The Bauer Et Al “Blue” Hydrogen LCA Paper Isn’t Useful In The Real World (Part 2 of 2)
The first part of this analysis on the recently released life-cycle assessment of “blue” hydrogen covered the provenance and background for the paper, as well as the significant and questionable assumptions that the authors make about both expected demand for “blue” hydrogen and the scalability of carbon capture and sequestration it would demand. This second half continues the analysis of assumptions and statements in the paper.
“In general, large-scale blue hydrogen production will be connected to the high-pressure natural gas transmission grid and therefore, methane emissions from final distribution to decentralized consumers (i.e., the low-pressure distribution network) should not be included in the quantification of climate impacts of blue hydrogen.”
The first problem with this is the assumption that massive centralized models of hydrogen generation will be preferable to the current highly distributed creation of hydrogen at the point of consumption. The challenges with distributing hydrogen are clear and obvious, so it’s interesting that they make an assumption that is completely contrary to what is occurring today, and wave away the significant additional challenges — including carbon debt — of creating a massive hydrogen distribution system essentially from scratch.
This also assumes that there will continue to be a distribution network for natural gas. Electrification of heat will continue apace, eliminating this market. But supposing that it does continue, this assumes that perpetuating the leakage problem is in line with actual climate mitigation, which is decidedly not the case. This is not the point of the paper, but is in line with the rest of the paper’s assumptions.
“… natural gas supply must be associated with low GHG emissions, which means that natural gas leaks and methane emissions along the entire supply chain, including extraction, storage, and transport, must be minimized.”
This is in context of what requirements “blue” hydrogen would have to meet in order to be low-carbon hydrogen per the paper.
I agree with this statement, but further say that there is zero reason to believe that this will be widely adhered to as the fossil fuel industry is already lagging substantially in maintenance with declining revenues in regions impacted by the Saudi Arabian-Russian price war, the history of the industry consists of a Ponzi-scheme of paying for remediation with far distant and non-existent revenues — witness the $200 billion in unfunded remediation in Alberta’s oil sands as merely the tip of the iceberg, and as long-distance piping and shipping of natural gas requires a great deal of expensive monitoring and maintenance to maintain that standard.
In other words, while the statement is true as far as it goes, it is so unlikely to be common as to be irrelevant to the actual needs of the world for hydrogen, something that the authors barely acknowledge.
“Our assessment is that CO2 capture technology is already sufficiently mature to allow removal rates at the hydrogen production plant of above 90%. Capture rates close to 100% are technically feasible, slightly decreasing energy efficiencies and increasing costs, but have yet to be demonstrated at scale.”
Once again, 90% is inadequate with over a thousand billion tons of excess CO2 already in the atmosphere. Second, carbon capture at source has been being done since the mid-19th century. It’s not getting magically better. The likelihood that approaching 100% capture rate technologies will be deployed by organizations and individuals who think 90% is good enough and are likely to be rewarded handsomely for achieving that level approaches zero. After all, Equinor has received what I estimate to be over a billion USD in tax breaks for its Sleipner facility, which simply pumps CO2 they extracted back underground, and ExxonMobil touts its Shute Creek facility as the best in the world when it pumps CO2 up in one place then back underground in another place for enhanced oil recovery, benefiting nothing except their bottom line.
Removal of carbon from the atmosphere to draw down CO2 levels toward achieving a stable climate will not be realized by “good enough,” and close to 100% will be so rarely realized globally that it’s not worth discussing.
“It is important to reiterate that no single hydrogen production technology (including electrolysis with renewables) is completely net-zero in terms of GHG emissions over its life cycle and will therefore need additional GHG removal from the atmosphere to comply with strict net-zero targets.”
The authors appear to think that the current CO2e emissions from purely renewable energy are going to persist. As mining, processing, distribution, manufacturing and construction processes decarbonize, the currently very low GHG emissions of renewables full lifecycle will fall. This is equivalent to the common argument against electric cars, that grid electricity isn’t pure. It’s also a remarkable oversight for a group of authors committed to a rigorous LCA process.
The argument that “blue” hydrogen at its very best in the best possible cases will be as good as renewably powered electrolysis as it decarbonizes fails the basic tests of logic and reasonableness.
“… natural gas with CCS may be a more sustainable route than hydrogen to decarbonize such applications as power generation.”
This is so completely wrong that it’s remarkable that it made it into the document. First, there is no value in hydrogen as a generation technology. That’s a complete and utter non-starter beginning to end, making electricity vastly more expensive to no climate benefit. Secondly, all bolt-on flue capture programs for electrical generation have cost hundreds of millions or billions and failed. They increase the costs of electrical generation to the level where it was completely uncompetitive in today’s markets.
