Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth

Singapore Lowers 2030 Emissions Forecast, To Boost Hydrogen (reuters.com) 50

Posted by msmash from the moving-forward dept.
Singapore cut its forecast for its carbon dioxide emissions in 2030 and will achieve a peak in emissions earlier than that as the city-state strives to achieve net zero by 2050, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said on Tuesday. From a report: Singapore plans to reduce its carbon emissions target for 2030 to 60 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), Wong said at the Singapore International Energy Week conference. The country previously aimed for emissions to peak at 65 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2030. "We will now aim to peak our emissions earlier, and reduce our emissions to around 60 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2030," Wong said.

"This 5 million tonne improvement is significant as it is equivalent to reducing our current transport emissions by two thirds." Wong did not specify in his speech what year Singapore's carbon emissions would peak. A spokesperson for Singapore's National Climate Change Secretariat said that the exact peak emissions level and year would depend on the country's decarbonisation efforts, which will be affected by the technology used and the contributions of citizens and businesses. As part of its decarbonisation plans, Wong launched the country's hydrogen strategy on Tuesday, saying the fuel could supply up to half of Singapore's power needs by 2050.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Singapore Lowers 2030 Emissions Forecast, To Boost Hydrogen More

Singapore Lowers 2030 Emissions Forecast, To Boost Hydrogen

Comments Filter:

  • How does hydrogen help? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ukoda ( 537183 ) on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @04:15PM (#62997639) Homepage
    Hydrogen is energy storage, not an energy source, and not a very efficient one at that, so rather limited in the applications where it actually helps things. The Slashdot summary is short on detail but in general adding the word hydrogen to a sentence doesn't explain how CO2 will be reduced.

    • Hydrogen is energy storage, not an energy source,

      Hydrogen can be converted to energy in fuel cells [epa.gov]. The only two byproducts from this reaction are heat and water.

      • You're missing the point: hydrogen is not an energy SOURCE, hydrogen REQUIRES energy (usually electric energy) to produce. Oil is an energy source.

        • The devil is in the details. The article says Singapore will lower it's emission. TFA isn't talking about global emissions. Presumably, the hydrogen will be generated and bottled outside of Singapore. Singapore cell burn/fuel cell the h2 instead of burning gas/diesel. That will lower pollution within Singapore.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Tyr07 ( 8900565 )

          Oil is energy storage as well. It's living organisms reprocessed into oil through energy processes derived from nature. That being other chemicals even, such as oxygen and other things that contribute to the decay of organic matter.

          If you find a source of hydrogen to extract hydrogen on it's own, it becomes an energy source, just like oil. The same way that carbon capture plants that can turn co2 into oil or gasoline, turns oil and gasoline into energy storage.

          The biggest potential advantage in hydrogen is

          • Technically, oil is stored solar energy. But if the cycle requires MILLIONS OF YEARS, it's not really a renewable, is it? As far as getting hydrogen without energy input as a fuel source, that smells like complete BS to me -- ask any chemist. Best case, they might come up with a catalyst that enables them to extract hydrogen with slightly more than the energy required to produce the hydrogen... but I doubt it.

            • Re: (Score:1)

              by Tyr07 ( 8900565 )

              Well the very first thing I said is if we used renewable energy to refine hydrogen it might work as a better storage medium in the future.
              Use excess power from renewables during the day to create hydrogen, use it to power vehicles or power at night.

              I mentioned as end game tech if we achieve fusion due to size limitations it might not be practical to have fusion technology in cars, but using an efficient large fusion plant to generate the power needed for hydrogen production and transporting that to cares mi

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        Well duh! But Singapore doe not have green hydrogen sitting around to use. To get green hydrogen you usually start with electricity and water. So if you are talking CO2 reductions then hydrogen is just working as a low quality, low efficiency but high energy density battery.

    • Hydrogen is energy storage, not an energy source,

      That's exactly how it helps.

      Because instead of having to have a power grid that can handle simultaneous charging of so many EVs, you can reduce in half the recharge on demand need of the power grid, by storing power in the form of hydrogen.

      It also helps because you only need to build half the batteries to power cars and trucks, and it's great for uses where a fast refill is required.

      Even if it's in efficient that is more than made up for the fact it reduces p

      • Is hydrogen a better energy storage media than simply pumping water uphill?

        • Is hydrogen a better energy storage media than simply pumping water uphill?

          Yes because of the other factors I mentioned (like the reduction of the need for battery metals in hydrogen powered cars, and the need to upgrade the entire grid to handle larger peak load).

