ROAD TO 2050] Doable, cool, but very expensive

[SHUTTERSTOCK]

APRIL 18, 2021

Korea’s transition to a carbon neutral society will be tough for many. But no industries face more of a challenge than steel, petrochemicals and oil refining, where greenhouse gas emissions are intrinsically linked to the ways of production.  

 
According to the Korea Energy Agency, manufacturing was responsible for 59.8 percent of Korea’s greenhouse emissions in 2019. By industry, steelmaking was the biggest culprit: It produced 38.2 percent of greenhouse emissions by manufacturers. Petrochemicals and oil refineries followed at 19 and 10.9 percent, respectively.
 

 
The government says tech development will help these companies reach a carbon neutral state by 2050 — by innovating production methods and adopting ecofriendly energy sources.  
 
In other words, there’s a plan. But the question is feasibility. Replacing production equipment will take massive investments. Technologies to reduce emissions or produce hydrogen in great quantities are still under development or far too expensive for immediate application at industrial sites.  
 
Experts say it’s time to sit down and have a serious talk about the costs we have to pay as Korea’s manufacturing industry goes through a difficult transition to carbon neutrality.  
 
“Carbon neutrality is a global trend. It’s no question that we have to go in that direction,” said Lim Jae-kyu, a senior researcher at Korea Energy Economics Institute (KEEI). “But in terms of pace, we need a clear assessment of where we stand and how much we could do realistically. What we need is milestones. Setting the goal at zero for everybody will only spur unrealistic plans and eventually pull down credibility in government policies.”
 
 
Betting on green technology
 
The reason steel, petrochemical and oil companies produce massive amounts of carbon dioxide is because of the way its products are made. They all involve combustion of fossil fuels like coal and naphtha.  
 
Without it, manufacturing would be impossible. That’s why companies will need facility upgrades of a fundamental nature -- upgrades that root out the old equipment and replace with new technology.  
 
In the short term, steelmakers have pledged to increase energy efficiency and reuse materials. In the long-term, a coal alternative steelmakers are eyeing is hydrogen.  
 

A Posco employee working in a steel mill in Pohang [YONHAP]

The traditional method of producing steel is burning ironstone with coal in high heat at above 1,500 degrees Celsius. In this process, 2 tons of carbon dioxide is produced for every 1 ton of steel. Burning hydrogen, on the other hand, produces water as a by-product instead of carbon dioxide.
 
But hydrogen-based steelmaking is years away from mass production as the technology is still in its infancy, globally. In Korea, the government is co-developing the technology with local steelmakers Posco and Hyundai Steel with a goal of running tests in production sites in 2025.  
 
Carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) is technology that could benefit all industries that rely on fossil fuel. It starts by extracting carbon dioxide from the gas produced from combusting fossil fuel. The carbon is then liquefied and transferred to a storage deep underground or undersea where it can’t harm the environment.  
 
Unlike hydrogen-based steelmaking, the technology for CCUS is already mature and is at use in many places around the world. including the United States, Europe, China and Japan.  
 
Korea's issue with CCUS is not the technology, says Yoon Yeo-il, a researcher at the Korea Institute of Energy Research. It’s the lack of storage.  
 
“The full chain of CCUS technology--from extracting, liquefying, transporting and storing carbon-- can be put to use immediately,” he said. “The problem is there’s nowhere to store the liquefied carbon dioxide. Unlike the United States or China, Korea has very small territory. Building a carbon storage facility could easily trigger 'not in my backyard protests' from residents in any region.”
 
That leaves no choice but to drill the seabed. But that would cost around one billion won per hole, Yeo said.  
 
Korea already has failed attempts of building CCUS storage facilities in the country. In 2016, two CO2 storage facilities on a test run-- one on the ground and one offshore in Pohang--were shut after an earthquake. Operations never resumed as a study released soon after suggested the CCUS facilities could have caused the earthquake.
 
 
Hydrogen production is a silver lining
 
As such, it’s no question that the global drive for zero carbon puts a great deal of pressure on steel, chemical and oil companies. But ironically, the increasing demand for ecofriendly fuel also creates a new opportunity in an era where combustibles will have to be replaced.
 
These industries have an advantage when it comes to producing hydrogen which is created as a natural by-product in their manufacturing. Hydrogen can also be made by processing natural gas, which is another resource steel and oil companies have more access to than other industries.  
 
Previously, steel makers, oil refiners and petrochemical companies re-used most of the byproduct hydrogen art the manufacturing sites. As demand is sure to go up, local companies have released ambitious plans to sell hydrogen.
 

Hyundai Steel's hydrogen factory in Dangjin, South Chungcheong [HYUNDAI STEEL]

Posco has annual capacity to produce 7,000 tons of hydrogen per year. In February, the company announced it would establish a manufacturing system to produce 5 million tons a year and generate 30 trillion won from hydrogen businesses alone by 2050. Hyundai Steel has a hydrogen factory in Daesan which can produce up to 3,500 tons of hydrogen per year. The company's chief executive said in October that Hyundai may invest up to 250 billion won to enlarge capacity, without suggesting a definite time line.
 
SK Inc., the largest shareholder of SK Innovation, announced in March plans to build a hydrogen factory with annual capacity of 30,000 tons in 2023. The oil refining subsidiary will supply the byproduct hydrogen created in its Incheon plant. SK E&S will also produce hydrogen from imported liquefied natural gas, which would bring SK’s total hydrogen production capacity to 280,000 tons a year by 2025.    
 
Hyosung teamed up with Ireland-based Linde to build a liquefied hydrogen factory in Ulsan. Both companies will be investing 300 billion won each. Once the site is completed in 2022, it will have maximum capacity of 13,000 tons a year, which Hyosung claims would make it the largest liquefied hydrogen factory in the world.  
 
