We've been talking about it here and there for a few months, to centralize information about the greenhouse effect potential of hydrogen I create this topic, from an interesting comment of a video on Jean-Luc Perrier (those who don't know: search.php )
Baudouin of Crombrugghe
Be careful with hydrogen enthusiasm.
This was the subject of controversy this summer at the IPCC which made me change my mind.
Seeing oneself as "nº1" in hydrogen seems more like a political fad than the result of in-depth reflection.
The hydrogen engine does not pose any problem but the problems of sealing and leaks are underestimated and not declared.
Even the best tanks are never completely sealed: Those of hydrogen cars, for example, can be empty in a few weeks, even when the vehicle is stationary.
Perfect sealing does not exist with hydrogen, which is the smallest of molecules.
Hydrogen releases only water vapor when burned, which has prompted politicians to place their hopes in this new gas to fight climate change... But hydrogen itself contributes indirectly to global warming.
Hydrogen is a potent, short-lived, indirect greenhouse gas that is 200 times more potent than carbon dioxide when released, kilogram for kilogram.
Hydrogen reacts to form ground-level ozone, which also contributes to the greenhouse effect.
Hydrogen also breaks down into water vapor in the stratosphere, which also contributes to the greenhouse effect.
Hydrogen is such a potent indirect greenhouse gas that it COULD UNDERMINE THE CLIMATE BENEFITS OF DECARBONIZATION EFFORTS.
When these atmospheric effects are taken into account, the climate benefits of replacing fossil fuels with hydrogen become less obvious, even when the hydrogen is produced from renewable electricity.
... And this warning comes from scientists and not politicians.
The hydrogen sector risks a fiasco when voters realize that it is a form of green-washing.
Real observation:
Perfect sealing does not exist with hydrogen since it is the smallest molecule.
... And as hydrogen impacts 200x more than CO2, do the math: It only takes one stagnant tank out of 200 and gradually losing its hydrogen through leakage to equal the impact and cancel out all the climate advantage.
In short, this is reason enough to disqualify the hydrogen sector... and redirect the investments made in this sector towards more intelligent and truly protective of the climate.
There are enough other technologies (inertial, cryogenic, gravity storage,...) of energy buffers as an alternative.
https://www.revolution-energetique.com/ ... ue-le-co2/
https://www.euractiv.fr/section/energie ... limatique/