      • > Because instead of having to have a power grid that can handle simultaneous charging of so many EVs, you can reduce in half the recharge on demand need of the power grid, by storing power in the form of hydrogen

        Because of the poor round-trip efficiency, you need a bit more than double the energy input for hydrogen than you do for batteries. IN other words, for every 1 kWh or energy delivered for final use, you need maybe 1.2 kwh of energy if you store it in a battery as an intermediate, but you need ov

        • Because of the poor round-trip efficiency, you need a bit more than double the energy input for hydrogen than you do for batteries.

          Which doesn't matter because that energy can come from off-peak usage and thus does not factor at all into peak demand the grid has to support. If the grid is under heavy load you simply stop producing hydrogen. Generally there's enough dead time at night to produce any hydrogen needed, you probably do not need any more power plants than are already required to power homes and

          • > Which doesn't matter because that energy can come from off-peak usage and thus does not factor at all into peak demand the grid has to support.

            Off-peak is typically when renewable energy is at its lowest. So you'll either need to ditch renewables to make your hydrogen - which defeats the point - or you need twice as much renewable energy infrastructure to charge your hydrogen stores. Just use batteries, or pumped hydro, or literally fucking anything else to store energy. It'll be a lot easier logistica

            • Off-peak is typically when renewable energy is at its lowest. So you'll either need to ditch renewables to make your hydrogen

              A) Wind/Water power dies down at night?

              B) It's called Nuclear Power, look into it. Singapore is [straitstimes.com].

              • Until you have shutdown all coal plants they will still be running because you can shut the bastards down and restart them in a timely fashion

              • > A) Wind/Water power dies down at night?

                At its lowest, not non-existent. I used that phrasing for exactly that reason.

                >B) It's called Nuclear Power, look into it. Singapore is.

                Nuclear power isn't renewable, and since you don't need to store the energy it produces, it makes hydrogen even worse of a proposition: The one advantage hydrogen has, being a storage mechanism, is right out the window when you no longer need to store energy. Good job destroying your own argument!

                (Also 10% by 2050 lul.)

            • or you need twice as much renewable energy infrastructure to charge your hydrogen stores

              You already need vastly more than the nameplate capacity of your renewables to account for when they are not producing anything. Some days you won't have enough regardless and will have to fall back on non-renewables. Some days you will have more renewables than you need. Sure, you can store that power in batteries, where it is only useful on the grid, or you can make it portable and use it for things not connected to the grid as well.

              • > You already need vastly more than the nameplate capacity of your renewables to account for when they are not producing anything.

                Irrelevant, because this is true regardless of how you store the energy.

                The question is by how much you need to oversize to cover those periods. If your storage system is 90% efficient, then you'll need to collect about 1.2 kwh for every kwh you need to deliver in the lean times. If you use hydrogen and your total efficiency is like 40%, then you need 2.5 kwh for every kwh del

                • So not only does this undermine your opening argument, because now you're not storing energy but simply diverting it, but it still means you're building twice as much renewable infrastructure for hydrogen than if you used electric with battery storage.

                  No, this was my whole point. I agree hydrogen is not appropriate for grid storage, however hydrogen is portable, batteries not so much. Portability is worth a premium over maximum efficiency in many cases. For instance you could replace a diesel generator with a hydrogen powered one which will last far longer than an equivalent mass of batteries, and you can refuel it even when the sun is not shining.

                  Some people see batteries as a solution to everything. More like when you are a hammer every problem

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        When it comes to cars and trucks hydrogen is too little too late, it will never happen despite all the wishful thinking of hydrogen fan boys. It is modern version of snake oil. It makes sense in a very limited number of use cases and even those use cases are disappearing as battery densities increase.

        While some power grid issues are real they are much easier to fix than tying to do anything with hydrogen and for the most part EVs can simply be handled with some smart software to time their use of the g

        • hydrogen is too little too late, it will never happen despite all the wishful thinking of hydrogen fan boys.

          Should we believe you or the entire city-state of Singapore, which plans to move forward with hydrogen in widespread use?

          In fact isn't the fact a giant government entity like this pushing hydrogen vehicles a great reason to believe it will happen? They have the resources and apparently the will, Toyota already has engine/storage tech and existing refilling stations that work today and have been throu

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ukoda ( 537183 )
            Oh, oh a city, so they must be right! News flash: The people who run cities are politicians, who are easily lead a stray when it comes to technology.

            I think is great what Singapore is trying to do but dumping money into hydrogen is going to slow things down, not speed them up.

            And yes there are many technical reasons why hydrogen can't make up 50% of an EV mix, especially in a city. Firstly from power source to wheels on the road hydrogen is terrible, a huge waste of any clean power generation that c

            • Oh, oh a city

              A) That is the entire city-state of Singapore to you sir, not just a city. Think of a nation but somewhat smaller.

              B) Even if it were just a city are you really arguing that in the entire city no-one knows as much about hydrogen power as you? Classic internet complainer...

              a huge waste of any clean power generation that could far more efficiently be charging BEVs

              Whoosh. Read my original post again until you understand why your point is irrelevant.