But whether it’s using byproduct hydrogen or processing natural gas, achieving hydrogen that can be commercialized for charging stations and fuel vehicles requires additional equipment. That will take years of investment and construction before fruition.
 
“There are limits to the amount of byproduct hydrogen that can be produced with current facilities, which means if we want more, we need to expand oil refining facilities,” said an SK Innovation spokesman. “The factories at the moment are not focused on producing hydrogen but oil, so there will need to be additional investments for that shifted focus.”
 
Researcher Yoon Wang-rae of the Korea Institute of Energy Research agrees that the amount of hydrogen produced at industrial sites like oil refiners and steel mills can be substantial. Technology has also reached a point where mass production is possible as well. But hydrogen supply lacks cost-effectiveness, says Yoon, mainly due to transportation costs.
 
“Transporting hydrogen through pipelines is cheap but prices jump the minute they’re loaded on tube trailers,” he said. “The most feasible way at the moment is selling hydrogen on-site to regions nearby production facilities.”
 
Hydrogen has to be liquefied for transportation. But this is an expensive task as hydrogen as a liquid is a volatile substance that requires storage at extremely low temperature of minus 253 degrees Celsius and high pressure. If the conditions are not met, storage tanks could explode.  
 
Moreover, it would take a much longer time for hydrogen produced by manufacturing companies to be completely green. Hydrogen produced at the moment is gray or brown hydrogen, meaning it comes from burning combustible fuel. To produce “green hydrogen,” the energy will have to be electricity generated from natural resources like solar or wind power, which at the moment is still very expensive.  
 
 
Haste will do harm
 
In short, technologies suggested by companies and the government are still at the very early stages. They have not reached the point to be applied in the manufacturing field, lack feasibility and will take years of investment in technology and production equipment.  
 
Some experts raise doubt on the government’s 2050 due date for carbon neutrality. According to a carbon reduction plan submitted to the United Nations in December, Korea aims to reduce carbon emissions by 24.4 percent in 2030, compared to 2017, and reach the point of carbon neutrality by 2050.  
 
But forcing a uniform standard may be an impractical initiative that doesn't consider the respective circumstance each industry is facing--which for steel, petrochemical and oil refinery is a little more desperate than others.  
 
“This isn’t something that can be done by the private sector alone,” says Jung Eun-mi, a senior researcher at the Korea Institute for Industrial Economics & Trade. “As a whole, we’ll need infrastructure to use more electricity as we burn less fossil fuel. There will have to be a consumer market is are willing to pay more for products that emit less carbon.”
 
Jung adds that these industries will likely lose competitiveness in the global market if they are not offered the right incentives, while the government carries out plans for carbon neutrality.  
 
In Europe where efforts to pull down carbon emissions started long before Korea, governments have offered support for industries that are vulnerable to the transition for zero carbon. Steelmakers, for example, were offered discounts in electricity fees.  
 
Another reason Korea should be careful in setting an execution plan is because steel, oil and petrochemicals take up a significant portion of Korea’s exports and are fields whose rise and fall could affect other industries as well, like automaking and shipbuilding.  
 
Steel, oil and petrochemicals were among Korea’s top five export categories last year. According to government data, four energy-intensive industries including cement took up 8.4 percent of Korea’s 2019 gross domestic product. This was much higher than the 5.6 percent in the United States, Japan’s 5.8 percent and the European Union’s 5 percent.
 
“These industries are sure to be affected as the society shifts towards carbon neutrality and their fall will affect our country as a whole,” Lim Jae-kyu, a senior researcher at KEEI.  
 
“Some say ‘green industries will make up for that loss and create new jobs. But nobody knows what this 'green industry' will be like. It has no substance.”
 
According to Lim, who advises to government officials on energy policy, discussions have just started to set action plans for carbon neutrality. Now that there’s a goal, what they need is a serious calculation on the costs that will have to be paid.
 
“Even if the technology is ready, the costs will be immense to apply them to manufacturing sites, and nobody is willing to say how much this costs and who will take on that financial burden,” he said. “Companies are announcing investment volumes, but there will be hidden costs that nobody knows yet.
 
“The cost issue is something that hasn’t been addressed yet but we'll get there at one point. The investments will be impossible to be handled by a single party. We also need to deliberate how those costs will affect our economy as a whole.”
 
BY SONG KYOUNG-SON  [song.kyoungson@joongang.co.kr]

German government agrees on national hydrogen strategy



Germany Hydrogen StrategyIn this Monday June 8, 2020 photo a nozzle valve is attached to the dispenser of a hydrogen filling station in Dresden Germany. The German government is to agree its national hydrogen strategy for the coming decades, part of a plan to reduce the country's dependence on fossil fuels. (Sebastian Kahnert/dpa via AP)

FRANK JORDANS
June 10, 2020·

BERLIN (AP) — The German government agreed Wednesday on a long-term strategy for increasing production and use of hydrogen as part of a plan to cut the country’s greenhouse gas emissions.

While hydrogen is currently produced almost exclusively from fossil fuels, the government wants to encourage its production from excess electricity generated by renewable energy sources.

Experts say this so-called green hydrogen could help smooth out the problem of solar and wind power's fluctuating supply, and replace fossil fuels in industrial processes that require high temperatures such as steel making.

The government plans to invest 9 billion euros ($10.2 billion) to promote hydrogen production and use, including 2 billion euros that will go toward projects in developing countries such as Morocco.

It set a goal of building hydrogen production facilities in Germany with a capacity of up to five Gigawatts by 2030.

Germany’s industry lobby group BDI welcomed the government decision.

“Only with hydrogen at competitive prices, from domestic sources and imports, can the goal of climate neutrality by 2050 be reached,” said BDI deputy head Holger Loesch.

Germany's transport minister, Andreas Scheuer, told the Funke Media group that the widespread use of technology such as hydrogen-powered engines in buses and trucks would be necessary if the country wants to meet its emissions reduction targets in the transportation sector.