When wind and solar are trending to $20 per MWh, long-distance transmission of electricity using HVDC exists in lengths thousands of kilometers long and underwater around the world, and there are already 170 GW of grid storage and another 60 GW under construction at the bare beginning of the development of storage, assuming that either natural gas with CCS or hydrogen have any play in electrical generation makes it clear that the authors are simply starting with the assumption that natural gas and hydrogen have a major part to play in the future, and have created an argument for it.
The authors’ argument boils down to that in a perfect world, perfectly monitored and perfectly maintained, “blue” hydrogen would be similar in emissions to green hydrogen today, ignoring the rapidly dropping GHG emissions per MWh of renewables and ignoring that the world of fossil fuels in no way adheres to the premise of perfect monitoring and perfect maintenance.
The authors are performing a life-cycle assessment focusing on greenhouse gas emissions, and it is not scoped to include costs. Having reviewed the costs of the technologies that they are proposing for this hypothetical perfect “blue” hydrogen world, they are vastly higher than just not bothering, shifting to renewables rapidly and electrifying rapidly.
As a contribution to the literature on what will happen in the real world, this is a fairly slight addition, one which is being promoted far beyond its actual merit by the usual suspects.
Featured image by akitada31 from Pixabay
Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.
Bojangles, the North Carolina-based chain known for its fried chicken and biscuits, is joining the growing list of fast food chains installing EV chargers in their parking lots.
The restaurant chain is working with Smart Big Box, Alyath EV, and Energy and Environmental Design Services to install turnkey EV charging stations at a “wide range” of its 800 restaurants, which are concentrated heavily in the southeast US. The rollout starts in late 2025, with most chargers expected to be available by sometime in 2026.
Each Bojangles location getting EV chargers will offer at least four ports. The stations will vary between Level 2 and DC fast chargers.
Bojangles CIO Richard Del Valle said, “Working with Alyath and Smart Big Box allows us to introduce a new convenience that aligns with evolving customer needs.”
It’s a smart move. The charging stations will let people plug in and power up, and they’re more likely to dine at Bojangles while they’re doing so. Plus, Bojangles will get a reputation for having charging stations, so EV drivers will be more inclined to head toward the restaurants as a reliable power source.
Cristiane Rosul, CEO of Alyath, said the partnership “not only benefits EV drivers but also positions Bojangles as a leader in the future of quick-service dining.”
Smart Big Box has contracted with Energy and Environmental Design Services as the exclusive installer and maintenance partner for all EV chargers.
Read more: Waffle House is getting DC fast chargers – and it’s a genius move
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. 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.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Toyota’s electric SUV is now its cheapest vehicle to lease. After slashing lease prices again, the Toyota bZ4X is listed for lease at just $199 per month in some states. That’s even cheaper than a Corolla right now, even though it’s nearly double the price.
Toyota bZ4X is now cheaper to lease than a Corolla
The 2025 Toyota bZ4X already starts at $6,000 cheaper than the previous model year, but with a new promotion this month, it’s even more affordable.
Toyota is at it again, having cut lease prices once more this month following the Fourth of July holiday. The 2025 Toyota bZ4X XLE is now listed at just $199 per month for 36 months. With $3,999 due at signing, you’ll end up paying an effective cost of $310 per month.
The offer is $42 less than before the new promo, or about a 12% price cut. It’s hard enough to find any lease nowadays around $300, but for an electric SUV, it’s a pretty good deal.
According to online auto research firm CarsDirect, it’s even cheaper to lease a bZ4X now in some states than a Toyota Corolla. The 2025 Corolla LE Sedan is available for $229 for 36 months. With $2,999 due at signing, the effective monthly rate is $312, or $2 more than the bZ4X.
Although $2 might not seem like much in the grand scheme of things, it’s pretty significant, given that the bZ4X is $16,000 more expensive.
The 2025 Toyota bZ4X XLE has an MSRP of $38,465, compared to the Corolla LE Sedan, which starts at $22,325. That’s a $16,140 cost difference alone.
Toyota’s electric SUV is slightly longer than a RAV4 at 184.6″ in length, but it has a longer wheelbase, which opens up more interior space.
Toyota is also throwing in a free year of unlimited charging (at EV-go-operated public charging stations) for those who buy or lease a new 2025 bZ4X. You can also add a ChargePoint home charger to the cost.
