Do you know that Germany has invested 340 billion euros in home insulation over the last ten years to save energy, and has saved almost nothing? 


Germany has invested 340 billion euros in home insulation over the last ten years to save energy, and has saved almost nothing

? Because houses were well insulated, people spent less money for the same amount of heating, which led Germans to heat their homes to 22°C instead of 20°C. 

This kind of behaviour may seem silly to you, especially considering the amount of money Germany spent and the lack of results. Yet, it is incredibly common and known as the 'rebound effect'.​ 

Sir Jevons was a 19th-century British economist. He studied the subject of coal, in particular the links between the exploitation of this resource and the United Kingdom's domination of the rest of the world at that time. Noting an exponential growth in the consumption of this resource, he was concerned about the possible consequences for the country once the peak had passed. Therefore, 

Jevons looked for ways to reduce coal consumption, including more economical use and more efficient machinery

He then noticed what would later become known as Jevons' paradox: the increase in the efficiency of machines, thanks in particular to the invention of the steam engine by James Watt, led to an increase in coal consumption [Figure 1].

The paradox is that if a machine consumes less coal for the same purpose, 

one would expect total coal consumption to decrease

This was without considering the adaptation of human behaviour

: for the same production, the machine certainly costs less coal. But it allows for more diverse uses, and one can also afford to use more for the same amount of coal. This explains the widespread use of coal in the manufacturing industry, which has led to an increase in consumption. In 1980, Khazzoom called this paradox the "rebound effect", particularly by studying this phenomenon in the energy consumption of household appliances. He describes the rebound effect as the fact that 

‘the estimates of energy savings predicted to result from these mandated standards are derived mechanically’

Jevons' paradox is a special case of the rebound effect

. This term ‘rebound effect’ characterises only the increased consumption of a technology in relation to reductions in the limits to its use. This means that the actual savings from reducing a limit to a technology, whether technical, financial, or ecological - often all three - are less than theoretically possible. This effect is often quantified by the following formula:

The term ‘Jevons’ paradox’ or ‘backfire’ only characterises a rebound that would exceed 100%, making 

the situation worse than if no technological improvements in efficiency had taken place in the first place, when the potential gains are more than offset by the negative effects

Since then, some people, especially economists, have looked into this phenomenon. François Schneider defines the rebound effect as 

an increase in consumption linked to the reduction of financial, temporal, physical, social, etc. limits to the use of a technology

The rebound effect highlighted by Jevons was due to the removal of a technological and financial barrier (the cost of coal)

. Most rebound effects are due to this type of barrier, but temporal and ecological barriers must also be considered. Furthermore, the rebound effect is 

extremely common in two areas in particular: energy and digital

In the field of energy, the ADEME (Agency for the Environment and Energy Management) has estimated that in France, between 1982 and 2012, while 

final energy intensity had decreased by 30%, final energy consumption had increased by 15%, from 134 Mtoe to 154 Mtoe

. Indeed, as energy was cheaper, the French consumed more of it, as was the case for coal in Jevons' time.

For digital technology, the improved energy efficiency of transmission networks has led to an explosion in data traffic. 

This is the case with 4G and then 5G: it takes less time and less energy to download a given amount of data

users are loading much more data than before

. The result is an explosion in energy consumption and GHG emissions from the digital sector, which already accounts for almost 4% of global GHG emissions.

Thus, technological innovations to relieve human pressure on the environment may even turn out to be false good ideas.

what is important to note is that the rebound effect is likely to occur wherever a barrier is removed. Indeed

, Jevons and Schneider have shown that ecological innovation in a growth economy inexorably leads to a rebound effect. According to them, to be effective in reducing environmental impacts, 

innovation must take place in a context of economic contraction and frugality in consumption

. Indeed, technological innovations are multiplying in an attempt to respond to climate and environmental challenges.

However, what matters is not the energy, material, or emissions per element, but the total energy, material, or emissions. Therefore, if the rebound effect is not considered, the effects are likely to be reduced, cancelled out, or 

To summarise and clarify the situation a little, it is essential to have in mind the different rebound effects. Indeed, one of the difficulties of the rebound effect is its multifactorial and sometimes even hidden character.

There are two main types of rebound effect, plus the Jevons paradox [Table 1].

We can thus see how difficult it can be to quantify the rebound effect, especially when the effects are indirect: 

"The concept is simple to understand, much harder to demonstrate with numbers".

Unfortunately, when it is difficult to quantify, it is not taken into account in projects and policies, including in scientific articles such as the IPCC or the IEA. Hence the emergency to raise awareness about this topic.

It is certainly difficult to put in place solutions to reduce something that we find hard to quantify. However, it is important to know that in some cases, particularly in the energy field, quantifications are present and precise. Moreover, 

we must not forget that the rebound effect is due to the human factor. Thus, encouraging people to change their behaviour can help reduce the rebound effect.

This can be done by raising awareness of ecological issues: making people aware of the rebound effect makes it easier to avoid it. The responsible fashion sector has conducted several massive awareness campaigns on this subject.

The Patagonia brand has a very strong ethical and environmental policy. It also ran an advertising campaign during Black Friday calling on consumers not to buy. ‘Don't buy this jacket’ encouraged consumers not to buy what they did not need.

Indeed, the brand declared: ‘It's time for us as a company to address the issue of consumerism’, thus 

stirring up the fashion world by being strongly relayed on social networks

In the same idea, the French brand Loom, founded in 2016, has a business model based on producing less but better. 

The clothes are indeed designed to last, and the customer service takes returns after the first year of use to ensure that the quality of the clothes is not deteriorated

. The brand also studied the rebound effect (of new clothes) and thus concluded 

that it was better to reduce emissions at source by reducing production, and that frugality was a priority

Finally, initiatives are flourishing to raise public awareness of consumption and frugality. This is the case, for example, with Zero Waste Scotland and Edinburgh Science, which have organised awareness-raising workshops in George Square in Glasgow. 

Information was provided on the environmental impact of fashion, but also on solutions to be implemented, such as sewing, repairing, but above all 

While solutions exist and are increasingly being found on an individual scale, reflection on a collective scale is much more profound and complex, but not impossible, as it requires us to question the entire consumption model on which our societies are based.

The rebound effect arises when financial, temporal, physical, social, etc. limits to the use of a technology are reduced.

The consequences are an increase in resource consumption 

and CO2 emissions, sometimes greater than if no reduction had been allowed in the first place.

It is therefore understandable that this can be a problem in the fight for environmental protection: 

innovations may improve existing uses but increase the pressures of behavioural change

. This is what has happened with electronic equipment, the use of fuel-efficient cars and the renovation of buildings.

This effect appears when we have understood the solutions but not the problem.

 Thus, environmental solutions in a growth economy will almost inevitably lead to rebound effects. So, what we need to do to avoid it and really reduce our pressures on the environment is to question our consumption at the root. What do we need and what do we do with it? This cannot be done without a massive awareness of the scale of the environmental challenges.

Future Thought Leaders is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of rising Energy & Sustainability writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

Rebound Effect: The Whiplash of Innovation

These stripes may remind you of others: the blue and red stripes of the climate. In 2018, climate scientist Ed Hawkins developed this sequence of stripes to represent in colour the temperature departure from normal from 1772 to 2017.

These stripes may remind you of others: the blue and red stripes of the climate. In 2018, climate scientist Ed Hawkins developed this sequence of stripes to represent in colour the temperature departure from normal from 1772 to 2017. Figure 1 (Hawkins, 2021).

Another way to represent global warming is to use the temperature anomaly since pre-industrial levels, compared to the average temperatures at the end of the 20th century Figure 2.

World famous, they even made the cover of The Economist in 2019. Inspired by this, Miles Richardson depicted the stripes of biodiversity to represent mass extinction and species loss. 

Behind this artistic representation, is a very precise goal: to raise awareness of the loss of biodiversity

, a subject at least 8 times less mentioned than climate change in media (Legagneux et al., 2018), while its boundary is much more outdated that the one of climate change [Figure 3] (Prados, 2022).

Indeed, the observation seems to come later, the link with human societies seems less obvious, so the consequences seem less serious than for climate change. However, the WHO states that 'Biodiversity loss can have significant direct human health impacts if ecosystem services are no longer adequate to meet social needs. Indirectly, changes in ecosystem services affect livelihoods, income, local migration and, on occasion, may even cause or exacerbate political conflict' (WHO, 2015). 

Nowadays, however, we are sinking deeper into the biodiversity loss, mostly caused by humans, without even considering the consequences for our societies.

The evidence is clear: according to the Living Planet 2020 Index, the average population abundance of species has declined by 68% since 1970 (Zoological Society of London, 2022). The IPBES speaks of one million species threatened with extinction (Purvis, nd) and many scientists speak of soon entering the 6th mass extinction.

