Home / Chroniques / “Turquoise hydrogen” a viable solution without CO2 ?
hydrogen fuel cell bus
π Energy π Industry

“Turquoise hydrogen” a viable solution without CO2 ?

Laurent Fulcheri
Laurent Fulcheri
Research director at PERSEE, MINES-ParisTech
Key takeaways
  • Black, brown and grey hydrogen are made from fossil fuels, and blue hydrogen is a similar process combined with CO2 capture and storage to reduce emissions.
  • Green hydrogen is produced via electrolysis of water, but it requires large amounts of electricity from the grid or renewable energy.
  • Turquoise hydrogen uses both electricity and methane, but with 4–7.5 times less electricity than electrolysis depending on the technology used – making it a hopeful technology for the future.
  • Moreover, if the methane comes from biogas it has captured CO2from the air, meaning it actually has a negative carbon footprint.

Though the use of hydro­gen ener­gy is clean, its pro­duc­tion is high­ly pol­lu­ting, par­ti­cu­lar­ly when it comes to COemis­sions. Gree­ner solu­tions, such as elec­tro­ly­sis, do exist but they are still too expen­sive. Never­the­less, new, effi­cient low-emis­sion tech­no­lo­gies are emer­ging, such as methane pyro­ly­sis. Here is a quick run­down of the colours of hydro­gen : grey, blue, green or turquoise ?

Is hydro­gen the ideal ener­gy solution ?

Hydro­gen is inhe­rent­ly a ‘clean’ ener­gy : when you burn it or you use it in a fuel cell, it only pro­duces water and ener­gy. Howe­ver, it is almost non-existent in gaseous form on Earth so it must the­re­fore be pro­du­ced some­how. Unfor­tu­na­te­ly, hydro­gen pro­duc­tion requires a lot of ener­gy, which makes it far less clean. As such, today about 95% of hydro­gen is made from fos­sil fuels. Pro­du­cing 1 ton of hydro­gen results in 10 tons of CO2 emis­sions. It is one of the ener­gies with the worst car­bon foot­print and so the chal­lenge is to find a way of pro­du­cing hydro­gen without emit­ting CO2.

Today, this is pos­sible thanks to water elec­tro­ly­sis, which repre­sents 5% of glo­bal hydro­gen pro­duc­tion. It is cal­led “green” hydro­gen. The pro­cess involves split­ting water into oxy­gen and hydro­gen, but it uses huge amounts of elec­tri­ci­ty. Ener­gy consump­tion is the­re­fore inevi­table : the che­mi­cal reac­tion requires at least 40kWh to pro­duce each kilo­gram of hydro­gen, if elec­tro­ly­sers ope­rate at maxi­mum effi­cien­cy. But today, their per­for­mance is only about 60% of maxi­mum, mea­ning that pro­du­cing 1kg of hydro­gen consumes as much as 60 kWh. 

“Green” hydro­gen can be fur­ther clas­si­fied as “pink” or “yel­low” if the elec­tri­ci­ty used is pro­du­ced by rene­wable ener­gy, nuclear ener­gy (both of which have low CO2 emis­sions) or a com­bi­na­tion of these.

It is easy to unders­tand why methane refor­ming (using fos­sil fuels) is the pre­do­mi­nant method com­pa­red to elec­tro­ly­sis. At cur­rent elec­tri­ci­ty prices, 1kg of green hydro­gen costs 4–6 €. In contrast, hydro­gen pro­du­ced through refor­ming costs less than 1€. Given the cur­rent mar­ket, a mas­sive deploy­ment of green hydro­gen is hard­ly possible. 

Table pre­sen­ting the sources and tech­niques used as well as the amount of CO2 emit­ted during the pro­duc­tion of each type of hydrogen.

What are the options to make hydro­gen pro­duc­tion “gree­ner”?

One of the options is to com­bine COrefor­ming with the cap­ture and sto­rage of CO2 (see our dos­sier on CO2 cap­ture and sto­rage). The sce­na­rios show that it would double or triple the cost of hydro­gen, that is a price of 2–3 €/kg. This is cal­led “blue” hydro­gen. “Grey” hydro­gen is pro­du­ced by methane refor­ming, and “black” hydro­gen is made from coal.

