Can hydrogen powered plants turn steel production 'green'? | DW News
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2023
- The production of steel today still means the release of a lot of climate-damaging CO2. Globally, the steel industry is responsible for a 6 percent of Co2 emissions. The aim is to change this as quickly as possible. In the future, hydrogen could replace coal, which is currently used to melt steel. Christian Pricelius took a look at the world's first steel production using hydrogen in Sweden.
Subscribe: ruclips.net/user/deutsche...
For more news go to: www.dw.com/en/
Follow DW on social media:
►Facebook: / deutschewellenews
►Twitter: / dwnews
►Instagram: / dwnews
►Twitch: / dwnews_hangout
Für Videos in deutscher Sprache besuchen Sie: / dwdeutsch
Green hydrogen is expensive there is a
Danish company that is marketing a 100MW electrolysis unit able to produce 2 tonnes of hydrogen per hour and costs 59 million dollars each . You need vast amounts of hydrogen to make ammonia that is the real aim of making ammonia. The price for green hydrogen per tonne is 9000 dollars and for hydrogen from hydrocarbons is 7500 dollars even if you use 50kg of hydrogen the steel will cost 2100 dollars a tonne and it's not green you still have to use coke and limestone to create slag and you use natural gas to lower the price of melting steel . It's a gimmick a trend and no such thing as something for nothing exist . So a step up transformers so 75MW coming in and 100MW coming to squeeze more hydrogen so 1000MW nuclear power plant so 13 electrolysis units and 26 tonnes per hour can produce 3500 tonnes of ammonia per day.
Do you think maybe over time it could be more beneficial than our processes now?
Pfew, No, they use cheap promises to split up hydrogen.
@@bns481 : I'm a hydrogen investor. I maybe biased but I see the technology eventually getting there but it's decades away ... maybe more if some hurdles are higher than expected.
No harm to having dream of free lunch.
also it is only really green when it is not just produced from green Energy, but from surplus green Energy.
There is a competing technology called Molten Oxide Electrolysis that can convert iron ore directly into steel. The hydrogen technology is a 2 step process. It will be interesting to see which process is the most economical.
i hadnt heard about molten oxide electrolysis until now so i looked it up abit
how does it actually produce steel? from what i can see its just turning iron ore into liquid iron and oxygen, theres no carbon there to make steel, and it cant be using iron carbonate because then it wouldnt produce oxygen like everything says it does
@@vincentgrinn2665 They will still need to use carbon but the carbon can be introduced in other forms. One of the biggest things with this process is that you no longer need to use fossil fuels to provide the heat the melt the ore. The process is essentially used to first create high purity iron metal and then in some other process add the carbon. That carbon can come from a variety of sources. Regardless you don't necessarily need to make steel, there are other ferroalloys that we could make
@@hmbro3236 oh that makes sense, i always assumed all these green steel were suppose to be carbon free
but reducing the carbon used to just the small percentage actually inside the steel makes sense
@@hmbro3236 The problem of using carbon is that .. in global scale, you still need to emit millions of tons of coal in the atmosphere
it is further away from being reality. and it does not fit as well into the other step of Iron production. All in all it has the potential of needing less Energy. but it is also less suited to use seasonal Energy overproduction.
most hydrogen is produced through natural gas, and besides steel is one of the most recycled metals in the world.
This would be a disastrous idea.
Sounds like the only way this can work is IF governments start charging those "carbon credits".
You should do a video about Boston Metal, they are working on a very promising steelmaking technology for about a decade now, their technology originally was developed by researchers at MIT.
Ah, clean coal.
Sounds promising!
Your customers don't want Green steel.. They all want quality STEEL....There is no way, no way You can make quality STEEL without coke get over it...
I gave up when I read that "hydrogen could replace coal which is currently used to melt STEEL"
I remember when they said Lithium was “scarce” and not very good. Now we keep finding massive deposits and battery efficiency increased x1000%. Same thing for Hydrogen. Toyota are going all in and the Japanese know stuff. Better than Middle East oil wars for another century.
