of more abundant, affordable, and reliable clean energy solutions within the decade,” the Energy Department explained in a press release on Monday.

Skeptics were and still are laughing off the idea of the hydrogen economy of the future, but the Energy Department is a big fan and they just clapped back bigly when they picked hydrogen as the very first focus of the new Energy Earthshots initiative.

“The first Energy Earthshot — Hydrogen Shot — seeks to reduce the cost of clean hydrogen by 80% to $1 per kilogram in one decade,” the Energy Department said. “Achieving these targets will help America tackle the climate crisis, and more quickly reach the Biden-Harris Administration’s goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 while creating good-paying, union jobs and growing the economy.”

“Clean hydrogen is a game changer. It will help decarbonize high-polluting heavy-duty and industrial sectors, while delivering good-paying clean energy jobs and realizing a net-zero economy by 2050,” Secretary Granholm added.

Here’s the money quote from the press release:

“By achieving Hydrogen Shot’s 80% cost reduction goal, we can unlock a five-fold increase in demand by increasing clean hydrogen production from pathways such as renewables, nuclear, and thermal conversion. This would create more clean energy jobs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and position America to compete in the clean energy market on a global scale.”

Fossil-Sourced Hydrogen With Carbon Capture, Or Maybe Not

If you caught that thing about renewables and nuclear, that’s a reference to electrolysis, meaning green hydrogen. There is also something called thermochemical conversion, which deploys high heat from nuclear or concentrating solar plants to split hydrogen from water, but that seems a bit too early-stagey to fit into the Hydrogen Shot timeline. The other option is thermal conversion, which generally refers to steam reformation and other processes that apply to natural gas and coal, meaning not green hydrogen.

The Hydrogen Shot Request for Information emphasizes diverse energy sources in the US, and it specifically mentions fossil energy plus carbon capture for ramping up hydrogen production, so it looks like fossil energy stakeholders have something to cheer about after all.

Or, maybe not. Climate action has become a mainstream business model. It’s a good bet that the market for fossil-sourced hydrogen will shrink as the supply of sustainable hydrogen grows, carbon capture or not.

The Energy Department’s RFI appears to recognize that the private sector is already leaning towards green hydrogen. Despite the nod to fossil-sourced hydrogen, the agency highlights green hydrogen in a shortlist of major projects currently under way:

“… hydrogen production, storage, and end use in turbines through the $1 billion Advanced Clean Energy Storage project in Utah; a 5 MW electrolyzer project planned in Washington State; first-of-a -kind nuclear-to-hydrogen projects in multiple states; a 20 MW electrolyzer plant to produce hydrogen from solar power in Florida; and the first GW-scale factory for electrolyzers announced in New York, with a 120 MW electrolyzer soon to be installed.”

If you can spot the thermal conversion project in that list, drop us a note in the comment thread (hint: there is none).

But What About Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles?

Yes, what about them? Hydrogen Shot is not taking aim at the hydrogen fuel cell passenger car and SUV markets, though Toyota and a small but growing list of automakers have been pitching the idea (for the record, the growing list includes Hyundai, Jaguar Land Rover, and most recently, BMW).

Instead, Hydrogen Shot is focusing on long haul trucks and other heavy applications. That could include locomotives as well as hydrogen aircraft and hydrogen watercraft.

Green hydrogen has already been incorporated into much of the planning for transportation applications, so it’s no surprise that green hydrogen producers are already jockeying to compete for business.

In the latest development on that score, the firm SGH2 Energy is pitching a “greener than green” hydrogen product that draws from biomass and other bio-based waste. The company claims that its green H2 displaces more carbon than both electrolysis-based process as well as thermal conversion, so hold on to your hats.

Follow me on Twitter @TinaMCasey.

Image: Hydrogen production from various sources courtesy of US Department of Energy.


Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.


 



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla reports $600 million bitcoin profit jump after digital assets rule change

Published

on

By

Tesla reports 0 million bitcoin profit jump after digital assets rule change

Musk had previously said in June he was leaning towards supporting DeSantis for president in 2024.

Joe Skipper | Reuters

Tesla‘s bitcoin holdings led to a big pop in reported net income for the fourth quarter because of a new rule change in how companies account for digital assets.