The representation of the bio-stripes highlights the most important feature of this mass extinction: its extremely rapid rate.

 Indeed, these stripes span less than 50 years, between 1972 and 2016, and show an extinction rate '100 to 1,000 times greater than that calculated over geological time'

However, in only tackling the climate, or almost, we forget the other nine planetary boundaries (Wang-Erlandsson et al., 2022). 

The climate frontier may have been exceeded, but it is not the one that has been pushed back the most.

 Indeed, the biodiversity frontier is much more worrying, and is further accentuated by climate change.

Nonetheless, climate change is only the third cause of biodiversity loss (followed by pollution and the proliferation of invasive species). 

The first two causes, accounting for more than half of the effects, are firstly the destruction of habitats

 (75% of the earth's surface has been altered by humans)

 (except for marine species, where overexploitation is the primary cause). In all, 28% of the species monitored are under threat, with fewer species and fewer individuals per species (La Fresque de la biodiversité, 2022; IPBES, 2019).

However, not all species are equally at risk of extinction: some 41% of amphibians are threatened, 26% of mammals, 37% of sharks, 34% of conifers, 33% of corals, 14% of birds, etc. Therefore, Richardson has, for example, focused on fish to show the sharp decline of marine species in a few decades [Figure 4] (Prados, 2022).

Now that we know this, what can we do as individuals?

Getting information is the most important thing

, to have in mind the orders of magnitude, to know on which actions to focus our energy and our time.

Combating land use and the destruction of ecosystems,

 particularly through the artificialization of land, is of paramount importance.

Shift to a plant-based diet, for 2 main causes

. The first is that livestock farming is responsible for a large part of deforestation and soil artificialisation, and is therefore responsible for the destruction of habitats, the primary cause of biodiversity loss. The second reason is that marine biodiversity suffers primarily from overexploitation of resources: dolphins die much more from bycatch in fishing than from hunting in Asia for example (Seaspiracy, 2021).

 because we are much more sensitive when we look at and learn about the living beings that are dying because of our activities.


The biodiversity collage (La Fresque de la biodiversité, 2022; IPBES 2019) also adds these 4 paths to action:

Reducing pressure on the 5 main causes of biodiversity loss.

Recreating the conditions for life, by thinking in terms of shelter and cover.

Contributing to knowledge about biodiversity, particularly through participatory science.

Particularly for the latter, consider that it is estimated that there are over 5 million species on Earth, but only 2 million are known, and less than 150,000 are studied

. The beauty and vastness of biodiversity are not just about humans, or even the few species you have seen in a zoo. The diversity of species on Earth is beyond human imagination, and we should do everything we can to preserve it.

My personal opinion on these stripes is that they are even more impactful than the climate stripes, as they fade and show a world that is losing its colours and dying

. Humans are part of the Living, and don't realise that if the Living dies, they die with them. However, we now know the facts, and we know how to take action: educating ourselves and raising awareness around us are the first steps to changing the world and fighting for the preservation of Life.

Future Thought Leaders is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of rising Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.

ALGRAIN S., 2022. [LinkedIn] August 2022 [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/stacy-algrain_showyourstripes-activity-6965617173666873344-jgU4?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

HAWKINS, 2021. Show your stripes [online] University of reading [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

La fresque de la biodiversité, 2022. [viewed 13 December 2021] Available from : 

LEGAGNEUX P., CASAJUS N., CAZELLES K., CHEVALLIER C., CHEVRINAIS M., GUERY L., JACQUET C., JAFFRE M., NAUD M.J., NOISETTE F., ROPARS P., VISSAULT S., ARCHAMBAULT P., BETY J., BERTEAUX D., GRAVEL D., 2018. Our House Is Burning: Discrepancy in Climate Change vs. Biodiversity Coverage in the Media as Compared to Scientific Literature. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution [online] 5 [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2017.00175

OUR WORLD IN DATA, 2019. Average temperature anomaly, global. [online] Our World in data [viewed 19 August 2022] Available from: 

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/temperature-anomaly?country=~Global

PRADOS J., 2022. À l’image des « bandes du réchauffement climatique », un nouvel outil pour mieux (se) représenter l’effondrement du vivant [Like the "global warming stripes", a new tool to better represent the collapse of life] [online] Vert [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from : 

https://vert.eco/articles/a-limage-des-bandes-du-rechauffement-climatique-un-nouvel-outil-pour-mieux-se-representer-leffondrement-de-la-biodiversite