Chancellor Angela Merkel has backed a national goal of ending greenhouse gas emissions in Europe by 2050 to meet the goal of keeping global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) by the end of the century.

Scheuer said Germany will have about 100 hydrogen fueling stations by the end of 2020 and add a further 10-15 each year, giving it the biggest such network in Europe.

Japan, which like Germany has no major fossil fuel resources of its own, has invested heavily in hydrogen technology. China and South Korea likewise have national hydrogen strategies, as do Australia, Norway and the Netherlands.

Japan looks past electric, bets on hydrogen powered cars

By Susan Phillips March 14, 2019

At Toyota's LFA Works factory in Japan, workers install hydrogen fuel tanks in a new Mirai. (Hiroo Saso)


This article originally appeared on StateImpact.

—

When it comes to electric cars, battery-powered vehicles dominate the roads. Sales of battery electric cars are set to take off. Auto companies are making more models, and countries are passing regulations to reduce carbon emissions. Even states like Pennsylvania have a plan to encourage more residents to buy battery electrics.

But Japan isn’t sure that’s the future — or, at least, the only future for electrified transportation. The country has ambitious goals to become the “hydrogen society,” and right now, the focus is on its automakers.

At Toyota’s LFA Works factory in Aichi prefecture, workers install the carbon-fiber hydrogen tanks on Toyota’s new hydrogen-powered fuel cell car, known as the Mirai — which means “future” in Japanese.

This tiny factory, within Toyota’s larger Motomachi plant, produces only about 10 cars each day. All are assembled by hand.

Hydrogen fuel station attendant Ken Kawakatsu fills the tank with hydrogen gas cooled to minus 35 degrees celsius. He says this Tokyo station gets about a dozen customers a day. (Hiroo Saso)

Plant manager Matsuo Yoshiyuki owns a Mirai and loves driving it.

“I believe in the future of hydrogen,” he said. “It’s very important for the [environment].”

But Yoshiyuki says owning a hydrogen car isn’t very convenient.

“Sometimes I have problems [filling up] with hydrogen,” he said. “There are not enough stations and the hours are very limited.”

A hydrogen fuel cell doesn’t burn anything — it uses a chemical reaction between the hydrogen and the oxygen from the air to produce electricity — and hydrogen-powered cars emit only water. So in a world striving to reduce its carbon emissions, it sounds like a great alternative to the internal combustion engine.

But the Mirai is expensive — even with generous Japanese government subsidies that bring it down from the equivalent of $70,000 to $50,000. The largest cost is the fuel cell, which Toyota says will drop as production ramps up.

A hydrogen fueling station in Tokyo. Only about 100 of these exist in Japan. This one gets at most 15 customers a day. (Hiroo Saso)

Hydrogen’s chicken and egg problem

The lack of hydrogen fuel infrastructure challenges automakers. Only about 11,000 fuel cell vehicles are on the road worldwide, according to Juan Pontes with EV Volumes. About half are in California, where strict emission regulations and tax credits incentivize electric vehicles. It’s hard to convince consumers to buy a car they can’t easily fuel up. And it’s just as difficult to get energy companies to build the infrastructure if there aren’t enough vehicles to make it profitable.

Part of Japan’s goal to be the first “hydrogen society” includes a target of building 900 hydrogen fueling stations by 2030. The country’s roughly 100 stations were subsidized by the government with continued operational support from manufacturers like Toyota.

The energy ministry has ambitious goals in the lead-up to the 2020 Olympics. The city of Tokyo plans to deploy 100 hydrogen fuel cell buses for the games, with a longer-term goal of 200,000 such vehicles in the next six years.

Hydrogen vs. battery electric

With about five million plug-in battery electric cars worldwide, fuel cell cars are in their infancy. Hydrogen’s detractors say the fuel cell doesn’t make sense given the greater energy efficiency of plug-in battery powered vehicles.

But in countries like Japan, where much of the population lives in dense urban areas, it’s not easy to charge up a battery electric vehicle. It’s here where companies like Toyota are banking on the convenience of hydrogen over plug-ins.

The Mirai at a hydrogen fueling station in Tokyo. (Hiroo Saso)

Matthew Klippenstein, co-author of online publication Fuel Cell Industry Review, says without a garage, or regular parking space that has access to an electrical outlet, hydrogen fuel cells make more sense.

“There’s just no behavior change as long as you have [hydrogen] infrastructure in place,” he said. “We go to the same gas station and fuel up in the same few minutes and just keep on tootling on. And I think that is ultimately the reason that Toyota and other carmakers now have more interest in fuel cells.”

Klippenstein says he sees the divide between hydrogen fuel cells and battery electric plug-ins tracking the parallel path as the gasoline and diesel split familiar to American consumers.

“We will see a similar split where batteries will, for decades at least, dominate the light duty vehicle passenger cars whereas fuel cells will ultimately win out in the heavier applications.”

In South Korea, where the majority of residents also live in urban areas, automaker Hyundai just announced that it plans to produce 700,000 fuel cell cars a year by 2030.
The Hydrogen Society

A new hydrogen fuel plant is rising several yards from Fukushima’s Daiichi nuclear power plant, the site of the nuclear plant meltdown after the 2011 tsunami.

That accident forced Japan to shut down all of its nuclear reactors, which had provided about one-third of the country’s electricity. Eight have since re-opened. Despite that energy source, Japan has always had to import all of its fossil fuels and is the world’s No. 1 importer of liquefied natural gas, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Workers push a partly assembled Mirai through the assembly line at Toyota’s LFA Works in Aichi Prefecture, Japan. Since there are so few hydrogen fuel cell cars manufactured, all of them are assembled by hand. (Hiroo Saso)

But hydrogen is abundant, and the fuel could be produced anywhere.

Ken Koyama from the Institute of Energy Economics, a Japanese think tank, agrees that hydrogen is a good bet for Japan.

