“Green hydrogen”, i.e. hydrogen produced by splitting water with a carbon “free” source of electricity via electrolysis, is set to become the energy vector enabling a deep decarbonisation of society and a virtuous water based energy cycle. If to date, water electrolysis is considered to be a scalable technology, the source of water to enable a “green hydrogen” economy at scale is questionable. Countries with the highest renewable energy potential like Australia, are also among the driest places on earth. Globally 380,000 GL/year of wastewater is available, and this is much more than the 34,500 GL/year of water required to produce the projected 2.3 Gt of hydrogen of a mature hydrogen economy. Hence the need to assess both technically and economically whether some wastewater treatment effluent, are a better source for green hydrogen. Analysis of Sydney Water's wastewater treatment plants alone shows that these plants have 37.6 ML/day of unused tertiary effluents, which if electrolysed would generate 420,000 t H2/day or 0.88 Mt H2/year, and cover ∼100% of Australia's estimated production by 2030. Furthermore, the production of oxygen as a by-product of the electrolysis process could lead to significant benefits to the water industry, not only in reducing the cost of the hydrogen produced for $3/kg (assuming a price of oxygen of $3–4 per kg), but also in improving the environmental footprint of wastewater treatment plants by enabling the onsite re-use of oxygen for the treatment of the wastewater. Compared to desalinated water that requires large investments, or stormwater that is unpredictable, it is apparent that the water utilities have a critical role to play in managing water assets that are “climate independent” as the next “golden oil” opportunity and in enabling a “responsible” hydrogen industry, that sensibly manages its water demands and does not compete with existing water potable water demand.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Woods et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: