The Environmental Defense Fund wants changes made to the way the industry analyses hydrogen emissions data.
A recent study from the Environmental Defense Fund asserts the energy industry is miscalculating the true impacts of deploying hydrogen. Hydrogen systems, with new analysis, could prove to be better – or worse – than the fossil fuels they intend to replace.
“Clean, green” hydrogen deployment can be considerably better or worse for the climate based on factors typically overlooked in standard assessments. That’s the finding of a new study from the EDF. The climate benefits of hydrogen vary depending on factors such as methane emissions, carbon capture, and hydrogen loss. Steve Hamburg is Chief Scientist at the EDF. He joins us to discuss his findings, and to examine the impact on the energy industry of these new analyses, as hydrogen continues to gain traction as a reliable source of clean energy.
Improvements are needed for standard hydrogen life cycle analyses as they currently don’t account for all climate warming emissions and impacts over time. By including the warming effects of three crucial and frequently overlooked factors in determining the climate impact of hydrogen deployment pathways the results of an assessment can look surprisingly different. Just how different? Listen to find out.
Subscribe to the Interchange Recharged so you don’t miss an episode. Find us on X – we’re @interchangeshow.
To keep up to date with everything we talk about on the show, sign up for our weekly Inside Track newsletter. You’ll get extra analysis from Wood Mackenzie and be notified when a new episode of the podcast is out.
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