“We are always talking about the long run future,” Koyama said. “It’s not the next year or a five-year time horizon. It’s a 20-year, 30-year, 40-year, 50 years because if we are really thinking about climate change it’s a long-, very, very long-term strategy is critical.”

Producing the hydrogen fuel is itself energy intensive. And critics point out that while the hydrogen fuel cell car emits only water, if fossil fuels are used to produce the hydrogen fuel, then the vehicles still contribute to global warming, just as battery electric vehicles charged with energy produced by coal plants can’t be considered completely carbon-free.

“So it’s not really clean if that is the case,” says Kimiko Haraka of the Kiko Network, a Japanese environmental group.

Haraka is critical of a plan by a number of Japanese companies, including Kawasaki Heavy Industries, J-Power, Iwatani Corporation and Marubeni, to build a plant in Australia that would use lignite coal to produce hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles. She also worries that the many subsidies for hydrogen come at the expense of promoting renewable energy.

Still, Bertel Schmitt, a former car industry advertising executive who lives in Tokyo, says it makes sense for Japan and its automakers to include hydrogen vehicles in their long-game plan.

“They pretty much realize that the exhaust regulations will get tougher and tougher,” he said. “What is being enacted right now, in 2020 in Europe, is nothing compared to what will come five years later, 10 years later.”

For now, though, Schmitt says the internal combustion engine remains the cheapest and most convenient car on the market. Despite massive investment, he says Toyota knows hydrogen won’t be taking over the roads anytime soon.

“They know that the guy sitting in the hydrogen fueling station will be very, very lonely for quite a while.”

Travel for this story was made possible with help from the International Center for Journalists.

The role of hydrogen in our low-carbon transition

Hydrogen fuel has long been hailed as the silver bullet that will free us from fossil fuels, but it's time for a reality check on its production and use in a low-carbon economy .

Mike Childs 

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH

21 Apr 20

Summary
Introduction
The environmental impacts of hydrogen production
Low-carbon hydrogen production
Prioritise using hydrogen when there are no practicable alternatives
Rapid decarbonisation requires a lot more hydrogen
Scale of renewable energy required
ANNEX

View as PDF

Summary

Hydrogen is being hyped as an easy way to provide low-carbon energy for heating, transportation and industry. But as this briefing shows, while hydrogen will be an important component of the low-carbon transition, its production will necessarily be limited over the next decade and it should be prioritised for uses where there’s no low-carbon alternative, such as industry. In other sectors, such as heating, alternative approaches will be needed.
Introduction

The UK has a legal obligation to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 at the latest, although Friends of the Earth and others are calling for this target to be achieved earlier. Regardless of the end date, it is cumulative emissions that matter in the fight against climate breakdown, which is why the UK’s Climate Change Act has interim targets in the form of 5-year carbon budgets.

The current fifth carbon budget mandates a 57% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 but will need adjusting because of the new net-zero target. The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) will make recommendations in December 2020 for the scale of cuts required by 2030 (the mid-point of the fifth carbon budget), as well as making recommendations for 2035 (the sixth carbon budget).

The role of hydrogen in meeting the reduction targets is increasingly being discussed.

For example:
The National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) recently published a report1 stating that the cheapest route to zero-carbon power is 90% renewable energy generation, supported by burning hydrogen to make electricity when renewable energy production is low. It says that using hydrogen reduces total energy system costs by around 20%.
It’s also increasingly suggested that hydrogen could be used for zero-carbon production of steel, cement and other industrial products. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies has recently published a detailed briefing2 on this issue.
Hydrogen is being promoted for use in some transportation, such as trains and heavy goods vehicles.
Over recent years the gas industry has been promoting a switch for home heating from natural gas to hydrogen3 (although in doing so it has been criticised for significantly under-estimating the costs, not fully considering the risks of leakages from home pipework not suited for hydrogen, and underplaying the challenges involved).2 See below for more discussion of hydrogen in heating.

The future role of hydrogen is broadly accepted but the question of how it should be produced remains. This choice could have a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Key decisions must be made soon and making the wrong choices could perpetuate our reliance on fossil fuels.
The environmental impacts of hydrogen production

There are two broad routes for hydrogen production:
From fossil fuels, either gas using steam methane reformation (SMR) or coal. This is sometimes known as "blue hydrogen."
By electrolysis, using electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. This is sometimes known as "green" hydrogen, particularly if the electricity used is from renewable sources.

Virtually all current global hydrogen production is made directly from fossil fuels. Only 2% of global hydrogen production is from electrolysis and it accounts for only 4% in the UK.

Production of hydrogen from fossil fuels is a carbon-intensive process

According to the CCC, hydrogen produced from natural gas by SMR has a carbon-emissions intensity of around 285 gCO₂/kWh. This excludes the impact of fugitive emissions from extraction of natural gas, estimated to be 15-70 gCO2e/kWh,4 although this could be 25-40% higher according to recent research.5 Hydrogen from coal gasification has an intensity of around 675 gCO₂/kWh.

In comparison, the carbon-emissions intensity of the electricity grid in 2019 was less than 200 gCO₂/kWh and is declining fast. Emissions from the global production of hydrogen are more than double the UK’s total territorial emissions.6

Carbon capture and storage will not deliver zero carbon

Hydrogen production from fossil fuels can be partly decarbonised by carbon capture and storage (CCS). However, doing so brings an energy penalty and extra costs. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme,7 CCS rates are generally designed to be 85-90% efficient (ie 10-15% of the carbon emissions aren’t captured). The IEA report suggested that while it should be technically possible to achieve capture rates of 99% using CCS, doing so brings an additional efficiency penalty for the power plant, meaning that even more energy is needed to produce the same amount of hydrogen. This in turn increases the amount of upstream fugitive emissions from the extraction and transportation of fossil fuels.
Low-carbon hydrogen production

Electrolysis using renewable electricity has negligible carbon emissions, although if it uses grid electricity, its emissions will be higher than the carbon-emissions intensity of the grid, because the production process is not 100% efficient. That’s why it’s better to use electricity directly, in electric vehicles for example, rather than converting it to hydrogen. As an illustration, in 2018 hydrogen made using grid electricity would’ve had a carbon-emissions intensity of 288-388 gCO₂/kWh, when the grid’s intensity was 216 gCO₂/kWh.