I'm all for anything to do with hydrogen.
Where's the disadvantage besides the initial cost?
I heard it is pretty reactive and needs high security containment. The city of Reykjavik was running test runs on busses. I don't remember why they stopped.
The hard part is getting it off the ground. It can be cheap in the long run, but getting it up to scale before it is price competitive is difficult, and will require a lot of effort on many different fronts. (carbon taxes/tariffs, subsidies, investments into infrastructure and research, etc.)
As costs fall, the need for incentives will go down, but getting the ball rolling in the beginning when everything is the most expensive and there isn't any momentum yet is tricky.
@@gluteusmaximus1657 : Storage is easy, tank storage is safer than natural gas. Ammonia is an easy way to transport it too, I made a small bag of gold from that technology. Sometimes early investors do get lucky :-)
the Energy needs for the steel production of Germany would be around 150 to 200 TWh a year.
compared to the 600 to 700 TWh energy production that Germany has at the moment, that is a lot.
that is however a disadvantage and an advantage at the same time.
That plant alone will consume HALF of the countrys energy production! They forgot to mention that.
the good thing however is, that it can time this consumption to whenever it is convinient. So it can at least in principle run on surplus Energy only. that allows for the overall renewable portion of the electric grid to rise to 80% or higher without the need for seasonal storage.
Theres so much misinformation here. Green steel is not "more efficient" and does not have "lower cost."
Thats the reason its currently so expensive and not really used. They are working on getting the astronomical costs down and the abysmas efficiency up.
that depends, on what cost you include in steel in the first place.
If they want to do it
It's possible because the technology is available already
It's a matter of investment and willingness to implement it.
Green Steel. very nice, if it works, But is that going to help replace all of those steel mills and employees who will have to convert. I hope so.
Iron reduction with coal and then melting in eaf or induction furnace is standard technology. Challenge is making the iron pellets without carbon....hydrogen from water using solar power or renewable power. The carbon is dri acts as fuel to reduce the electrical energy input in steelmaking but when reduced with hydeogen dri would be lacking in carbon and will.havw to be added to make various steel grades
100% wind and solar energy used to split water up?
No, they use cheap promises to split up hydrogen. That's cheaper and doesn't work as well.
Solar will dominate hydrogen exports due to the insanely low prices in some countries.
Wind and hydro might be used locally in some places, but we'll have to see how competitive they are in comparison.
@@Dayanto : Solar is THE most expensive power without subsidies. Simple fact.
nope
This is a true miracle for industry and our precious planet.Trouble is it rdestroys tangiable items were as people cannot control oil or gas?????
No
Shipping hydrogen around doesn't make sense when you can make it on demand?
making green hydrogen in Germany on a night in January is harder than shipping it from Morocco
Hydrogen production requires a ton of energy and is only 60% efficient, so it is very sensitive to electricity prices.
It probably makes more sense to import hydrogen made from insanely cheap solar (as low as 1.5¢/kwh in some places) than to try to make it locally.
Sure, there are some losses when transporting it, but not enough to make up the difference in electricity prices in most cases.
2/3rds of humanity live near a coastline, but 1/3rd live deep inland, hydrogen will need to be shipped to those people.
@@Dayanto morocco is also very, very well suited to solar production due to it's clear desert skies and long durations of direct sunlight exposure throughout the year. they've already begun selling solar power to europe via undersea power lines.
@@Dayanto There's also upcoming projects on white hydrogen (aka geologic) which has been gaining steam recently. This bypasses the need for electricity and can be treated as an energy source like natural gas at that point. Huge wells have been discovered in France, Africa, and Australia recently. Since Earth does the generation for you, it's expected to be very cheap. So cheap that it can easily reach the 1USD per kg targets most countries are aiming for even with transportation losses considered.
