Shout out to the US EPA for sheer craziness

[markslawson + 1,057]

After getting a huge project out of the way I can now comment on a submission I sighted a couple of weeks back on a new set of EPA regulations.

There I was thinking that the Australian government was winning awards for crazy by insisting that a certain percentage of the feedstock of a new gas turbine being built near a pumped hydro project in South Eastern Australia had to be green hydrogen. By insisting that the plant at a place called Kurri Kurri initially run on 30 per cent Hydrogen, to fulfil a pre-election promise, the ruling Labor government has more than doubled the original $A600 ($US383) million project cost for the 660 MW turbines and delayed it by more than a year. Then there is the problem that there are no sources of green hydrogen on the site or anywhere else in the state. I'm not clear whether the need to manufacture green hydrogen from renewable energy projects has doubled the cost or whether it is the need to re-design the turbines to use hydrogen as well as natural gas, but a major renewable energy project is the only way to generate Hydrogen. The difficulties of transporting the gas mean that H2 generation facility would have to be on the site with the green power plants not far off, or perhaps connected by a transmission line. This is grossly inefficient. If you feel that way about using natural gas why not take the power directly from the renewable facilities and, perhaps, run the turbines  30 per cent less? Why take the energy losses required to convert the power into hydrogen? One chief executive of Snowy Hydro (a hydro power project) quit in disgust after trying to get the government to see sense. 

Okay, crazy right.

Then I happened to see EPA submission by one Dave Yost, Ohio Attorney General, to the EPA's proposed set of rules for emissions from power generators. I apologise in that I seem to have mislaid the original source of the paper which printed out and now can't find it online, however Mr Yost who heads a coalition of 18 states has been quite vocal in opposing the regulations which require power plants to drastically reduce emissions through a combination of carbon capture and sequestration and the use of hydrogen. Mr Yost points out forcefully in the submission that carbon capture technologies are still in development at best. The world's one commercial project at Saskatchewan, Canada, is still battling technical issues to get to a carbon capture rate of 37 per cent. But the EPA is demanding projects capable of capturing 90 per cent of carbon and ignoring the fact that the project has to have access to the right geological structures, which most generators don't. In addition, the EPA wants existing gas generators to use Hydrogen for 30 per cent of its feed stock. This is possible for generators under construction which can be modified but insane for established generators. In addition, in a whole new level of crazy, the EPA wants the hydrogen to be green.

The EPA is making the Australian Federal Government look good, and that's saying something. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

This wont please you much either!

Australia’s “biggest” green hydrogen project inches closer to reality with design contract

https://reneweconomy.com.au/australias-biggest-green-hydrogen-project-inches-closer-to-reality-with-design-contract/

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Kurri Kurri power plant running on green hydrogen ‘will not impact’ power prices

February 01, 2022 - 5:21PM

 

Shadow International Development Minister Pat Conroy has rejected claims by Energy Minister Angus Taylor that Labor's plans for the Kurri Kurri power plant will drive up electricity prices.

Labor intends for the power plant for be 100 per cent green hydrogen by 2030.

"We've said we'll work with Snowy Hydro about the additional investment required to convert the plant to green hydrogen," Mr Conroy told Sky News Australia.

"Our power prices are determined by a combination of factors but the one in this case that's relevant is the wholesale energy market, and Snowy Hydro will bid the plant into the wholesale energy market like any other bidder and they'll take the price that the wholesale energy market settles at.

"So this will not impact on electricity prices for consumers."

In fairness Mark I dont believe this for a second lol

Edited September 7, 2023 by Rob Plant

[markslawson + 1,057]

11 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Shadow International Development Minister Pat Conroy has rejected claims by Energy Minister Angus Taylor that Labor's plans for the Kurri Kurri power plant will drive up electricity prices.

Labor intends for the power plant for be 100 per cent green hydrogen by 2030.

Yes, both stories show just how bizarre the debate has become. As you might well have seen with the thread I started in April If hydrogen is the answer, you're asking the wrong question it is difficult to see that there will be any commercial role for H2, and that's simply from the business side of the issue, before taking into account any of the huge technical problems. But, anyway, I'm impressed with the US EPA. To make the Australian government look smart by comparison is hard but they achieved it. 

[turbguy + 1,543]

Ask for a variance, as there is no hydrogen to be had?

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

6 hours ago, markslawson said:

Yes, both stories show just how bizarre the debate has become. As you might well have seen with the thread I started in April If hydrogen is the answer, you're asking the wrong question it is difficult to see that there will be any commercial role for H2, and that's simply from the business side of the issue, before taking into account any of the huge technical problems. But, anyway, I'm impressed with the US EPA. To make the Australian government look smart by comparison is hard but they achieved it. 

I wont get into the hydrogen debate again as we've done that.

Suffice it to say whether you believe there is a future in it or not what is undeniable is the level of investment in it is on a scale of wind power pre pandemic levels, currently $240b which isnt chump change! Investments apparently are set to triple to $700b up to 2030 so there are definite industrial uses and transportational uses.

https://hydrogencouncil.com/en/new-hydrogen-projects-achieve-record-numbers-globally-with-even-greater-urgency-for-final-investment-decisions-to-attain-net-zero/

Mark hydrogen isnt going away anymore than EV's are in Europe, whether projects are commercially viable or economic is questionable as far as I can see currently, but equally the speed of technological advancements is phenomenal.

Time will tell if this is a gigantic waste of money or not, we will have to wait and see.

[markslawson + 1,057]

17 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Suffice it to say whether you believe there is a future in it or not what is undeniable is the level of investment in it is on a scale of wind power pre pandemic levels, currently $240b which isnt chump change! Investments apparently are set to triple to $700b up to 2030 so there are definite industrial uses and transportational uses.

Rob - I agree thoroughly that H2 isn't going away, nor are EVs but that has to do with current obsessions, not whether they are of any use at all in fighting emissions if that's what you want to do. Money spent on H2 as a means of storing and transmitting energy is a straight waste. Money spent on EVs is of some use in that at least consumers get a car, of sorts, to drive. However, you're right in that the H2 debate has been done and the huge problems in the area have been ignored yet again. Time to move on. Leave it with you.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 9/9/2023 at 2:07 AM, markslawson said:

Rob - I agree thoroughly that H2 isn't going away, nor are EVs but that has to do with current obsessions, not whether they are of any use at all in fighting emissions if that's what you want to do. Money spent on H2 as a means of storing and transmitting energy is a straight waste. Money spent on EVs is of some use in that at least consumers get a car, of sorts, to drive. However, you're right in that the H2 debate has been done and the huge problems in the area have been ignored yet again. Time to move on. Leave it with you.

There are dozens of applications for H2 whether theyre economic or just a fad remains to be seen, but its a fledgling industry that has enormous investment so my guess is its here to stay expecially in putting 20% in the NG supply for home and manufacturing use.

CCS for me is the problem as I just dont see how that ever becomes viable, but there are dozens of those projects going on too. H2 will find its niche in several markets and has potential with continual breakthroughs to become a fuel of choice for many. I disagree that the H2 problems have been ignored, I think they are being actively addressed as we speak and with billions if not trillions in investment those problems will be overcome.

I guess the difference between our thinking is you look at what was and currently is, I look at what currently is and what it could become.

Edited September 11, 2023 by Rob Plant

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Mark

Have a read of this and look at all the 750 H2 projects happening in Europe now, you can filter in various ways to see what is going on in the industry and the strategy Europe are adopting.

Project pipeline (europa.eu)

Hydrogen (europa.eu)