PURVIS A., nd. A million threatened species? Thirteen questions and answers [online] IPBES [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

https://ipbes.net/news/million-threatened-species-thirteen-questions-answers

SEASPIRACY, 2021. [Netflix] Available from: 

WANG-ERLANDSSON, L., TOBIAN, A., VAN DER ENT, R. J., FETZER, I., TE WIERIK, S., PORKKA, M., STAAL, A., JARAMILLO, F., DAHLMANN, H., SINGH, C., GREVE, P., GERTEN, D., KEYS, P.W., GLEESON, T, CORNELL, S. E., STEFFEN, W., BAI, X., ROCKSTRÖM, J., (2022). Towards a green water planetary boundary. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. [online] [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-022-00287-8

WHO, 2015. Biodiversity and Health [online] World Health Organization [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/biodiversity-and-health

ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON, 2020. Living Planet Index [online] [viewed 17 August 2022] Available from: 

Show Your Bio Stripes

When tackling climate related issues, energy is a key topic. Indeed, it accounts for 73.2% of the GHG emissions, which represented over 33 GtCO2eq in 2019. (IEA, 2020) Specifically, 16.2% comes from the transport: 11.9% for road transport, 1.9% for aviation and 1.7% for shipping. (Ritchie and Roser, 2020) Although electric vehicles help road transport to emit less, decarbonisation of this sector is not yet a reality. 

When tackling climate related issues, energy is a key topic. Indeed, 

it accounts for 73.2% of the GHG emissions

, which represented over 33 GtCO2eq in 2019. (IEA, 2020) Specifically, 16.2% comes from the transport: 11.9% for road transport, 1.9% for aviation and 1.7% for shipping. (Ritchie and Roser, 2020) Although electric vehicles help road transport to emit less, decarbonisation of this sector is not yet a reality. And while almost 80% of the world’s energy nowadays comes from fossil fuels (Ritchie, 2021), it is an emergency to use cleaner energies or energy carriers.

This article then focuses on transport as this sector may, in the future, be strongly affected by hydrogen (

dihydrogen molecule – H2), a trendy energy carrier in the subject of energy transition. (Evans and Gabbatiss, 2020)

hydrogen is not an energy source but can act as an energy carrier

, an intermediary between an energy source and a use of that energy, such as electricity. Thus, energy is needed to produce hydrogen and use it: 

native dihydrogen is scarce, so human need to produce it.

Several technologies are available to produce hydrogen, such as methane reforming, coal gasification, biomass gasification, oil, and electrolysis.

First, 76% of dedicated hydrogen is produced from natural gas, mostly composed by methane.

 (IEA, 2019a) However, this reaction needs high temperature and pressure to be achieved. (Parkinson et al., 2019) This method hence releases between10 kgCO2eq/kgH2. (IEA, 2019a) and 13.7 kg CO2eq/kg H2, if fugitive emissions are considered. (Alhamdani et al., 2017)

Then, 23% of dedicated hydrogen is made from coal gasification

 – and called “grey hydrogen”. (Allen, 2018)This production method is even more polluting than methane reforming, as it releases about 19 kg CO2eq/kg H2 without any Carbon Capture, Storage and Use (CCUS) technology. (IEA, 2019a)

Dedicated hydrogen production requires 275 Mtoe of gas, coal, oil, and electricity, to produce about 69 MtH2. [figure 1] Plus,

 99% of the hydrogen used nowadays is made from fossil fuels, so its production is highly pollutive

: dedicated hydrogen production releases 830 MtCO2eq/year. (Evans and Gabbatiss, 2020)

Hydrogen can be used pure – with small levels of additives – or in gas mixtures. Despite the perceived huge enthusiasm for hydrogen in transport, 

pure hydrogen only represents a very small share of the total: less than 0.01 Mt H2 for transport

demand is nowadays mainly for refining for oil products and for ammonia production. 

Moreover, ethanol and steel production also use hydrogen. Plus, those sectors are expected to increase their demand of hydrogen in the short-term future at least, because of the expected demand in those sectors and the need for ‘decarbonation’. (IEA, 2019a)

Regarding the costs of hydrogen, as the current uses of hydrogen and conventional energy differ and as the quantities involved are different too, comparison of the prices struggle to make sense.

