Science

This is why it remains as trivial as so called "renewable energy" for the purpose of producing the difficult to handle gas hydrogen.

The International Journal of Hydrogen Energy is now approaching half a century of publication, with the first issue being published in 1976. For about 30 years or so, I've popped over to its pages from time to time, either for laughs or to see about some esoteric thermochemical cycle. Once in a while, rarely, there are interesting, if less than practical papers.

There are always electrolysis papers, oodles and oodles and oodles of them, none of which have placed much of a dent in the practice of steam reforming of dangerous fossil fuels, chiefly gas (and especially in China) coal to make this hard to handle, store, and use gas which is nonetheless an important captive intermediate in the Haber-Bosch process and in oil refining, followed by methanol synthesis. No one has by the way ever overcome (as it is physically impossible) the loss of energy to both Faradaic and Thermodynamic efficiency of electrolysis.

The electrolysis papers all offer ways to avoid the use of expensive platinum anodes, and in the case of seawater electrolysis, how to deal with toxic chlorine and bromine side products.

There has been, really, "hydrogen economy" bullshit even before 1976; 1976 was when the daydream became popular enough to hype it. It's now been picked up by the fossil fuel industry as a tool to greenwash their product, claiming hydrogen is "green," by advertising electrolysis, which is even thermodynamically more odious than steam reforming, since, again, electricity itself is thermodynamically degraded.

It remains true that hydrogen is a A Giant Climate Lie: When they're selling hydrogen, what they're really selling is fossil fuels.

Salespeople are cute when they try to talk about science when advertising their products.

Have a swell day.