Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
I dunno, this seems like a plan to greenwash their electricity production by selling "green" hydrogen while ignoring the fact that coal is a huge part of their grid, and more coal will have to be burned to make up for the losses from green hydrogen production. I don't really think you can hive off stuff like this, call it green, and pretend you have done good. It only makes sense if this would be completely wasted electricity, but even then battery storage makes more sense.
|
I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding on how this works or is proposed to work.
Quote:
The Mission will result in the following likely outcomes by 2030:
Development of green# hydrogen production capacity of at least 5 MMT (Million Metric Tonne) per annum with an associated renewable energy capacity addition of about 125 GW in the country
|
That's from the article, those 125 GW of renewable energy production will absolutely displace coal production. The green hydrogen comes in when the renewables are generating in excess of demand. That excess power is going to be diverted to an electrolyzer to make hydrogen for use at a later time. It equally could be sent to a battery storage facility. The issue with batteries is what do you do with excess power once those batteries are full. It's much easier and cheaper to add incremental hydrogen storage than adding batteries.
I don't see where greenwashing comes in, unless I'm missing something you are trying to say.
Personally, I'm a believer in hydrogen as fuel for long haul trucking to replace diesel engines.