Jan Rosenow"Not a single [independent study] says hydrogen is going to be cheaper & more cost-effective than deploying the other solutions, like heat pumps and district heating."
This is what I told the Times when they interviewed me for this article.
Florian Ahrens@janrosenow what you do with the hydrogen hype is what transition engineers call „crash testing“. In order to move on with the real solutions, we test current policies (hydrogen, batteries, CCU) if they pass thermodynamics, economics, infrastructures, materials for a specific problem. This is based on the development vector analysis framework. We are looking for like minded people to publish the final hydrogen crash test once and for all to then start engineering the real solutions. Interested?
CooperJ@floachim @janrosenow The only problem I've found with Transition Engineering is that, while it's entirely logical, the institutions that we need to change aren't. The value and utility of Green H2 has been crash tested and found wanting so many times by so many people. And yet people still seem to need the magic bean solution and keep trying to make Green H2 fit the bill.
@CooperJ @janrosenow sometimes it seems like the challenge is too big to fight against this. This is why we need the final crash test to then be able to move on. We are currently starting the island centre for net zero in Scotland. It’s refreshing to start working on real value instead of trying to convince people that hydrogen sucks for most things. As a first insight: people are usually surprised that the numbers for H2 don’t work but are willing to move on!
@floachim @janrosenow People like Twiggy are so blinded by the "business opportunity" of Green H2 that they need a lot more to convince them. Even people I know who privately admit that it doesn't make sense, are publicly promoting it. Hopefully all the grand announcements of huge H2 production plants will come to nothing when the proper costings have been done.