🚨ICYMI: Last week, @ETC_energy released two exciting deep dives; one on electrification, the other on #hydrogen
🧵with some of my favorite charts 👇(1/9)
🏭Debates around future hydrogen demand are heated, but we can all agree on it's importance for the industrial sector.
🔥 Small role in building heat
🚛🚢✈️Important role in transport, but sub-sectoral allocation varies
⚡️I'd say power is the wildcard here (2/9)
Here's a more detailed breakdown of ETC's scenarios. Power sector demand could be x3 what's displayed in the previous tweet. My takeaway is that the power sector could very well turn out to be the largest consumer of hydrogen. (3/9)
Hydrogen from electrolysis will become a competitive alternative to hydrogen from gas reforming with carbon capture *this decade*.
Locations with the best renewable resources might even produce hydrogen cheap enough to compete head-to-head with natural gas by 2030. (4/9)
💨The picture is of course more nuanced than 280 characters. Not everyone has the same brilliant insollation of Chile, and some have really low cost gas. So expect some gas-derived hydrogen, even in 2050. The critical point here is to ensure MINIMAL upstream leakage. (5/9)
💦Some may ask, what about upstream electrolytic hydrogen i.e. sustainability of water use?
The way I think about it, we'll end up with more water once we exchange fossil fuel extraction and processing for renewable hydrogen. (6/9)
How do we get hydrogen to where it's needed?
🥊Molecules vs. electrons💥
New electron infrastructure could be a better alternative than new pipelines.
Retrofitted pipelines are a good idea if they are in the right place.
Local production can be cheapest still (7/9)
🌱Nonetheless, even decarbonised hydrogen at $0.5/kg, will command a green premium in the absence of a carbon pricing mechanism. But green inflation is far less daunting, even negligible when spread along the value chain. (8/9)
🧑🏫If you found this educational, you ought to read the full report, because there is plenty more where that came from. Kudos to everyone involved in putting together this fantastic piece of work. (9/9)
Electrolysers are the single biggest market. OEMs active across electrolysers and fuel cells can leverage manufacturing synergies to accelerate the cost curve for competitive advantage.
But stack manufacturing synergies will only get you so far. Balance of plant can account for as much as half of electrolyser system costs.
“e-hydrogen could turn into the largest electricity consumer and double power demand in Europe”
This idea is of course borne out of some outlandish hydrogen demand scenarios. The analysis we did with Aurora showed there’s no way we could power all that electrolysis affordably.
“The reconversion of gas plants into hydrogen turbines could lift combined cycle gas turbine operators Uniper, Engie and RWE.”
I have two words for the Goldman team: fuel cells.
I am convinced these will eat turbines in long term. Thermal assets are stranded assets.
Recent EU hydrogen strategy aims for 2x40 GW electrolyser deployment by 2030. Half within the EU, half in neighboring countries like Morocco and Ukraine.
What will EU hydrogen strategy mean for electrolyser prices? A minithread 👇👇👇 (1/7)
1) Assuming alkaline electrolysers 2) Using nel-Nikola deal with $350/kW as a reference point, realized in 2023 3) Applying 17% learning rate
Gives $112-136/kW by 2030, depending on deployment targets. (2/7)
By coincidence, these prices reminded me of batteries, another storage technology with a learning rate of ~18%. Plotting indexed prices shows similar pathways. But I believe that my electrolyser curve is not steep enough. (3/7)
Short rant: that’s one way to perpetuate the status quo. Hydrogen has some critical uses, but the extent of its penetration in consumer markets is a function of our attitude to waste and centralisation.
Circularity is gaining momentum as a key theme. Another key point is that energy companies are basically profit machines for the few. Take residential heat for example. Most profits from repurposing the gas grid will go to current owners.
Now imagine we built new, passive houses or energy co-ops instead. How many new jobs would that create? How much less energy would we need in the long run? How empowering and equitable would it be for communities?
Power to the people, by the people, for the people.