The carbon intensity of hydrogen production from the electricity grid is therefore already lower than hydrogen made from fossil fuels (see chart below). This difference will only increase over time as the carbon-emissions intensity of the electricity grid reduces. In 2019 it fell below 200 gCO₂/kWh and it’s forecast to drop below 100 gCO₂/kWh by 2030 and 41 gCO2/kWh by 2035.

Carbon intensity of various hydrogen production methods compared to natural gas. Note that data for natural gas include fugitive emissions from natural gas extraction. CCS assumed to be 95% capture rate.

Scaling up production and the real cost of producing hydrogen

Hydrogen production using natural gas (SMR) is an established process. This has the advantage that manufacturing capacity can be ramped up relatively quickly (the H21 project envisages a 12.5 GW hydrogen from natural gas plant, built in a modular 1.25 GW plant each year from 2026), but the downside is that there are unlikely to be significant cost reductions. However, the necessary CCS elements are still in development and in practice unlikely to be available at scale until the 2030s.

The government’s action plan for CCS states that "our ambition is that the UK should have the option to deploy [CCS] at scale during the 2030s, subject to the costs coming down sufficiently."8 The recent Budget stated it will invest "at least £800 million" for a CCS infrastructure fund that will support efforts to "establish CCS in at least two UK sites, one by the mid-2020s, a second by 2030."

Will CCS be at scale in time?

Given the chequered past of developing CCS in the UK, it would be a brave bet that the UK would have large-scale operational CCS facilities by 2030, when significant inroads to decarbonising heating need to be made.

Will hydrogen from natural gas be affordable?

The cost of making hydrogen from natural gas with CCS is also uncertain, because no plant is operational. One recent proposal to the government, for a CCS plant based in Aberdeen with its associated existing infrastructure, estimated the cost at 8 p/kWh, with peak hydrogen production of 6 tonnes/hour from a 200 MW plant.9 Unsurprisingly, this is considerably higher than wholesale natural gas prices, which average 1-2 p/kWh.10Such increased cost would be passed onto the consumer, significantly increasing the price of gas for home heating and making it at least as expensive as electricity.

Electrolysis – scope for cost reductions?

Hydrogen production using electrolysis is a newer technology, which will make it harder to scale up production quickly. However, a recent Bloomberg New Energy Finance (NEF) report says that the cost of electrolysers in North America and Europe has fallen by 40% since 2014, and costs are even lower in China (80% cheaper than those in the West).11

British company ITM has recently secured government support with others to develop a modular 100 MW electrolyser system with peak hydrogen production of 40 tonnes/day (this hydrogen could supply 0.6 TWh/year). Although this is a tiny fraction of the amount needed in the future and less than 2% of current UK hydrogen production, the project aims to "validate a complete production system capable of delivering hundreds of megawatts of electrolysers per year."12 This is the beginning of a process to start scaling up the production of hydrogen from electricity.

Hydrogen production from electrolysis also has the advantage that it can be located near to use, as it only needs an electricity supply and no carbon capture facilities. For example, it could be located at a train depot for hydrogen refuelling.

Cost of making hydrogen by electrolysis uncertain

As this is a newer technology, it has scope for significant further cost reductions, as has been seen in the renewable energy and battery sectors. The CCC suggested the cost might be around 6-8 p/kWh, although it also forecast much lower costs for hydrogen from natural gas with CCS at around 4 p/kWh. The more recent Bloomberg NEF report suggests that the costs of producing hydrogen by electrolysis may be similar to producing it from natural gas with CCS by 2030 and cheaper by 2050.11

According to the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies: "the levelised cost of SMR/CCS is likely to be significantly lower [than electrolysis] at current gas and electricity prices … In the longer term, assuming appropriate scale up and cost reduction of renewable electricity and electrolysis, it will be preferable for [electrolysis] to become the dominant production technology to minimise the continued use of fossil fuels."2

The NIC also sees natural gas being the main source for hydrogen production, albeit alongside electrolysis when electricity prices are low.1 A Navigant Consulting analysis on behalf of the Electricity Network Association assumes that hydrogen production costs will fall to 5-6 p/kWh by 2050, for both hydrogen from natural gas and electrolysis using dedicated renewables.13

Will hydrogen be affordable?

It’s likely that for at least the next decade, making hydrogen from natural gas will be cheaper than from electrolysis, but this may not be true in 10 years’ time. Both approaches are more expensive than natural gas, which poses affordability questions for some future uses, such as in households, where it could increase levels of fuel poverty. Significant scale-up of either approach is highly unlikely over at least the next 10 years, but for different reasons. The lack of CCS facilities at scale will hold back production of hydrogen from natural gas, whereas electrolysis is a developing technology that’s still exploring how to build capacity at scale quickly.

Current and future demands for hydrogen production

The UK currently produces and uses around 700,000 tonnes of hydrogen per year (equivalent to around 29 TWh). This is produced from natural gas using carbon-intensive processes without CCS. Nearly all of it is for refining fuels and ammonia production. Replacement of this with low-carbon hydrogen would be a sensible priority.

In the future, potential additional demand would be very significantly higher than this.

Decarbonising electricity

The NIC has recommended that the best low-cost route for decarbonising electricity production is by achieving 90% renewable energy by 2050, backed up by hydrogen combustion in 55 GW of turbines, producing 77 TWh of electricity.

