Blue hydrogen worse than fossil fuels: Study

The government's plan to install more than 22,000 megawatts of hydrogen-based electricity by 2050 appears to go against climate goals, as new research finds blue hydrogen worse than traditional fossil fuels in terms of harmful emissions.

The Integrated Energy and Power Master Plan (IEPMP-2023), supported by the Japan International Cooperation Agency and the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan, proposes to install 137,800MW by 2050 in Bangladesh, of which 22,048MW would be from hydrogen-based electricity.

There are three types of hydrogen – grey, blue, and green. Grey hydrogen is produced using fossil fuels such as natural gas and coal. Green is produced through renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, which don't release greenhouse gases when generating electricity.

Blue hydrogen, often hailed as a climate-friendly option, is produced from fossil fuels with partial carbon capture and storage. However, research findings suggest that blue hydrogen may be worse for the environment than traditional fossil fuels.

The IEPMP-2023 target has not specified whether power will be generated by using green or blue hydrogen. However, experts fear that a major part of this hydrogen will be blue because it is more cost-effective compared to green hydrogen.

In blue hydrogen production, methane gas will be broken down into gas, and the emitted carbon dioxide will be separated from the atmosphere through carbon capture and storage technology. It is claimed that the environment can be kept in good condition. However, new research from EDF suggests otherwise.

Green hydrogen, on the other hand, uses renewable electricity to break down water (H₂O) to produce hydrogen, according to researchers. It will require investment in technology, but the raw material is readily available.

In contrast, blue hydrogen will depend on local or imported gas for its production.

Whether blue hydrogen or green, it will require new technologies. These technologies may need to be imported from Japan or other countries. Japan, in particular, has numerous blue hydrogen power plants. Importing these technologies will incur significant costs.

After all of these investments, if the environment does not benefit as expected, then ultimately, blue hydrogen could become a burden for Bangladesh in every aspect, including the economy, experts warn.

The study published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) last month says that the climate impacts of blue hydrogen could be up to 50% worse than traditional fossil fuels.

US-based non-profit environmental advocacy organisation EDF's research was published last 21 February.

The EDF study exposes its shortcomings, revealing that high levels of hydrogen and methane emissions along its supply chain can worsen near-term warming by up to 50% compared to fossil fuels.

Proponents of blue hydrogen production and use are using carbon capture and storage technology as their shield, the study said. It is said that up to 98% of carbon dioxide can be prevented from entering the atmosphere through this technology. However, such technology has not been brought to the market so far, which can prevent the release of carbon dioxide at this rate on a regular basis.

Instead of this 98%, if the carbon capture and storage technology is slightly less, such as 60%, that can trap carbon dioxide; it is claimed that the environmental benefits due to blue hydrogen may be 15–50% less in the short term and 20-60% less in the long term.

Tianyi Sun, lead author of the EDF report, said, "It's important to get the emissions accounting right, both to accurately assess the climate impacts of hydrogen systems and to identify opportunities to reduce them."

"When we consider all climate warming emissions and their impacts over the near and long term, our analysis shows that hydrogen deployment can have far greater impacts than expected," she added.

Governments around the world are currently in the midst of deciding how to define "clean" hydrogen, with experts arguing the only clean form of hydrogen is green hydrogen made from renewables.

A global ISO methodology to calculate hydrogen emissions, announced at COP28 in December, drew concern over its risk of under-reporting blue hydrogen emissions.

However, concerns have been raised by a number of local and international experts regarding the inclusion of blue hydrogen in this plan.

M Zakir Hossain Khan, a climate and renewable energy finance expert, told The Business Standard, "Shifting focus towards these unproven sources, prioritising clean energy over proven renewable energy like blue hydrogen energy, will create an unprecedented burden for Bangladesh in terms of safety, security, affordability, access to resources, and energy scarcity."

"The government should avoid the blue hydrogen energy plan. Green hydrogen can be an ideal solution that offers a truly zero-emission alternative," he emphasised.

Hasan Mehedi, member secretary of the Bangladesh Working Group on External Debt, told TBS, "Hydrogen technology is known as a false solution for emission reduction because the technology is not proven enough. Even developed countries like the US, Canada, and the UK rejected the proposal of adopting it from Japan during the G7 Summit last year."

"Considering the cost of production, a developing country like Bangladesh should not accept such unproven technology," he added.