Questerre Energy Corp (Canada) T.QEC

STICK TO NATURAL GAS

[CALGARYNATGAS]

HYDROGEN FROM NATURAL GAS =MASSIVE COSTS --ALL FAIRY DUST

HYDROGEN FROM NATURAL GAS =MASSIVE COSTS

HYDROGEN FROM NATURAL GAS
 
Part of the problem with H2 is that it requires so much of a change in the value chain.  The power plants in the vehicles need to be changed, the H2 manufacturing and distribution infrastructure needs to built and then you may need to de-carbonize the power sources that both methods of hydrogen production require.
 
For all their other failings battery electric vehicles just plug into the existing power grid, so the value chain changes are more focussed and easier, in some cases, to deliver.
 
  Now if you have to completely rewire every neighbourhood for hydrogen it becomes a problem of a different sort. 
 
1.  If you make Hydrogen  from Natural Gas there are more problems than just managing the emissions, since transportation is typically expensive because of the need for stainless steel containment or pipelines. Modular SMR plants exist, but I don’t know their per kg cost of H2 manufacture.  Even still the majority of the reactants by mass need to be disposed of. 
 
 2. Steam methane reforming (SMR), the least expensive pathway to making H2 the reactions are endothermic and so you have to put energy in to make the reactions (first methane reforming and then a water shift reaction) work.  There is an entropy associated with the reaction, as well as the usual engineering inefficiencies and the energetics of capturing and disposing of the emissions.  However, it is much easier to capture the resulting CO2 from a SMR unit than there is if the methane is combusted with the atmosphere.  This is the reaction that Shell uses at Quest for its capture and storage process. This process produces energy at about the same cost of gasoline plus the cost of the capture and storage. 
 
  3. The alternative method of H2 production is the electrolysis of water.  Currently this process is about twice as expensive as SMR plants and it only lacks emissions if the sources of electrical power have no emissions.  While favourable because it could potentially lack emissions, the higher cost of the H2, and the fact that many of the electrical power sources will have emissions makes this a more problematical method of making H2, as compared to SMR. 
 
  4.While there are insufficient deployments to be sure what the best route will be it seems that Steam Methane Reforming is likely to less expensive to make but the management of emissions is itself an issue that will add costs, and possibly make Electrolysis more viable. 
 
   5.The advantage of electrolysis is that power and water are pretty generally available.  This means that you can have a smaller impact on the value chain and you don’t need a special distribution infrastructure.  Just make the H2 at the site of dispensing.  So modular electrolysis plants may be more expensive, but they don’t have the parasitic costs of emission management, other than the electrical power emissions, which would be zero if the power is hydro.    
 
Why would anyone TRUST the  CORRUPT QUEBEC POLITICANS, they have lied and SABOTAGED and acted with Malfeasance and Corruption for over 12 years.