Although the bZ4X is available for just $199 per month, the 2025 Hyundai IONIQ 5 is listed at $179 nationwide this month. With more range, style, and an NACS port for charging at Tesla Superchargers, the 2025 IONIQ 5 offer is hard to pass up right now.
| 2025 Toyota bZ4X trim | Starting Price (excluding $1,395 DPH fee) |
Price reduction (vs 2024MY) |
Range (mi) |
| XLE FWD | $37,070 | -$6,000 | 252 |
| XLE AWD | $39,150 | -$6,000 | 228 |
| Limited FWD | $41,800 | -$5,380 | 236 |
| Limited AWD | $43,880 | -$5,380 | 222 |
| Nightshade | $40,420 | N/A | 222 |
Like many carmakers, Toyota is currently offering significant incentives on electric vehicles, with the federal tax credit set to expire at the end of September. Accordingly, Toyota’s promotion ends on September 30. Although the bZ4X doesn’t qualify for the credit through purchase, Toyota is passing it on through leasing.
In some areas, like LA, Toyota is currently offering $12,000 off bZ4X leases. With the loss of the tax credit, the savings would drop to just $4,500, which would add over $100 a month to the lease price.
Looking to take advantage of the savings while they are still here? You can use our link to find deals on the 2025 Toyota bZ4X in your area today.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Transport Canada has finished its investigation into Tesla’s questionable filing of $43 million worth of EV incentives in a single day, finding that the claims did indeed represent cars sold before the deadline to file for incentives – still raising questions about disorganization within Tesla.
To recap, Canada suddenly sunsetted its electric vehicle incentives back in January, as the program ran out of money. It caught a lot of EV dealers by surprise, and there was a sudden rush to sell cars and to file for incentives, given that the end of the program was announced with just three days notice.
One of these dealerships that showed a rush was a single Tesla dealership in Quebec, which recorded 4,000 rebate requests in a single weekend, an impossible number at the relatively small location. Other Tesla locations also filed for suspiciously high numbers of incentive claims on the same weekend.
This raised alarm bells, and other Canadian auto dealers pointed it out to Transport Canada, with Huw WIlliams, head of the Canadian Auto Dealers Association (CADA) claiming that Tesla “gamed the system” to hog an illegitimate number of incentive claims out of the limited money left. The total amount was $43 million, which was more than half of the amount left in the Canadian government’s coffers.
Even accounting for Tesla delivery pushes, and for increased sales as the credit rapidly sunset, these numbers did not seem possible.
This – perhaps combined with Tesla’s unpopular position in Canada at the time given CEO Elon Musk’s participation in a US government which was attacking Canada’s sovereignty at the time – led to Transport Canada announcing an investigation into Tesla’s incentive claims (Canadian Transport Minister Chrystia Freeland even said at the time that future Canadian ZEV incentives should exclude Tesla until the US’ “illegitimate and illegal” tariffs were lifted).
Tesla responded to the investigation in a typically standoffish manner, claiming in a letter that it was “shocked” to hear about the investigation, threatening legal action if payments weren’t resumed, and blaming Transport Canada for causing Tesla’s negative public perception and exposing Tesla’s Canadian employees to harassment (the letter did not, however, mention anything about CEO Musk’s government activities, or his recent actions attempting to spread white supremacy around the globe, and how those are much more responsible for negative public perception of the company).
Well now, the result of that investigation is back, and Freeland said on Friday that Tesla’s claims “were determined to legitimately represent cars sold before January 12.”
Transport Canada also pledged to CADA that all cars delivered before January 12 will have their incentive claims fulfilled, regardless of the program’s budget. CADA estimates it’s owed around $11 million in past-due claims, and Williams still wonders how Tesla knew to file those claims so suddenly.
Electrek’s Take
Questions still remain about this incentive. As pointed out by the Canadian Press, it’s still not clear whether Tesla’s incentive claims were for cars sold on that weekend, or for cars sold prior to that weekend and delivered all in a lump.
Given the physical limitations of the locations involved, it’s likely the latter. Which raises a different kind of alarm bell: that of disorganization within Tesla, as I pointed out as my main concern over this situation in a previous article.
I just don’t see how Tesla Canada can justify leaving tens of millions of dollars on the table for potentially several months, when all it took was the filing of some pieces of paper for them to get it. That’s capital that Tesla could have used to do business, and letting it sit in someone else’s bank account doesn’t benefit Tesla at all.
Now, disorganization is nothing new for Tesla, but businesses usually don’t like leaving money laying around for no reason. And Tesla, with its focus on quarterly results and end-of-quarter pushes, surely would have enjoyed having that extra cash in December, the end of a fiscal quarter/year, rather than the beginning of January when they filed for these incentives.
So regardless of the now proven legitimacy of these claims, this aspect should be cause for some amount of concern. It’s a reflection of a longtime problem in Tesla, where things tend to fall through the cracks until there’s some sort of emergency, and then it’s all-hands-on-deck from whoever happens to be closest to the problem at the time. But this has been an issue within Tesla for so long that it’s hard to see it being fixed at this point – and certainly not under its longtime CEO who seems far more interested in using Tesla to bail out his private companies or turning Twitter into “MechaHitler” than on making actual good decisions for Tesla.
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. 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.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike