Home / Chroniques / Hydrogen and ammonia: the risk of climate-damaging leaks
A hydrogen pipeline. Generative AI.
π Energy π Planet

Hydrogen and ammonia : the risk of climate-damaging leaks

Avatar
Didier Hauglustaine
Physicist and CNRS Research Director
Fabien Paulot
Fabien Paulot
Atmospheric Chemistry Researcher at the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory in Princeton
Key takeaways
  • Green hydrogen (produced by the electrolysis of water using renewable energies) is seen by the EU as a cornerstone of the energy transition.
  • To move away from dependence on Russian fossil fuels, the EU wants to produce 9.6 million tonnes of green hydrogen by 2030.
  • Naturally abundant in the atmosphere, hydrogen is not a greenhouse gas, but its increase increases the concentration of other gases, contributing to the greenhouse effect.
  • The hydrogen economy relies on another gas: ammonia.
  • But using ammonia as an energy carrier poses major challenges in terms of nitrous oxide emissions, a potent greenhouse gas.
  • Numerous studies stress that we must be careful not to invest in a solution that could do more harm than good for the climate.

Green hydro­gen – pro­du­ced by the elec­tro­ly­sis of water using rene­wable ener­gies – is seen by the Euro­pean Union (EU) as a cor­ners­tone of the ener­gy tran­si­tion. Since Rus­sia inva­ded Ukraine, the EU has step­ped up its ambi­tions to move away from depen­dence on Rus­sian fos­sil fuels : by 2030, the tar­gets have been rai­sed to 9.6 mil­lion tonnes of green hydro­gen pro­du­ced in the EU, and 10 mil­lion tonnes impor­ted (40% of which in the form of ammo­nia)1. The com­bus­tion of hydro­gen (H2) pro­duces water and nitro­gen oxides, the­re­by avoi­ding the release of CO2 – a green­house gas (GHG) – into the atmosphere.

By repla­cing fos­sil fuels with green hydro­gen, and taking cur­rent lea­kage rates into account, we can reduce CO2 emis­sions by 94%.

The effects of hydro­gen on the climate

Hydro­gen is natu­ral­ly abun­dant in the atmos­phere. It is the pro­duct of the break­down of cer­tain atmos­phe­ric che­mi­cal com­pounds and is also relea­sed during the com­bus­tion of fos­sil fuels, forest fires or by geo­lo­gi­cal pro­cesses. Around 40% of the atmos­phe­ric concen­tra­tion is due to human acti­vi­ties2.

Hydro­gen is not a green­house gas. “When the concen­tra­tion of hydro­gen changes, atmos­phe­ric che­mis­try is dis­tur­bed and this indi­rect­ly impacts the concen­tra­tion of green­house gases,” explains Fabien Pau­lot. The main mecha­nism is the des­truc­tion of the hydroxyl radi­cal (OH) by hydro­gen. Hydro­gen is a power­ful oxi­di­ser of methane, so its reduc­tion increases the concen­tra­tion of methane – a potent Green­house Gas. The increase in hydro­gen concen­tra­tion also increases the amount of tro­pos­phe­ric ozone and stra­tos­phe­ric water vapour, contri­bu­ting to the green­house effect.

In its gaseous form, hydro­gen can be trans­por­ted over long dis­tances in exis­ting gas net­works. Howe­ver, these ins­tal­la­tions – as well as pro­duc­tion faci­li­ties – are recor­ding ano­ma­lies, such as the mas­sive methane leaks obser­ved by satel­lite over the last few years. Air Liquide, a hydro­gen pro­du­cer, esti­mates the loss of com­pres­sed hydro­gen (in its gaseous form) at 4.2%. The figure rises to 20% for hydro­gen trans­por­ted in liquid form3. “Unlike methane, it is not pos­sible to mea­sure hydro­gen by satel­lite,” com­ments Fabien Pau­lot. “These esti­mates are the­re­fore rather uncer­tain. On the other hand, we believe that future tech­no­lo­gies could reduce lea­kage.” Des­pite the fact that the rise in hydro­gen increases the green­house effect (see box), do these leaks off­set any posi­tive effects on the ener­gy tran­si­tion ? “It seems high­ly unli­ke­ly,” replies Didier Hau­glus­taine. Along with Fabien Pau­lot, he co-autho­red a publi­ca­tion on the sub­ject publi­shed in 2023 in the jour­nal Nature Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Earth & Envi­ron­ment4. “By repla­cing fos­sil fuels with green hydro­gen, and taking cur­rent lea­kage rates into account, we can reduce CO2 emis­sions by 94%,’ explains Didier Hau­glus­taine. For blue hydro­gen, these figures fall to 70–80%. Even taking cur­rent uncer­tain­ties into account, hydro­gen remains of great inter­est as a tool for redu­cing the impact of ener­gy on the cli­mate, par­ti­cu­lar­ly when it comes to ship­ping, road trans­port and hea­vy industry.”

But the hydro­gen eco­no­my relies on ano­ther impor­tant gas in the value chain : ammo­nia. Hydro­gen (H2) can be conver­ted into ammo­nia (NH3). The lat­ter is then either burnt to pro­vide a direct source of ener­gy or conver­ted back into hydro­gen by cra­cking. These pro­cesses have been mas­te­red and the direct com­bus­tion of ammo­nia is alrea­dy being used on ships. In an ener­gy tran­si­tion sce­na­rio where glo­bal war­ming is limi­ted to 1.5°C, the Inter­na­tio­nal Rene­wable Ener­gy Agen­cy (IRENA)5 esti­mates that in 2050, hydro­gen will cover 12% of the world’s ener­gy demand. In this sce­na­rio, a quar­ter of the hydro­gen consu­med world­wide comes from inter­na­tio­nal trade. What’s more, 55% is trans­por­ted in the form of pure or mixed hydro­gen and 45% by ship, most­ly in the form of ammonia.

Ammonia, a false solution ?

Ammo­nia is essen­tial to a hydro­gen-based eco­no­my. But the trans­port of ammo­nia (NH3) also pre­sents a risk of lea­kage, with far more detri­men­tal effects on the cli­mate. Some of the com­pounds pro­du­ced by the com­bus­tion of NH3 are power­ful green­house gases, such as nitrous oxide (N2O), which has a war­ming poten­tial 265 times grea­ter than that of CO2. In an article publi­shed in the jour­nal PNAS in Novem­ber 20236, Ame­ri­can scien­tists assess this risk. Since ammo­nia has simi­la­ri­ties with methane, they use the same lea­kage rates as for methane, mea­su­red by satel­lite. 0.5 to 5% of ammo­nia could be lost to the envi­ron­ment in the form of reac­tive nitro­gen. These losses can be explai­ned by leaks, but also by the com­bus­tion of ammo­nia : when incom­plete, this contri­butes to the emis­sion of reac­tive nitro­gen into the atmos­phere. For the highest esti­mate (5% losses), this repre­sents the equi­va­lent of half of the glo­bal cli­mate dis­rup­tion cur­rent­ly cau­sed by the use of nitro­gen fer­ti­li­sers (the equi­va­lent of 2.3 Gt CO2 are emit­ted each year, i.e. 1/5th of emis­sions from the agri­cul­tu­ral sec­tor).  

In addi­tion, unde­si­rable reac­tions occur during the com­bus­tion of ammo­nia. Although these have been mini­mi­sed by recent tech­no­lo­gies, they still exist and gene­rate N2O in par­ti­cu­lar. The authors of the stu­dy in PNAS believe that this effect could com­ple­te­ly off­set the posi­tive bene­fits of the ener­gy tran­si­tion, out­wei­ghing the cur­rent cli­mate impact of fos­sil fuels such as coal. Even in the best-case sce­na­rio (where there would be no lea­kage), the team cal­cu­lates that ammo­nia has a higher car­bon foot­print than wind or geo­ther­mal ener­gy, but com­pa­rable to that of solar energy.

In 2022, ano­ther scien­ti­fic team asses­sed the impact of a tran­si­tion to ammo­nia to decar­bo­nise mari­time trans­port7. Their conclu­sion was simi­lar : small leaks of N2O – during com­bus­tion or trans­port – com­ple­te­ly off­set the cli­mate impact of such a tran­si­tion. “These esti­mates are the first to be made, and they include some uncer­tain­ties, because this eco­no­my is still in its infan­cy, so they may be overs­ta­ting the case,” com­ments Didier Hau­glus­taine. “But they are cru­cial : they sound the alarm about ammo­nia, which has a signi­fi­cant impact on the cli­mate.” Ammo­nia is an attrac­tive solu­tion for the mari­time sec­tor : it is rela­ti­ve­ly easy to convert an inter­nal com­bus­tion engine to use ammo­nia, and manu­fac­tu­rers are alrea­dy pre­pa­ring dedi­ca­ted engines. These ini­tial stu­dies show how impor­tant it is to be care­ful not to invest in false solu­tions that may do more harm in terms of the climate.

Anaïs Marechal
1Accor­ding to the France Hydro­gène asso­cia­tion, which brings toge­ther players in the sec­tor : https://​www​.france​-hydro​gene​.org/​m​a​g​a​z​i​n​e​/​r​e​p​o​w​e​r​-​e​u​-​e​n​c​o​r​e​-​p​l​u​s​-​d​a​m​b​i​t​i​o​n​-​p​o​u​r​-​l​h​y​d​r​o​gene/
2https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-24–4217-2024
3Arri­go­ni, A. and Bra­vo Diaz, L., Hydro­gen emis­sions from a hydro­gen eco­no­my and their poten­tial glo­bal war­ming impact, EUR 31188 EN, Publi­ca­tions Office of the Euro­pean Union, Luxem­bourg, 2022, ISBN 978–92-76–55848‑4, doi:10.2760/065589, JRC130362.
4https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023–00857‑8
5IRENA (2022), Glo­bal hydro­gen trade to meet the 1.5°C cli­mate goal : Part I – Trade out­look for 2050 and way for­ward, Inter­na­tio­nal Rene­wable Ener­gy Agen­cy, Abu Dha­bi.
6https://​doi​.org/​1​0​.​1​0​7​3​/​p​n​a​s​.​2​3​1​1​7​28120
7https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-022–01124‑4

Support accurate information rooted in the scientific method.

Donate