Methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than CO₂ and stays 20 years in the atmosphere. Extracting it from methane gas deposits results in 15% leakage to atmosphere. It’s also being used to produce “blue” hydrogen which may be actually worse than just burning coal.

Chair of UK hydrogen body quits over support for fossil-fuel dependent ‘blue hydrogen’ championed by Tories.

“Blue hydrogen is at best an expensive distraction, and at worst a lock-in for continued fossil fuel use,’ says Chris Jackson”

The counter to that is that it would lead to a hydrogen infrastructure being acquired and blue hydrogen could then later be replaced by “green” hydrogen produced by hydrolysis from renewables at 40% efficiency (60% electric power driving the hydrolysis is wasted as heat) with power derived from an already at best 20% efficiency coverting solar to power when the sun shines.

My feeling is that those who have paid for rights to natural gas reserves don’t want their investment tanking and their rights worthless. I can’t say I blame them trying but if the goal is reducing greenhouse gases drastically methane is not the answer unless they sort out the leakage problem which they will not.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by modbot.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by modbot.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by modbot.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by modbot.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by modbot.
• This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by modbot.