Decarbonising industry

The CCC suggests up to 82 TWh of hydrogen might be needed by industry.4
In 2018, the Hybrit project in Sweden started constructing a pilot plant to manufacture primary steel using hydrogen produced via electrolysis, aiming to have a fully commercialised carbon-free process by 2035.
Cement production requires intense heat (>1600 °C), which could be provided by either an electric or hydrogen kiln furnace. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies says that since neither has yet been developed at commercial scale, it’s not yet clear which option will prove more cost effective.
The chemicals industry is already a significant user of hydrogen. Emissions reductions can be made by increasing the use of hydrogen through process changes. A report commissioned by the European Chemical Industry Council said that "hydrogen is a key enabler for a major part of low-carbon technologies."14
Natural gas is also used in glass and ceramics production, although whether these can be switched to hydrogen is currently unclear according to the Institute of Engineering and Technology.6

Decarbonising transport

Hydrogen has been suggested as a route for decarbonising shipping (in the form of ammonia fuel), long-distance HGVs, trains, buses and cars. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies suggests that batteries are likely to be a better option for trains in most cases, with batteries recharging when travelling on electrified track. Where the distance between recharging points exceeds 200 km, trains that also have hydrogen fuel cells make more sense.2 Similarly, electric buses and cars are far preferable to hydrogen-powered ones.

Is it realistic to power the whole domestic sector with hydrogen?

Northern Gas Networks’ H21 project is an extreme example, proposing wholescale switching to hydrogen, with all home heating provided by boilers burning hydrogen.

By 2050, it would require around 8 million tonnes of hydrogen (equivalent to 300 TWh) to heat 3.7 million homes and businesses in the north of England. Production of this amount would require 140 GW of electrolysers powered by wind (current UK wind capacity is around 22 GW). And it would consume a vast quantity of water, equivalent to the annual consumption of 1.2 million homes.

Alternatively, producing this hydrogen from natural gas would require around 60 plants the size of the largest in the world,6 and these would not be low carbon. The cost for householders would be substantial, potentially driving many more homes into fuel poverty. It would require the replacement of all boilers and gas cookers, and potentially all pipework in the home.

Decarbonising domestic heating

Another way to start decarbonising heating is by adding hydrogen to the gas supply, up to around 20%. The safety and practicalities of this are currently being tested. More than 20% could be added, but would require changing boilers and gas cookers. But even if this extra hydrogen was produced by renewable energy, it would only have a small impact on reducing emissions.

The most sustainable home heating approach is to use electricity largely or wholly, with hydrogen either as a domestic back-up (using hybrid heat pumps that can switch between electricity and gas) or to produce electricity when renewable sources are low. The former is more energy efficient (because using hydrogen directly in the home is more efficient than burning it to make electricity) and is the route preferred by the CCC,4 but requires ongoing use of the gas grid, whereas the latter approach doesn’t.

Viability

Hydrogen is needed for the move to net zero, replacing natural gas in parts of the energy system where electrification isn’t feasible or is prohibitively expensive. But scaling up hydrogen production will take time, and in practice hydrogen production from natural gas with CCS or electrolysis will be very limited before 2030 and still limited for the decade after.

Yet even meeting existing carbon budgets means more action is needed before 2030 on reducing emissions, and significantly more if the CCC recommends deeper cuts by 2030, which it should.
Prioritise using hydrogen when there are no practicable alternatives

Low-carbon hydrogen use should be prioritised where no alternative readily exists, such as shipping, industry and some heavy goods vehicles. Uses where electric options exist should use this approach, including domestic heating and most transport.

In practice, this means:
In homes the focus must be on energy efficiency and electrification via the installation of heat pumps (with an ambitious stretch target of 10 million installed by 2030). Friends of the Earth, the Energy Savings Trust, and others are calling for all homes to have at least a C-rated Energy Performance Certificate by 2030. Hydrogen should only be used at times of peak demand, either directly through the gas grid for use in hybrid heat pumps or for production of electricity.
In transport a faster transition to electric vehicles is needed, including necessary investments in grid infrastructure. Localised hydrogen production for some heavy transport will be necessary where a switch to electric isn’t possible. For shipping, hydrogen converted to ammonia is likely to be the most practical route.
In industry a switch to electricity should be prioritised where possible, and hydrogen where not. This will have an impact on costs, so measures to ensure that UK manufacturers are not disadvantaged by this move should be taken.

The CCC’s "Further Ambition" scenario suggested that around 270 TWh of hydrogen is needed, with industry using 120 TWh, shipping using 70 TWh, 53 TWh for peak heating and 25 TWh in transport. It envisages only 2 TWh for electricity production, unlike the 77 TWh suggested by the more recent NIC report. The CCC will be producing a new analysis this September and may upgrade its recommended use of hydrogen.
Rapid decarbonisation requires a lot more hydrogen

Based on the CCC’s "Further Ambition" scenario and the more recent NIC recommendation of a 90% renewable energy grid, it’s clear that the UK needs to produce a lot more hydrogen (equivalent to more than 300 TWh).

Furthermore, to reduce emissions as deeply as possible requires this to be met through electrolysis rather than natural gas, because of the fugitive emissions from natural gas extraction and transportation. This will require around 140 GW of windfarms, in addition to the renewables needed to decarbonise the electricity grid to meet other demands.
Scale of renewable energy required

The NIC report suggested up to 237 GW of renewable energy, producing 530 TWh of electricity, will be needed by 2050 to meet the government’s net-zero goal. If all the hydrogen required (see above) were produced by electrolysis, this amount of renewable energy would need to increase significantly.

