Green hydrogen or a Carbon Bomb?: Why the new definition is making industry, climate activists see red
green hydrogen (GH2) making the industry and climate activists see red?
As industrial use cases rise, the attempt to create an enabling environment to cater to a wider domestic eco-system while simultaneously aiming for a major chunk of global exports of the green gas through some standardisation is a logical first step. But continuing to depend on the paradox that fossil fuels, mainly coal, will fire our green revolution is hardly a forward leap by the world’s 3rd largest emitter of carbon dioxide.
Without plugging the key gaps and relying on simplistic assumptions, the new definition will fail the very purpose of reduction of greenhouse emissions that the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy is aiming to achieve in the first place.
In India, for hydrogen — that is produced through the electrolyser process by splitting water into hydrogen and carbon dioxide — to be certified green, it now needs to have emissions of under 2 kg of carbon dioxide for every kg of hydrogen produced, but the emissions will be measured over a 12 month average.
This is far too lenient and does not forward the decarbonisation agenda. The new notification further encourages “banking” of green energy with the grid while discouraging the greening of the grid by making electricity from green sources dispatchable – ideally the ultimate goal.
“Grid Banking” is an industry mechanism of releasing excess renewable energy generated in low demand times to the grid for third party usage only to be compensated with fossil fired electricity in peak demand times to balance out with inherent intermittency of renewables.
But every time renewable power is banked, physically electrolysers draw more grid power to run themselves.