              See you in 5-10 years to serve you up some deli

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ukoda ( 537183 )
                I have been to Singapore so I know about them, that still does not make them right. How big something is does not correlate to how smart they are, I believe Russia is the most recent place to make that point.

                Hydrogen has an end to end efficiency of 23% vs batteries at 69%. That means you need to build three times as many clean power stations to do the same job. Not sure how you can gloss over that major point.

                • That means you need to build three times as many clean power stations to do the same job. Not sure how you can gloss over that major point.

                  This is why I said to re-read my post until you understood, which you clearly do not yet.

                  To meet peak demand just from half the cars being battery EVs being charged during the day you'll have to build out MANY more power plants than you have now.

                  You don't need to build out any extra power even with a 5x greater power use by hydrogen generation because you are using off-p

        • I think you've got it all wrong, the right use case for hydrogen isn't putting a fuel cell in your car. It's importing energy from places like Australia to places like Singapore! Wind and solar can generate lots of energy, but not necessarily when and where it's needed.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ukoda ( 537183 )
            Maybe, but if they are getting hydrogen from Australia that is made with coal so is just about the worst hydrogen you can use and would give any country using Australian hydrogen zero CO2 credibility.
            • At the moment, but check this out [ft.com]. The article isn't exactly a positive spin, either. But if they get the cost of green hydrogen close to those predictions it will be revolutionary. As for transport, as of earlier this year there is exactly one [reuters.com] hydrogen tanker ship, transporting brown hydrogen from Australia to Japan, but at least it shows the possibility of hydrogen tankers.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Swervin ( 836962 )
        Hydrogen isn't really ideal for storage either though, because of it's ability to infiltrate so many materials, and embrittle metals. Now, if we took that hydrogen, and maybe locked it up in some sort of molecule, something stable, that'd be a good storage medium. Maybe something plentiful, like carbon.
      • TO create "green" hydrogen so you don't throw more CO2 into the atmosphere, you have to use electricity to create it. TO make enough green hydrogen to power a fuel cell car 100 miles, you would have used enough electricity to power 3 BEV's 100 miles each.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Singapore wouldn't have any trouble requiring smart chargers that spread the charging out over time, to prevent high loads at peak times. Cars are already heavily regulated and taxed there.

        The UK government is trying to do it via a less restrictive system. Chargers will normally charge overnight when demand is low, unless the user presses an override button. The theory is that most people will just let their car change while they are asleep, rather than regularly pressing the button. There will be a small n

    • The only advantage hydrogen has over the electricity used to produce it is that hydrogen can be shipped long distances, just like oil. The people that profited from the petrodollar are trying to preserve that energy model. Going all-electric is going to require some serious infrastructure improvements. The power companies DO NOT want to pay you for feeding your excess solar/wind/tidal power back into the grid!

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        My power company does. They charge me NZD $0.32 kWh to use power and pay me NZD $0.15 kWh to feed in power. That is near a 50/50 split so not to bad. The are making $0.17 kWh for basically no effort and no investment and they seem to be quite happy with that.

    • Hydrogen allows you to store excess wind/solar power without being limited by batteries. Production of hydrogen is generally inefficient, but if you've ever heard of utilities having to burn off "excess" power generation during peak generation moments, then hydrogen production offers an ideal solution to that problem.

    • It "helps" by green-washing. Although you can split H2O to make H2, the most common way to produce it is by stripping the carbon from hydrocarbons [wikipedia.org] and simply dumping CO2 in to the atmosphere someplace other than from the vehicle.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        Yes, alarmy many hydrogen projects are sold as green, where when forced, will admit they will be initially getting the hydrogen from dirty sources, like you point out, and then ask you to trust that at some magical point in the future they will switch to green hydrogen sources.

        I have said it many times, hydrogen for cars attempts to solve problems that no longer exist for BEVs when used normally, so are simply never going to become mainstream. Many people pushing hydrogen have commercial interest that h

  • Realistically, you cannot replace all cars with battery EVs - the charging needs and requirements around all of the batteries needed to be made are just too much.

    But if you throw hydrogen into the mix in a substantial way as Singapore plans to do - well now, you have suddenly have a realistic path forward to converting a very high percentage of vehicles to EV, and a good way to transition existing gas stations to supporting EVs.

    All that is needed is a substantial excess of power and an abundance of water in

  • heavens above that we the people will save and fit 5kW or so of solar panels to our homes and charge our increasingly affordable EVs off grid. Hydrogen will become the new oil and gas unless consumers reject it. Do you want to be in control or be controlled?

Slashdot Top Deals

Kiss your keyboard goodbye!

Close