We can go two ways. Either we squander the lead, or we grow it.
Fortunately, very little in this strategy depends on American investment or American technology. For instance
“Shell’s Scotford Upgrader captured 77% of its carbon emissions in 2022 …”
“ArcelorMittal Dofasco in Ontario plans to end the use of coal in its plants,…”
“inclusion of hydrogen in the Canada-EU High-Level Energy Dialogue, active since 2007, where Canada and the EU collaborate on mutual goals …”
“the Canada-Japan Energy Policy Dialogue, active since 2019, which signed an updated Action Plan for 2023 to 2025 …”
“the May 2023 Memorandum of Understanding with South Korea on cooperation in critical mineral supply chains, the clean energy tran…”
"the August 2022 Joint Declaration of Intent to establish a Canada-Germany Hydrogen Alliance, which seeks to create …
“the 2021 Memorandum of Understanding between Canada and the Netherlands on cooperation in the field of hydrogen energy, w…”
“In the East, Atlantic Canada’s abundant and untapped wind resources and immediate proximity to Atlantic shipping routes will allow wind-to-hydrogen electrolysis projects to become reliable suppliers of clean hydrogen to Germany and other European markets. Germany has announced its intention to import up to 50-70 percent of its hydroge…”
Are all points that reflect a Canadian strategy to globalize our hydrogen policies.
Incidentally, recent developments and explorations on naturally-occurring free (unbound to other elements) hydrogen deposits, once thought impossible, now indicate that Canada’s unique geology of natural rock formations could make it one of the world’s largest sources of naturally-occurring free hydrogen. Enough to power the world for hundreds of years.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/bakx-white-hydrogen-natural-mali-1.7094645
And Newfoundland-Labrador, with its abundance of renewable electrical generation, could make it a world center for hydrogen from electrolysis (it is now one of the leading world centers for current projects).
Let’s not drop the ball on this one, or let the Americans take it away from us like they did the Avro.
“The credit will apply to both electrolysis projects and natural gas reforming projects if emissions are abated with carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS)” referring to a tax credit for hydrogen development
Another one:
“Offers a 37.5% to 60% credit on the equipment necessary to capture, transport and store carbon emissions, benefitting facilities producing hydrogen from natural gas”
Also:
" The following uses of hydrogen can create CFR credits:
- Hydrogen used as a fuel or feedstock in the production of liquid fossil fuels
- Hydrogen used as a fuel or feedstock at a low-carbon-intensity fuel production facility
- Hydrogen used as a fuel in stationary applications (for example, hydrogen injected in natural gas pipelines)"
Over half of the hydrogen production facilities are from oil and gas:
“There are 13 low-carbon hydrogen production facilities in operation in Canada, comprising 6 electrolytic facilities and 7 projects that have adopted carbon capture to lower the emissions of traditionally carbon intensive hydrogen production”
Don’t act like the concerns I raise are bullshit. I am trying to have a discussion about something you are clearly passionate about and you respond like an asshole. If you want to educate people on things then be prepared to actually discuss the topic rather than attack people becaise they dont want to spend time reading through a technical report to quote a specific reference.
A lot of hype around hydrogen results in government money that subsidizes fossil fuel companies, that’s hardly a green initiative in my mind. Hydrogen production by electrolysis is absolutely a good thing, especially for applications like steel production. I truly hope that stuff works out as an international export. Storage and transport as ammonia seems promising, but comes at a substantial energy expense in the conversion process. Will that plus shipping costs still work out to be cheaper than producing domestically for other nations? Is investing in this technology really the best utilization of our excess energy or are we better off developing more energy intensive industries here? Or maybe even reducing electricity costs for domestic consumers?
You are not trying to have a discussion, you are trying to proselytize. The export of hydrogen as ammonia produced by non-fossil-fuel energy input is quite clearly dominant in the future hydrogen energy strategy. You can pull up all the small tidbits you want to support your proselytizing, but be clear that is all they are, small tidbits, in the overall strategy.
I’m not proselytizing anything. I raised some concerns and you told me that I’m either uninformed or some kind of anti-hydrogen shill. You made no real attempt at engaging with what I said and you brush off the other commenter’s in the thread that are also skeptical of the viability of hydrogen. What’s the point of your post if you are going to attack anyone that has questions or skepticism about a technology that you are pumping up?
I have no problem with those who bring factual considered qualified material to the table. I have a big issue with posters who bring spurious facts and points to the table just to push some dogma or other. You are anti-hydrogen just for the sake of being anti-hydrogen, without any consideration of the facts.