Currently, total renewable capacity (excluding biomass) is only about 34 GW. In other words, we need to see more than a seven-fold increase in renewable power, yet currently the UK is aiming to increase renewable energy capacity only fourfold by 2050.15

Hydrogen is needed to reach net zero. To meet net-zero ambitions, it should be produced by electrolysis. For this to happen, national and local government need to support much higher deployment rates of renewable energy than they’re currently achieving.
ANNEX

Hydrogen supply projects supported by the government

In February 2020, the UK government announced financial support for several hydrogen production projects across the UK,16 summarised below. A wider range of projects is funded by industry, the UK government, Ofgem and devolved nations in the Institute of Engineering and Technology "Transitioning to Hydrogen" report.6

Dolphyn – involves producing hydrogen from seawater powered by offshore wind in deep waters off the north of Scotland. The government says the funding will enable the detailed design of a 2 MW prototype system.

HyNet – looks at producing hydrogen from natural gas with CCS and blending the hydrogen into the existing gas grid at volumes that don’t require changes to appliances. The project has been given £7.48 million to permit further project development including engineering design to deliver a "shovel ready" project. Of two potential locations – the Mersey and the Humber – the Mersey is seen as the most attractive.

Gigastack – invovles producing hydrogen from renewable power, using electricity from Orsted’s Hornsea Two offshore windfarm to generate renewable hydrogen for the Phillips 66 Humber Refinery. The £7.5 million funding will also support the development of plans for large-scale production of electrolysers.

Acorn – looks at producing hydrogen from natural gas with CCS for blending into gas consumed in Aberdeen. The £2.7 million grant will enable further engineering studies.

HyPER – this project has been awarded £7.4 million for the pilot development of a novel process for hydrogen production from natural gas developed by the Gas Technology Institute at Cranfield University.



Mike Childs, Policy & Insight Unit, April 2020

1. a. b. https://www.nic.org.uk/publications/net-zero-opportunities-for-the-power-sector/ 

2. a. b. c. d. https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Insight-66-Hydrogen-and-Decarbonisation-of-Gas.pdf?v=79cba1185463 

3. https://www.h21.green/ 

4. a. b. c. https://www.theccc.org.uk/2018/11/22/hydrogen-is-a-credible-option-for-the-future-the-uk-must-now-prepare-for-the-key-decisions-on-zero-carbon-energy/ 

5. https://www.carbonbrief.org/methane-emissions-from-fossil-fuels-severely-underestimated 

6. a. b. c. d. https://www.theiet.org/media/4095/transitioning-to-hydrogen.pdf 

7. http://documents.ieaghg.org/index.php/s/CLIZIvBI6OdMFnf 

8. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/759637/beis-ccus-action-plan.pdf 

9. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/866380/Phase_1_-_Pale_Blue_Dot_Energy_-_Acorn_Hydrogen.pdf 

10. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/quarterly-energy-prices-december-2019 

11. a. b. https://about.bnef.com/blog/hydrogen-economy-offers-promising-path-to-decarbonization/ 

12. https://www.itm-power.com/news/industrial-scale-renewable-hydrogen-project-advances-to-next-phase 

13. https://www.regen.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Regen-Heat-Paper-WEB2-Single-Page.pdf 

14. https://dechema.de/dechema_media/Downloads/Positionspapiere/Technology_study_Low_carbon_energy_and_feedstock_for_the_European_chemical_industry-p-20002750.pdf 

15. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/millions-more-homes-to-be-powered-by-renewables 

16. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hydrogen-supply-competition/hydrogen-supply-programme-successful-projects-phase-2 INSIGHT ENERGY CLIMATE CHANGE


Further reading

Cape Town fire damages 'irreplaceable' archives

The University of Cape Town's Jagger Reading Room has been gutted by a blaze. The loss of invaluable documents casts a spotlight on digitizing history.


The Jagger Reading Room of the University of Cape Town housed many priceless archives that may have been destroyed


A wildfire that started on Sunday on the slopes of South Africa's Table Mountain has destroyed, among others, the University of Cape Town (UCT) campus, ravaging its historic library that housed a priceless African Studies collection described as "unique in the world."

For years, local and foreign academics, students, and researchers have flocked to the university's Jagger Reading Room to gain valuable insights and knowledge through its astounding collection of works pertaining to the African continent.

"If you see inside, everything is gone. There's nothing left, all the books, the history, all gone. It's going to take a long time to rebuild it. I think the main thing is the history," Shurud Jacobs, a caretaker who has worked at the university for more than 10 years, told DW.

Watch video 01:58 Has the fire been contained? DW reports from Cape Town

Loss beyond imagination

Previously known as the J.W. Jagger Library, it was constructed in the 1930s and named after John William Jagger, an English-born businessman who served as Minister of Railways and Harbor in the cabinet of former prime minister, Jan Smuts.

The library's African Studies collection consists of around 65,000 volumes, 26,000 pamphlets, 3,000 African films, and 20,000 other audiovisual items. Some of these are very rare.

Some works were published from as far back as the 1500s to the present. Written in multiple European or African languages, they include newspapers, maps, anti-apartheid works, activist pamphlets, graduate theses, film and audio. The specialist book collections include a Kipling and an Antarctic collection.

Notably, even documents of transitions to independence of some of the other African countries form part of this collection.

The burning library on April 18: The blaze has been meanwhile extinguished

"An African continent, which has suffered several series of conquests, has been struggling to reconstruct its own history and particularly that which is documented," historian and political analyst Somadoda Fikeni told TV news broadcaster Newzroom Afrika. "Therefore, any special collection that is frail, no longer available, or no longer printed very often tends to be priceless in terms of its heritage value and in terms of the knowledge project."

Could be the 'genesis of something new'

The library has yet to determine the scale of the devastation, according to the UCT Libraries executive director, Ujala Satgoor.

The institution's fire detection system did trigger fire doors, which presumably saved many of the most precious records stored at the library's lower levels. The floor razed by the flames however also held vast collections of literature and records that are now presumably lost.

She also told Newzroom Afrika that some of the materials were already being digitized, adding that the library had been purchasing duplicates of some documents over the past 10 years that were housed in its General Section.

