▲ | _aavaa_ 6 hours ago | |
> In the US, regions First of all the US isn’t the whole world. Like you said transportation is a problem which is why you would produce it close to where it’s needed (say Nebraska). You don’t need an “ideal” solar output location. Yes I am well aware of the energy difference. > Exactly. 20 kg of methane costs $3 today, but contains 15 kg of carbon that could be worth $20-$30. It's a non-trivial issue if you hate generating value If carbon free hydrogen is going to be worth doing at scale it will be because there is a price on the carbon. So the input methane will go up in price. As for the output, global demand for carbon black is currently ~14 million metric tones a year [0]. Current hydrogen demand is ~100 million metric tones a year [1]. 100 Mt of hydrogen needs ~400 Mt of methane and produces ~300 Mt of carbon. 300 Mt vs 14 Mt of current demand. What do you supposed will happen to that carbon black price when you produce even a fraction of total hydrogen demand through pyrolysis? It’s non-trivial cause you’re gonna be having to create reverse coal mines to store all that shit. [0]: https://www.chemanalyst.com/industry-report/carbon-black-mar... [1]: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-hydrogen-review-2025/dema... |