Daniel
@danielwilliams965
Author and clean energy campaigner/advocate My previous book is available at and medium page for more stuff on energy/climate/finance/policy
I think people don't understand that this isn't going to 𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘰𝘶𝘵. If you have fossil shareholder money saturating research/lobbying/politics, then those subsidies they receive are going to be lobbied for and maintained 𝘽𝙔 𝘽𝙇𝙊𝘾𝙆𝙄𝙉𝙂 𝙃𝙔𝘿𝙍𝙊𝙂𝙀𝙉 from the start, so the system can never change
..that 'reducing the need for cement' is going to have any effect on cement emissions is cynical in the extreme With green hydrogen approximately the same cost as LNG in a decade, the case is obvious; and moreover the hydrogen and CO2 infrastructure are all being built
Not focusing on hydrogen, while "hoping" that some as-yet -uninvented technology is going to replace all the use cases where batteries and direct electrification are not going to work (industry, seasonal energy storage, aviation, shipping etc) just means that these industries don't decarbonise ☠️
Good point, bruh. Keeping the climate science community in good theatre until the next major improbability - from the IPCC
Yeah, but NL is on the wrong side of the biggism/smallism debate; and considering their track record on renewables and various other metrics, despite the intrinsic geographic advantage of being directly between the trade routes of France, Germany and the UK, they shouldn't really be promoted
As the planet dies wholesale; I can't help think that all those people who blocked hydrogen were really the ones to blame (I am talking about the EU case here; and yeah it needs to be about 25-35% of the energy system including derivatives - as per the people who operate and plan the system ⬇️)
It might be slightly premature to start adding extra burdens to the industry; but yeah 300GW by 2050 would be great But Beyond Fossil Fuels seems to only be interested in blocking hydrogen
What is the issue ? What are we actually talking about ? I do not believe anything the IPCC, UNFCCC, IEA or any government or sponsored policy group or NGO are telling us. We are looking at collapse; structured or unstructured, within decades By blocking hydrogen, we failed
Yeah but the IPCC are just dicks Seriously - roll that stone away, and what do you find: a bunch of dicks
You have failed in life, in respect for the environment and the lifeforce that sustains us, and every other metric you can possibly imagine. Death-worship is not exalted, it is tawdry
Hello there Patrick. Just bought a place in this village, and it seemingly pays homage to you. Genuinely impressed !
The TSOs, who operate the EU energy system today, are not to be trusted? Note: the graphs below place hydrogen and derivatives at about 25-35% of the EU energy system by 2050
The look (not a weird, shitty shower, but something people feel at home in, and reduces costs for time horizons considering how the system works (electric quad etc):
Okay: first call The IPCC scenarios currently model 30% of total final energy globally derived from biofuels by 2050. This is not a statistical anomaly. It is wrong. The bigger the lie, the worst the disease
Original header to the additional 3-part #RFNBO update from May 2026. If anyone is still confused about what the Commission are doing regarding hydrogen, please read any of these reports Desperation and stonewalling: H2 is being blocked while the Commission still get credit for "supporting" role
Green hydrogen imports to Germany (including subsidies and carbon pricing) will cost about the same as natural gas by 2030 Every heavy industry sector is already using hydrogen commercially: the future is clear The only problem are the anti-hydrogen lobbyists, like yourself
And the cost of hydrogen would be 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗮𝘀 𝗟𝗡𝗚 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗱𝗲, without these rules: no more import dependencies from a small group of suppliers; anyone can produce hydrogen and decarbonise there own economies simultaneously Instead we lose yet another decade, and Europe deindustrialises
'Can Green Hydrogen Meet the Needs for the EU Green Industrial Development?' - as this report explains in detail, hydrogen is 𝗮𝗯𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹, and must be central to all EU state industrial strategies 𝗕𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘆-𝗽𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗴𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻 www.sciencespo.fr/chair-sustai...
People like Michael Liebreich and Jan Rosenow are the main barrier to achieving net zero globally. Heavy industry, shipping, aviation, seasonal energy storage - these sectors are not decarbonising with batteries. They are already using H2. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗲.
REPowerEU, Hydrogen and Decarbonised Gas Package, Grids Package 2025, European Hydrogen Bank, CEF-Energy, MFF, TYNDP, ENNOH - all completely meaningless Ember: committed to blocking the energy transition
#Hydrogen is a clean fuel made from water+VRE, in abundant supply. We don't produce batteries in the EU, which don't work for most fossil use cases. - TSOs have mandated 25-35% H2 via the TYNDP - Commission have identified €240bn in H2 infrastructure investment to 2040 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗽𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺
37 detailed technical reports show that hydrogen heating is practical and viable at scale; and that hydrogen grids are a vital component of integrated net zero energy systems Boilers/appliances are also low cost compared to upgrading to heat pumps, which average at €15k installed #hydrogenheating