"We do have the basis of rebuilding this African Studies collection. But the materials that are salvaged (from the fire) will have to go on a proactive digitization initiative," Satgoor said, however adding that "the magic, the beauty, of working with a tangible hard copy for researchers is invaluable."

Describing the fire as "a quirk of fate," she says that it now forces a serious rethink of how to rebuild the collection and develop it further in different areas within the context of new politics that's emerging across the continent.

"And so, in all of this sadness and horror, there is the opportunity, the genesis of something new to look forward to," she said.

Strong winds fanned the fire that spread from the Table Mountain to the University of Cape Town campus

Losing voices from the past

For many academics and researchers, the African Collection offers a window into the continent's colonial past.

In an interview with The Conversation, UCT academic Shannon Morreira described the fire as "a terrible thing because you lose voices from the past which may carry alternative histories."

She explained how archives are significant for countries like South Africa that have had "fraught and contested histories, or countries whose histories have, for centuries, been told from a particular vantage point."

While underscoring that not all of the UCT's African Collection has an "anti-colonial" stance, historian Somadoda Fikeni explained that it's a mix that gives students insight into the mind of the colonialists.

"It gives us an opportunity to understand the life then, and interpret it within the new lenses of decoloniality," he explained.

De-romanticizing special collections

Fikeni, however, raised a pertinent point about romanticizing special collections or archives that are often tucked away in safe spaces, and inaccessible to the general public. Drawing parallels with widely available ancient works by for example, Greek philosophers or the works of Shakespeare, he said that this event raises the question of what constitutes a "special collection."

"And how does it relate to a knowledge system that gives access to someone in a village with a smartphone or who is in Asia or in the wider diaspora? For, as long as this material is jailed in some basement with signs that say 'Do not touch,' then it says that it is both vulnerable to water and fire as well as ignorance."

CAPE TOWN UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES FIRE TWITTER

 

Germany: Greens campaign for legal cannabis on 4/20

Youthful sin, criminal offense or lifestyle choice: The consumption of cannabis, in whatever form, often divides societies. In Germany it’s illegal, but Annalena Baerboeck and her Green Party could change that.



Hops are king in beer-loving Germany but the Green Party wants to give hemp its due, too

April 19 will go down in German political history as the day Annalena Baerbock was elected the Green Party's first-ever chancellor candidate. Assuming the party is ready to govern, the very next day may well be remarkable as well.

April 20, referred to among marijuana enthusiasts as 4/20, has become an international counterculture holiday, where people gather to celebrate and consume cannabis. Many such events have a political nature to them, too, advocating the legalization of cannabis.

On Twitter, the Greens wrote: "Cannabis is the most consumed illegal drug in Germany — the proportion of minors consuming it is increasing. For real youth & health protection there must be rules for the trade and a controlled distribution of cannabis!”

The position is also part of their draft party platform for this September's federal election.

Current legal status of Cannabis in Germany

At the moment, cannabis in Germany is only legal for medicinal use. The plant may only be grown, sold, owned, imported or exported with the permission of the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices and seriously ill people can be prescribed cannabis-based drugs.

Possessing cannabis is otherwise prohibited — punishable with fines or, depending upon the amount, imprisonment for up to five years under the nation's Narcotics Act (BtMG).

Still, punishment for private consumption is relatively mild. A person in possession of only a small amount of the drug can, according to the law, avoid prosecution — but small is a relative term.

Nevertheless, cannabis has grown in popularity, especially among young people in Germany. According to a study by the Federal Center for Health Education (BZgA), cannabis use has increased in recent years, with 10.4% of 12-to-17-year-olds and 46.4% of 18- to-25-year-olds having tried it.

Last year, official government figures estimated some 4 million Germans used cannabis.

Daniela Ludwig, the Federal Government Commissioner on Narcotic Drugs and a member of the Christian Social Union (CSU) — the Bavarian sister party of Chancellor Angela Merkel's CDU — explains: "The figures prove how important it is to educate young people about the health risks of cannabis use and to make it perfectly clear to them that smoking pot is not cool, but can be harmful to health! It's not for nothing that we have therefore launched a new cannabis prevention program."

Watch video 04:36 The race to legalize marijuana

How do the Greens want to legalize cannabis?

The Green Party says it wants “to dry up the black market for cannabis and push back organized crime” with its new drug policy. To do so, they seek to pass legislation that enables the legal and controlled distribution of cannabis in licensed stores. Here are the key aspects:
adult private individuals would be allowed to purchase and possess up to 30 grams of cannabis or three cannabis plants for personal use.
regulated and supervised system for cultivation, trade and distribution of cannabis.

The idea is to relieve police and public prosecutors of having to pursue low-level possession cases, while at the same time increasing financial resources that could be used for prevention, risk reduction and therapy, according to the party's website.
Conservatives stick to prohibition

In 2020, Germany's Bundestag parliament rejected a cannabis control bill put forth by the Greens. The conservative CDU/CSU argued legalization would lead to increased consumption. One of their members, Stephan Pilsinger, pointed out the health risks and long-term consequences of cannabis use, noting that Germany already has enough people addicted to legal substances such as alcohol and cigarettes.

Angela Merkel's CDU is the last of the major political parties in Germany to maintain a strictly prohibitive stance on drug policy, refusing to agree to legalization policies laid out by the Greens, the Social Democrats, the Free Democrats and the Left party.
Cannabis helpful in fighting COVID-19?

Last year, a Canadian study suggested that certain active ingredients in the psychoactive drug could also increase the protection of cells against the coronavirus. Researchers believe some ingredients may reduce the virus' ability to enter cells in the lungs, where it attaches, multiplies and spreads.

"The results on COVID come from our studies on arthritis, Crohn's disease, cancer and others," Dr. Igor Kovalchuck, professor of biological sciences at the University of Lethbridge, said in an email to DW.

If the study proves correct and is peer-reviewed by other researchers in the field, Annalena Baerbock could have a strong argument on her hand for the upcoming elections.