Hacker News Reader

Comment by nine_k | Hacker News Reader

But what's the point to produce hydrogen from hydrocarbons? Hydrocarbons are already an energy-dense, stable fuel.

I think that it's solar and wind energy, peaky and unstable as it is, should be used to produce hydrogen. Then it could be used as is, or combined with heavy hydrocarbons to produce much lighter hydrocarbons like methane. Maybe it can be economically used to produce something useful from CO₂, from fuel to plastics.

View on HN

Carbon capture is much easier at a single hydrogen refinery than at thousands of vehicles or buildings.

So you can access those sweet Government subsidies:

https://www.ispionline.it/en/pubblicazione/eus-hydrogen-stra...

> “'Hydrogen Europe' promotes the growth of green hydrogen production in the EU... €145bn in support between grants and subsidies."

Burning hydrocarbons emits CO2, which is already at high enough atmospheric levels to make us less smart, as well as particulate matter, which is directly affecting air quality and shortening our lifespans.

Burning hydrogen emits water.

I see an important area where hydrocarbons will not be displaced by batteries and hydrogen for decades: jet fuel.

Burning CH₄ produces much more water and less CO₂ than burning longer hydrocarbons. This works for ICE car engines, with tiny modifications, too. So it could still be a useful step in phasing out carbon-based fuels, until we have epic-scale batteries and likely more nuclear generation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com