illuminem summarizes for you the essential news of the day. Read the full piece on The Wall Street Journal or enjoy below:

🗞️ Driving the news: A new Harvard University study challenges the cost-effectiveness of hydrogen as a fuel in the U.S., concluding that green hydrogen is currently more expensive compared to carbon capture and storage (CCS)
• For each metric ton of CO2 reduced, green hydrogen costs $500 to $1,250, while CCS is cheaper, ranging from $100 to $1,000 per ton

🔭 The context: Hydrogen has been promoted as a key player in the energy transition, especially for heavy industries like steel and cement
• However, the high costs of producing, moving, and storing hydrogen, particularly green hydrogen, have slowed down projects globally, raising skepticism about its viability as a "silver bullet" solution

🌍 Why it matters for the planet: Hydrogen, especially green hydrogen made from renewable energy, was considered a major tool to reduce emissions in sectors that are hard to decarbonize
• However, if its costs remain higher than alternative solutions like CCS, it may hinder efforts to scale hydrogen projects and delay the transition to cleaner energy sources

⏭️ What's next: The study suggests focusing on blue hydrogen (made using fossil fuels with carbon capture) as a more cost-effective interim solution, especially in regions like the U.S., which benefit from incentives like the 45Q tax credit program for carbon capture

💬 One quote: “If you look at the value proposition as a whole, there is no way [hydrogen is cost effective],” – Roxana Shafiee, the study's lead researcher

📈 One stat: Hydrogen demand increased by 2.5% in 2023, reaching 97 million tons, but its production is still largely in the planning phase

Click for more news covering the latest on hydrogen