Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

that_other_goat t1_j57h3nq wrote

Reply to comment by Mollymusique in Successful test flight of Hydrogen-Electric Airplane could be key to zero-carbon flying. Aim for commercial 700 mile flight with 40-80 seater aircraft by 2027. by DisasterousGiraffe

All hydrogen is color coded based on its feedstock and or the power source used to extract it.

The worst and sadly most common are black and brown hydrogen which use hydrocarbons.

Green hydrogen, the best, would be split from water using renewable or low carbon power. Using hydro electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen would be an example of green hydrogen.

Pink hydrogen is split from water using nuclear power. It's a clean source but it's problematic for certain other reasons mainly a desire to prevent nuclear proliferation.

37

culingerai t1_j57t4o9 wrote

And blue hydrogen?

11

that_other_goat t1_j57ukgo wrote

Methane sourced.

Methane is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO2.

Blue overlaps with grey hydrogen which used both methane as the feedstock but differ in production.

Add to that they both still need the entire carbon rich transport sector to work so neither are really carbon neutral despite the attempts at carbon capture for blue.

18

zoinkability t1_j58186r wrote

And even green hydrogen isn’t as carbon neutral as one would think if it is produced using renewable energy that otherwise could have fed a non-100% green grid. Because in that case there is demand that needs to be met with fossil fuels — you might as well have just used fossil fuels to make the hydrogen and had the same carbon footprint. The only way green hydrogen is really green is if it is using renewable power that would otherwise have been dumped.

6

Zephyr104 t1_j584hg7 wrote

Not every reactor design requires enriching of uranium or only very limited amounts of enriching. CANDU reactors for example are heavy water reactors that use very little to no enriched uranium. If anything nuclear power is great for hydrogen production as it's consistent. Perhaps not great for poorer nations but for larger nations that cause the bulk of the world's emissions let's not discount it.

2

that_other_goat t1_j58b0j4 wrote

It's funny that you brought up CANDU reactors as that's the exact design India used to develop it's atomic weapons.

They produce both plutonium and tritium.

This use of what was thought to be a "safe design" for nuclear arms is the one of the major anxieties behind not using nuclear power.

6

Ok_Emphasis2116 t1_j59xir9 wrote

Preventing nuclear proliferation is a ludicrously silly reason to discount clean energy when the major polluters already have nuclear stockpiles.

2