But there is a dif­ferent way. Indus­trial and poli­ti­cal circles recent­ly dis­co­ve­red this pro­cess, but it is not new : I have been wor­king on it since 1995 and have based my whole car­rier on this sub­ject. Refer­red to as “tur­quoise” hydro­gen, it uses both elec­tri­ci­ty and methane. It involves decom­po­si­tion of methane by pyro­ly­sis at very high tem­pe­ra­tures (1 000 to 2 000 °C). Hence, it still requires elec­tri­ci­ty, but 4–7.5 times less than elec­tro­ly­sis depen­ding on the tech­no­lo­gy used. This pro­cess pro­duces car­bon and hydro­gen, but not CO2. One kilo of methane is used to pro­duce 250g of hydro­gen and 750g of car­bon, a pro­duct with high added value. More impor­tant­ly, this reac­tion requires 7 times less elec­tri­ci­ty than water elec­tro­ly­sis for each quan­ti­ty of pro­du­ced hydro­gen (but it pro­duces two times less hydro­gen than water refor­ming per methane molecule).

How far along is indus­trial pro­duc­tion for tur­quoise hydrogen ? 

This pyro­ly­sis pro­cess is cur­rent­ly under indus­trial deve­lop­ment in the USA, with our Ame­ri­can indus­trial part­ner Mono­lith Mate­rials. They deve­lo­ped a conclu­sive pilot bet­ween 2012 and 2017 in Cali­for­nia and have star­ted indus­tria­li­sa­tion. The first unit has been built and 11 other units are soon to fol­low. Tech­no­lo­gi­cal pro­blems rela­ted to change of scale have been sol­ved, and first mar­ke­ting is expec­ted in the coming months. This unit will consume 20,000 tons of natu­ral gas and will pro­duce 15,000 tons of black car­bon as well as 5,000 tons of hydrogen.

At first, the eco­no­mic model will consist of adding value to the car­bon pro­du­ced, which is wide­ly used in tyre manu­fac­tu­ring and sold at approxi­ma­te­ly 1€/kg. A tyre contains about 30% of black car­bon, which increases resis­tance to wear, UV radia­tion or heat. In the second phase, hydro­gen will become pro­minent from an eco­no­mic pers­pec­tive. Today, the tech­no­lo­gy is opti­mi­sed for black car­bon pro­duc­tion (the tem­pe­ra­ture is set accor­ding to the desi­red grade for black car­bon). In the future, it will be opti­mi­sed for hydro­gen pro­duc­tion, and new appli­ca­tions for black car­bon will need to be deve­lo­ped. For ins­tance, it could be used in construc­tion mate­rials, road infra­struc­tures, or even in agri­cul­tu­ral soils. It is chea­per and safer than sto­ring CO2 !

Bet­ter yet : if the methane comes from bio­gas (obtai­ned by the decom­po­si­tion of orga­nic mate­rials, in bio­gas plants or land­fill sites, for example), it has cap­tu­red CO2 from the air. In this case pyro­ly­sis actual­ly has a nega­tive car­bon foot­print since it reduces the quan­ti­ty of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Are there other tech­no­lo­gies for tur­quoise hydro­gen pro­duc­tion technologies ? 

Yes, but only at the labo­ra­to­ry or demons­tra­tor stage. There are “liquid metal bath” methods in which methane is injec­ted and decom­po­sed in columns contai­ning mol­ten metal. Pilots were built in Cali­for­nia and in Aus­tra­lia. For its part, the Ger­man indus­tria­list BASF stu­dies the decom­po­si­tion of methane using cata­lysts. These are serious com­pe­ti­tors, but they must still over­come seve­ral tech­no­lo­gi­cal challenges.

Interview by Cécile Michaut

Contributors

Laurent Fulcheri

Laurent Fulcheri

Research director at PERSEE, MINES-ParisTech

After a thesis at the CNRS, he joined the Centre d'Energétique (now known as PERSEE) in 1989 and created the Plasma group. Laurent Fulcheri is a specialist in thermal plasma hydrocarbon conversion processes. He has been working in particular for more than 25 years on the pyrolysis of methane for the production of decarbonated hydrogen and solid carbon.

Support accurate information rooted in the scientific method.

Donate