Are solar and wind powered electrolysis plants capable of producing hydrogen cheaply enough, and would they be able to meet market demand? Also, the best way to decarbonize heat is with ridiculously cheap, glowing hot thermal batteries. Thermal batteries are dirt cheap because they’re made out of dirt. And those batteries can be charged during peak energy production when the price of solar and wind can often be negative. So industrial furnaces would literally be paid to use heat.
Would you buy 1 tonne of green steel for say 5000 euro, or 1 tonne of the same quality steel made in China for - say 1000 euro. No brainer.
All of our coastlines should have hydrogen on demand power plants
2/3rds of humanity live on the coast, with nuclear power plants we could power desalination plants and electrolysis hydrogen production plants to provide green power and water to most of humanity, and powerlines and water pipelines could supply the rest of humanity. nuclear is the future.
desalination is expensive af.@@cageybee7221
I would like my green steel to be electric green chartreuse please
Spray some electric chartreuse-colored algae in paint suspension
@@tylerphuoc2653 I might be a little on the border of the spectrum because when I first heard the phrase green steel I was picturing green Steel... especially since I heard about it from a known pothead
@@ExileTheKnightsOfMaltaNow I mean, the concept of greenwashing in these sorts of high-tech industries makes you think of an algal bloom… which *should* probably get you the desired sort of internal emotional affect
@@tylerphuoc2653 maybe Moss
@@ExileTheKnightsOfMaltaNow That's not exactly that much better in terms of staining power 😆
Cool
Is hydrogen better than an electric furnace?
For making steel a lot of heat is needed. And with hydrogen one can more efficiently provide these high temperatures.
Yes. It's hard to heat up something with an metallic electric coil when the target temperature would melt said metal
Yes, the required heat for steelmaking makes electric furnace really energy demanding. More energy demanding than combustion of gasses like hydrogen even.
it is not about the heat. the hydrogen is needed as a reduction agent.
Q: How much coal is used worldwide to make steel each year?
A: About 1.26 billion tonnes of coal are used to make steel each year.
Q: How many square feet of solar cells would it take to replace the coal
A: About 57,000 square miles, which is slightly larger than the state of New Jersey.
And for crude oil ~300,000 square miles if my calculations are correct, generously assuming 260 watt-hours per day per square meter for solar panels. So larger than Texas. 200x the power then we had in 2020 as per IEA. I don't think we have nearly enough rare earth metals for this.
New Jersey pfffff whatever cover New Mexico state and it alone could power everything.............. globalyyyyyyyyyyy.
@@DaVe-iSnOtHoMe.MaN.LemmingsWeB 1. It wouldn't, not nearly enough
2. you couldn't transfer that energy that far anyway
@@R3bel02 a man with that many y's at the end of his words is clearly being sarcastic.
In America we’ve built a New Jersey in parking lots alone. If we really cared about land use and saving space, we’d start with our wildly sprawling post-1960 development model.
But also, all that wasted space could be dual-use between parking and solar if we wanted. Rooftops too. How many giant industrial warehouses are there taking up entire fields that could double as little power plants?
Also, you forgot to mention how much perpetual space coal mining takes up, and must continue consuming forever to power coal plants, unlike metals mining. Coal mining takes enormous swathes of land, and unlike solar or wind, it is extremely difficult to reclaim its useful life. Can’t keep just blowing up every hill in West Virginia until there’s no more hills.
It's interesting but premature.
in what way?
I hope countries are sharing anything for climate change
Forget it. TK itself spent millions and billions for R&D by working together with many universities. No way they are gonna share their new technology
I heard Elon say Tesla’s solar and EV patents are almost all open-source.
Most companies guard patents & trade secrets ferociously, so would be cool to see green energy companies break that traditional mold.
@@ThePianist51 it is not exactly countries. we are talking about private companies.
не знают как ободрать налогами, на природу им насрать)
You didn't account for the cost/environmental damage cause by the production of windmills. You started with is as "free". Just before 2.00.
that is a red herring. I hope you know that.
@@MusikCassette Don't know what that is actually...
Nothing will be 100% green
The new fad of "hydrogen will save us" while we simultaneously shut down all our nuclear power plants makes me want to scream.