When produced from methane reforming, hydrogen nowadays costs about 1.3 USD/kg H2. Hydrogen produced from coal mainly concerns China, which accounts for 80% of its production. Here, the price is about 1.1 USD/kg H2, and globally is about 1.6 USD/kg. (IEA, 2019a)

For both methods, costs can increase if production methods are combined with CCUS, which will be discussed later. As some methods alone are highly pollutive, a carbon tax should also be considered.

 hydrogen is a promising energy carrier, main issues lie in its production.

 Consequently, when investigating in hydrogen improvements, the priority is to tackle its production.

A small part of hydrogen is already produced from water electrolysis, which needs water and electricity – about 50kWh/kg H2. (IEA, 2019a) 

 as the electricity is: indirect emissions for nuclear and renewables are generally around 1-2 kgCO2/kgH2 but can be up to 40 for coal. (Parkinson et al., 2019)

compensating for the intermittency of renewable energies by fuelling the electrolysis of water would produce low-carbon hydrogen and help to solve batteries issues simultaneously. 

However, the main limit is its price, which is not competitive enough against methane reforming or coal gasification yet. (US Department of energy, nd a)

Nevertheless, if the means of production based on fossil fuels are still used in the future, CCUS technologies will be needed. 

If low prices and emissions are to be met, one of the best solutions is the gasification of coal, coupled with CCUS. 

However, although this solution mitigates emissions, it does not reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Moreover, it is not the least emitting solution, as 'green' electrolysis can go down to 0-0.4kgCO2/kgH2. (Parkinson et al., 2019)

if hydrogen is to be used to help decarbonise some sectors, the means of production must be improved to emit less,

 and thus not shift the problem of pollution from the use to the energy carrier production. (Florette et al., 2020)

Even if the transport sector is becoming electrified to reduce GHG emissions, this solution is not ideal for all means of transport. 

Indeed, the main disadvantages for electric vehicles are their autonomy and refilling time, which does not really suit heavy-duty transport, shipping, and air travel. Therefore, hydrogen and electricity should complement each other for the transport sector, and hydrogen should help to decarbonise heavy and long-distance transport. (RTE, 2020)

fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) convert hydrogen into electricity and water

. Most of the electricity is used, and a small part is stored in batteries, as well as electricity generated thanks to braking. (Bae Systems, 2022)

the use of hydrogen as a fuel does not emit GHG or polluting particles. 

 hydrogen also allows trucks to have a much smaller battery

 when compared to BEVs (Battery Electric Vehicles), but also a range comparable to that of a diesel truck and to refill faster, which is vital for road haulage. (Gray et al., 2021)

, in many ways, to be decarbonised, as it currently emits about 940 MtCO2eq/year, is mainly powered by oil products and is expected to triple by 2050. (IEA, 2019a)

hydrogen as a fuel for shipping requires special conditions

: hydrogen must be stored as a compressed gas – under a pressure of 700bar – or as a liquid – around -252°C. (Gray et al., 2021) (IEA, 2019a) Therefore, a promising solution is using hydrogen to produce ammonia – NH3 –, which is much denser, hence takes less storage space than hydrogen. Although ammonia is toxic to living organisms and therefore causes other problems, it could reduce GHG emissions by up to 34.5%/tonne-km. Nonetheless, if the problem of storage is solved, then hydrogen could also be used, which could reduce emissions by up to 47%/tonne-km. (ITF, 2018)

Finally, planes nowadays only rely on ‘gas-turbine engine and jet fuel for propulsion’. (Gray et al., 2021) 

Using pure hydrogen for the aviation sector would require profound changes 

in infrastructure and equipment, mainly because of storage issues. Indeed, even if hydrogen has an important energy density – around 33kWh/kgH2 – its volume density is very low.

hydrogen-based liquid fuels would reduce accommodation costs.

 Despite this, it would still be up to 6 times more expensive than current fuels. (IEA, 2019a) Moreover, storage issues persist: ‘comparing with kerosene, four times bigger volume of LH2 (liquid hydrogen) is needed to deliver the same amount of energy’. (Baroutaji et al., 2019)

Notwithstanding, using hydrogen-fuelled planes would help drastically reduce CO2 and NOx emissions, reduce fossil dependence, and improve air quality. (Baroutaji et al., 2019)

However, no matter which technology is used,

 improvements in the carbon footprint struggle to be noticed if hydrogen production mode remains the same as nowadays. 

