- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
You must log in or register to comment.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The idea is to make €800 million available from European funds to help the industry and at the same time, incentivise private investment.
Green hydrogen is expected to play a key role in decarbonising the EU so that it can achieve its emission reduction goals by 2050.
“We would like clearly to demonstrate that we are the global leader if it comes to the use of these new technologies,” Commission Executive Vice President, Maroš Šefčovič, said in an interview on Monday.
In 2022, hydrogen accounted for less than 2% of the bloc’s energy consumption and was primarily used to produce chemical products, such as plastics and fertilisers.
During the bloc’s Hydrogen Week in Brussels, which started on Monday, the sector will try to join the dots between the European Commission, policymakers, researchers, and industry.
“But to be honest, we also need to import hydrogen and that’s why we are super happy to welcome here South Africa, Brazil, Saudi Arabia.”
The original article contains 371 words, the summary contains 159 words. Saved 57%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
so… anyone who performs electrolysis/can crack water and capture the hydrogen devalues the bank’s issuing currency?
You must have some strong opinions about sperm banks
Think the idea is to build a good supply of hydrogen as a resource, not as a store of wealth or a currency.
Hyperinflation. Just add water!
Uh, this isn’t anything like a bank in the traditional sense… They aren’t using hydrogen as a currency or anything like that. This article is pretty unclear on what the “hydrogen bank” actually is, but it seems to be about promoting the development of hydrogen based technologies by, for instance, issuing loans for funding hydrogen related research.
It would be hard to come up with a crappier fuel than hydrogen.
E-fuels, coal, gas, oil, wood. There I did it.
Wood is renewable and literally grows without effort. Pretty darn good.
Gas and oil have much, much better energy density (by volume) which is a big deal for transportation uses. Pretty darn good.
Hydrogen is bested by other fuels in every category. It likes to leak directly through container walls, you can’t transport it economically, it has low energy density (by volume) even when you put it in a pressure vessel which is basically required to have any energy storage wroth speaking about, and on top of all that it is expensive to produce. Hydrogen sucks as a fuel. It’s why it isn’t used hardly anywhere despite the technology to use it existing for decades.
Wood is only good if you produce it regionally. Cutting down forrests to produce wood pellets for heating in Western Europe is very bad. Wood is most of the time not as sustainable as one might think.
Oil and gas are used as much as they are for a reason, but it’s also the reason why we face an ecological tragedy.
It’s not that hydrogen is perfect, but it has more of a place in the future than the other ones.
That and wood isn’t the best fuel overall. It’s okay for very local burning, but as a source of more concentrated energy just about all other fuels are better. There’s a reason you don’t see wood-powered electricity plants anywhere.
Yeah, it is shit, but it can be CO2 neutral, which gives it an edge over all the other fuels. It will most likely be used for everything, that can not be easily done with electricity.
It is not meant as a fuel necessarily. The big consumers today are chemical companies, which use it as a base product for a lot of their production. The other big ones is the steel industry. Hydrogen can be used to create iron from iron ore. That is already done on industrial scale. The big problem is that for a lot of it hydrogen is produced using natural gas, which is extremely polluting.
There are some other maybe intressting things, but green hydrogen is very likely to be a key part of the green transition.
