The following report is from Study Finds:
Blue hydrogen, an energy source involving a process for the creation of hydrogen via methane in natural gas, is supposed to be a “green” asset in the fight against climate change. Unfortunately, researchers from Cornell University and Stanford University reports this supposed clean energy source may be worse for our planet than burning fossil fuels.
According to their study, the carbon footprint incurred by creating blue hydrogen is 20% higher than using either natural gas or coal directly for heat and roughly 60% greater than using diesel oil for heating purposes.
To create blue hydrogen, scientists convert methane to hydrogen and carbon dioxide via heat, steam, pressure – just like creating gray hydrogen. However, the blue hydrogen process takes things a step further by collecting some additional carbon dioxide as well. After getting rid of that byproduct carbon dioxide and any other impurities, the remains become blue hydrogen. That’s all well and good, but study authors say that creating blue hydrogen requires tons of energy, usually attained by burning more natural gas.
In the past, no effort was made to capture the carbon dioxide byproduct of gray hydrogen, and the greenhouse gas emissions have been huge. Now the industry promotes blue hydrogen as a solution, an approach that still uses the methane from natural gas, while attempting to capture the byproduct carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, emissions remain very large.
Study co-author Robert Howarth, professor of ecology and environmental biology at Cornell, in a university release.
Still Producing Harmful Emissions
Methane is a particularly powerful methane gas which scientists believe is 100 times stronger as an atmospheric warming agent than carbon dioxide. According to the The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released earlier this month, methane has contributed about two-thirds as much to global warming as carbon dioxide cumulatively over the past century.
It is true that emissions for blue hydrogen are lower than gray hydrogen, but only by roughly nine to 12%.
Blue hydrogen is hardly emissions free. Blue hydrogen as a strategy only works to the extent it is possible to store carbon dioxide long-term indefinitely into the future without leakage back to the atmosphere.
According to the study
On Aug. 10, the U.S. Senate passed the $1 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. That legislature includes an allocation of several billion dollars toward developing and building the hydrogen technology industry.
Political forces may not have caught up with the science yet. Even progressive politicians may not understand for what they’re voting. Blue hydrogen sounds good, sounds modern and sounds like a path to our energy future. It is not.
Robert Howarth
A Greener Alternative
There is a third option however — green hydrogen. This variety of hydrogen is by far the most clean, researchers explain, although it remains a very small sector with little commercial activity today. Green hydrogen is the result of water experiencing electrolysis. The water eventually has its hydrogen and oxygen components separated.
The best hydrogen, the green hydrogen derived from electrolysis – if used wisely and efficiently – can be that path to a sustainable future. Blue hydrogen is totally different.
The study is published in the journal Energy Science & Engineering.
AUTHOR COMMENTARY
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.
Revelation 11:18
The WinePress has been continually rebuking the nonsense surrounding all these moves to “go green,” innkeeping with Agenda 2030 and the Vatican’s Laudato Si’. This is where the world is moving, and yet more and more studies are showing these moves to transition into a “more sustainable life” are far more damaging, and totally counterintuitive to pollute less. But the elites who are funding this garbage know this and could care less. They are interested only in control. And the masses eat it up…
Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.
Jeremiah 6:16
Oil Giants Invest In AI Companies To Remove Carbon From The Air And Soil, Furthering Agenda 2030
Study Reveals That “Green Technology” Toxicity Seeps Into Our Bones
The Health Effects Of Plant-Based And Artificial “Meats”
[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).
The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.