Nevertheless, producing hydrogen via electrolysis thanks to low-carbon electricity will allow significant cuts in the emissions. (Gray et al., 2021) However, the question of price, competitiveness and geopolitical issues remains open to debate.

China alone consumes over 24 MtH2/year, mostly produced from fossil fuels and is a pioneer in the development of FCEVs. (Wood, 2022) (IEA, 2019a) The challenge now is for them to get out of coal, which will not be easy because it means price increases of up to 3 times more. (IEA, 2019a) Plus, USA account for 13% of the demand, with an ambitious development plan for FCEVs. (Wood, 2022)

Besides, as part of the European Green Deal, the EU plans to develop projects of ultra-low-carbon mobility in European big cities, such as FCEVs for buses. As 

the future of mobility will rely more on shared transportation, investing in hydrogen buses could help cut the 25% of EU emissions

 that transport represents. (Wood, 2022) To that aim, almost 20% of European Clean Hydrogen Alliance’s projects on hydrogen will have applications in mobility. (European commission, 2022)

As mentioned before, the main challenge will be the prices, the decarbonisation, and the production.

 Although China, India and USA have favourable conditions for low carbon/renewable hydrogen, the same cannot be said for EU and Japan.

 [figure 2] They then may not be able to self-supply, which will create dependence between countries, but, more importantly, represent huge costs and energy consumption for storage and transport.

Furthermore, it must be kept in mind that the public acceptance of this energy carrier, as well as significant subsidies and funding, are necessary for its large-scale development, and may prove to be obstacles, especially on the financial side. (RTE, 2020)

 the savings in terms of emissions depend strongly on the modes of production.

 The use of hydrogen as an energy carrier may have no impact on the variation of GHG emissions, but it can also make them worse. On the other hand, produced responsibly (i.e., electrolysis from renewable electricity), it can remove up to almost all the emissions from some modes of transport - notably trucks. (Çabukoglu et al., 2019)

Prices are generally higher for hydrogen technologies than conventional ones but are expected to fall in the future.

 As for now, the cleanest and cheapest technologies are still methane and coal with CCUS. However, 

an ambitious carbon tax, as well as an expected drop in the cost of renewables in the future, may make 'green' hydrogen competitive.

 (IEA, 2019a) (The Hydrogen Council, 2020) There are also hopes that communities and states will support 'green' technologies so that they can be deployed more quickly.

To put it in a nutshell, hydrogen is an encouraging solution to decarbonise transport sector, specifically for long-haul, such as freight, aeronautics, and road haulage. 

Although this energy carrier is nowadays predominantly dedicated to industrial uses, it can also be used as a fuel or in FCEVs. This could help drastically decrease transport emissions, as its use emits far less GHG than conventional fuels.

Nevertheless, it has many levers for improvement, such as its production, which is nowadays 99% from fossil fuels and highly pollutant

. Electrolysis with electricity made from renewable energy could be a sustainable solution.

 Attention should also be paid to its price, and to the extent of infrastructure adaptations.

 Plus, because of its low-density volume,

 storage is made complicated and expensive. 

All this leads to high prices for ‘green hydrogen’, but in which the countries of the North – USA and Europe – are investing.

Finally, hydrogen could cut transport emissions, but commitments from governments, such as an ambitious carbon tax and financial support, are expected to make these technologies viable.

ALHAMDANI Y., HASSIM M., NG R., HURME M., 2017. The estimation of fugitive gas emissions from hydrogen production by natural gas steam reforming. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. [online] 42(14), pp. 9342 – 9351 [viewed 23 February 2022]. Available from: 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.07.274

ALLEN J., 2018. Explainer: how do we make hydrogen from coal, and is it really a clean fuel? [online] The Conversation [viewed 23 February 2022] Available from:

https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-do-we-make-hydrogen-from-coal-and-is-it-really-a-clean-fuel-94911

BAE SYSTEMS, 2022. What is a Hydrogen Fuel Cell Truck? [online] Bae Systems [viewed 8 March 2022] Available from: 

https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/definition/what-is-a-hydrogen-fuel-cell-truck

BAROUTAJI A., WILBERFORCE T., RAMADAN M., OLABI A., 2019. Comprehensive investigation on hydrogen and fuel cell technology in the aviation and aerospace sectors. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews [online] 106, pp.31-40 [viewed 10 March 2022] Available from:

You can’t miss it!

Gabrielle Piot

Gabrielle Piot

Recent publications

Readers also like

Want to know more about illuminem Voices?