After showing a carrying value of $184 million in digital assets for the prior four quarters, the number suddenly jumped to $1.08 billion in the December period, Tesla reported in its earnings release on Wednesday.

The increase followed a recent policy change from the Financial Accounting Standards Board, which mandates that corporate digital asset holdings be marked to market each quarter starting at the beginning of 2025. Before the FASB rule change, companies owning bitcoin had to report their holdings at the lowest value recorded during their ownership, regardless of any subsequent price gain.

Tesla said in its earnings deck that the change resulted in an earnings per share boost of 68 cents in the quarter, and CFO Vaibhav Taneja noted on the earnings call that the net income increase was $600 million.

“It’s important to point out that the net income in Q4 was impacted by a $600 million mark-to-market benefit from bitcoin due to the adoption of a new accounting standard for digital assets,” Taneja said.

At the end of the third quarter, Tesla’s bitcoin holdings were recorded at a carrying value of $184 million, though their fair market value was significantly higher at $729 million. That means the actual increase in the value of its holdings in the period was about $347 million, reflecting bitcoin’s fourth-quarter rally.

Much of the recent gain in bitcoin is tied to optimism surrounding the second Trump administration, which was heavily backed by the crypto industry. Tesla CEO Elon Musk was Trump’s biggest financial supporter and is now a top adviser in the White House. Longtime Musk ally David Sacks was tapped by Trump to the be the White House AI and crypto czar.

Bitcoin tracking website Bitcoin Treasuries ranks Tesla as the sixth-biggest holder of bitcoin among public companies.

Tesla’s fourth-quarter earnings and revenue fell short of analysts’ expectations on Wednesday as auto revenue dropped 8% from a year earlier, yet the stock climbed in after-hours trading.

CNBC’S Lora Kolodny contributed to this report.

WATCH: Trump Media expands into financial services

Trump Media expands into financial services, including allocation to crypto: CNBC Crypto World

Continue Reading

Environment

You’ll die without a solar roof says Musk, whose admin made it harder to get solar

Published

on

By

You'll die without a solar roof says Musk, whose admin made it harder to get solar

Tesla CEO Elon Musk said that “your family’s life might depend on” having solar, despite that he’s part of a US government administration that has already made it harder to get solar, and seems poised to try to make it even harder.

Tesla hosted its Q4 and full year 2024 earnings call today, missing expectations on revenue and earnings. The company had its first down sales year since 2011, despite a rising EV market. The market initially responded poorly to the numbers, but recovered as Tesla guided a return to growth.

As part of the call, an investor asked if Tesla had given up on ramping its solar roof. The product was originally unveiled way back in 2016, and hasn’t particularly lived up to the hyped expectations of the time (especially due to some, uh, hiccups along the way).

Tesla’s answer highlighted that the roof remains a core part of its residential product portfolio, along with Powerwall, and that it draws a lot of customer interest despite it being a “premium” product (in contrast to original promises that it would cost less than a regular roof). But Tesla isn’t installing the roof itself, it says it would rather produce units to send to the roofing industry.

Then, CEO Elon Musk went into a soliloquy about the benefits of having home solar, which are true if perhaps a little overstated:

I think it looks really cool, and your house generates electricity. And if you combine it with the Tesla Powerwall battery, then you can be self sufficient, so that even if the grid turns off – even if the grid turns off for several days – your house still works. And your roof looks awesome. So it’s like, I recommend anyone who can afford it, get Tesla’s solar roof and Powerwall, your family’s life might depend on it. And just in terms of convenience, your kids are not gonna yell at you cause their computers don’t work and their power went out and they cant charge their phone. Actually happens. You literally cant even call anyone cause your phone’s out of juice.

Despite the answer being a bit rambly, there’s an important portion in there, when Musk says “your family’s life might depend on it.”

This is perhaps a little alarmist, but there is a point to be made in there. Having ready access to energy can be helpful in a bad situation, like for example during increasing natural disasters which Musk himself seems to deny are happening.

So, while Musk is wrong about climate change, he’s right that solar and batteries can increase resiliency of a home – which could, indeed, be lifesaving for that home’s residents in certain circumstances. But it’s still hyperbolic, and self-serving, to leverage these fears in order to sell a “premium” product – one which costs in the multiple tens of thousands of dollars – to fearful family members.

But then we must consider the larger context in which these words were said.

The White House’s occupant opposes solar

Unfortunately for the US, and for Elon Musk’s businesses selling renewable energy products, that three-time candidate finally managed to get more votes than his opponent (while still failing to attain a majority, and despite committing treason in 2021, for which there is a clear legal remedy). And after campaigning against solar, he’s already started attempts to marginalize it as an energy source in his first week squatting in the Oval Office.

On his first day occupying the seat on which traitors do not belong, he signed a memo stating that the US should focus on all forms of energy except wind and solar, the latter of which the company that virtually all of Musk’s wealth comes from sells.

Mr. Trump has also attempted to freeze disbursement of funds related to the Inflation Reduction Act, some of which go to solar projects. The IRA reduces energy costs for Americans and was responsible for a massive boost in American manufacturing, both things which Mr. Trump opposes.

We’re not sure what effect these directives will have, given their questionable legality and the fact that Congress is responsible for government budgets, not former reality TV hosts. But then again, it should be expected that a convicted felon would break the law again, especially if said felon shows no remorse for their illegal actions.

And Mr. Trump has ignorantly promised – inasmuch as the promises of a compulsive liar ever matter – to continue to attack this cheap, clean energy source in his quest to make life worse for Americans. Many estimate there is more nonsense to come, and given past experience with the ignoramus in question, that seems like a good bet.

But we’re talking about Elon Musk here, what does he have to do with all of this?

Elon Musk’s involvement in anti-solar actions

Elon Musk spent much of last year campaigning for Mr. Trump, despite that he made it openly clear that he wants to harm solar, the fastest-growing energy source in the US, which is cheaper and cleaner than fossil fuels. That candidate instead favors dirty, costly fossil fuel energy.

As a thank you for Musk’s massive bribes to Mr. Trump’s campaign, he has been appointed to the Department of Government Efficiency. This is not an actual department, but an advisory panel with no official authority.

It was created to be helmed by Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, two of the supposedly most intelligent and capable republican operatives, who nevertheless were both tasked to do a job that would normally accomplished by one person (Ramaswamy has since quit or been forced outbefore the job even started). The panel has a redundant mission to the already-existing Government Accountability Office – making it a redundant office to reduce redundancy (no, this is not a Monty Python sketch, this is apparently real life).

So, Musk is an official part of this administration which is making these anti-solar moves.

It’s a change from Musk’s previous statements about solar power. Even as recently as 2022, Musk has decried anti-solar moves, and yet he’s now thrown large chunks of his personal wealth and effort into a group committing several of them.

While Musk and his advisory panel haven’t necessarily been directly associated with these anti-solar actions, the idea of freezing government funds is related to the supposed purview of his department, so it would be reasonable to think that he might have some input into this.

Further, Musk has shown in the past that when an administration does something he objects to, he’s willing to leave an advisory position in protest. He did this in 2017 when Mr. Trump signaled that he wanted to pull the US out of the Paris Agreement, an action which Musk said was “not good for America or the world” and quit an advisory board that he had been on (Trump did the same thing again last week, and Musk didn’t resign his position this time, signaling his newfound spinelessness).

So – the fact that Musk has not pulled out of the administration despite these anti-solar moves, combined with the fact that he has shown disapproval through resignations before, suggests that he at least tacitly accepts these moves to make it harder for you to install solar.

So… Elon Musk says you’ll die without solar, but wants to make it harder for you to get it?

And now we get to the point of this all: if Elon Musk thinks that your family is in mortal peril if it doesn’t install solar panels, but he also seems okay with government making it harder to install solar panels, does that mean he wants you to die too?

Worth a thought, especially for those apparently few investors who are still onboard for Tesla’s mission, rather than just holding onto base hopes that the company might benefit from some unspecified corruption.

Although, given the policies we’ve seen, which will directly harm Tesla’s business, maybe even that latter group might reconsider how the corruption is working out for them.


If you’d like to install home solar from a company that *isn’t* working actively to harm solar adoption in the US,  it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Skeptical of FSD?

Published

on

By

Skeptical of FSD?

Manage push notifications



Continue Reading

Trending