It's all about costs per output, mate...
What happens if temperature rises and you have no water to cool powerplants? Half of those things had to be shut down in France several times… Not cool, mate…
@@ThePianist51 If temperatures rise enough for you to be out of water, then we're dead from unnatural heat exposure.
I guess I’m not sure who “we” and “all” is referring to. Germany alone?
Bc China and South Korea are building new nuclear plants. I’m sure others will follow if/when they succeed at finding cost cuts.
Ironic too since the most economical way to generate large amounts of it is using Nuclear. In fact thermal plants have advantages in hydrogen production than Renewables since they produce waste heat that can be utilized to lessen the amount of electricity needed for electrolysis. In fact newer high temperature Gen4 Nuclear can generate it as a byproduct of operating to generate electricity as those designs have high enough waste heat temperatures to split water through chemical cycles alone, zero electricity input needed.
"eye-ron"
Steel is already the greenest material because it is the most recycled and the most recyclable.
It's great if it's greener still, eh?
Not in China. All metals are recyclable.
Doesn't matter. It's still 8% of global emissions. That's quite a bit more than shipping and aviation combined.
Well…Aside from the fact that you need coal to produce it….
we have a high recycling rate, but we also need a lot of new steel in addition. so overall we are talking about 8% of the problem. that is a sizeable chunk.
Can steel plants not be electric plants? So much waste of heat energy.
it is not about the heat. the hydrogen is needed as a reduction agent.
Interesting... green steel, Australia/Germany hydrogen deal, Volkswagen announcing they will stop building electric vehicles and focus on hydrogen power. Germany is betting big on hydrogen.
It's not efficient and is more expensive than stainless steel. It'll be many years before it is viable without HUGE subsidies.
More cloud culckoo land science, no hydrogen production is carbon neutrol and wastes electricity, just use the electricity to directly reduce the ores, hydrogen does not enhnce the iron ore it is a reduction process. If the developement of such proccesors that need gov funding are therefore unecanomical.
Industrial secret? Is it or is it not for the health of mother Gaia?
No.
Green steel. Will Mongolia be the next destination for green steel?
Energy or basic alloys production that's not addicted to autocratic fossil fuel supplyings, is definitely a very important foot step for a industry countries like Germany, France or Sweden.
It stabilizes the energy support and makes political decisions towards countries like Syria, Iran or Russia simpler. 😊
The political lobbies of dictatorships that sell fossil energy to world market will loose impact. 👍
And weak warlords are important for peace and freedom of democracy 😅
LOL conveniently left out how they produced/got pig iron pellets.
That were not pig iron pellets, that were iron oar pellets.
@@MusikCassette 2:09
Germany has really blown me away. From being p*ssed on by everyone to becoming a genuine leader.
hmm, maybe look at german inventions. you'll prolly be astonished about what germany did for the world beside of causing 2 world wars.
Two words:
Hydrogen Enbrittlement
Perhaps finishing in an arc furnace will drive off the hydrogen.
let's hope the German bureaucratic regime won't ruin it =))))
❤
Isnt most hydrogen produced by hydrocarbons ?
it is now
@@DSAK55 so it isnt green. Like electrolysis that uses power from the many coal power plants in germany . Sorry this is just eco washing by the companies .
@@Holypaladin887 As a Dutchman you should know about wind energy.
@@peabase i implied german electrical grid . I know that theres a station in the north sea that uses already available infrastructure from normal gas to export the hydrogen from electrolysis that is generated by wind power . I was only talking about the german system .
☺
😁✌️🌎
Great only green steel in the EU
Green steel is another green BS-marketing gimmick.
How much Is waste emotion capture put into requirement and kept in regular order
Can hydrogen melt steel beam
Literally, high-school science🙃 Urine hydrolysis is more efficient though😅
Ark furnace are very green also co2 comes out of the steel and needs iron ore to keep the steel from being week so it's literally impossible to become green.
I think the problem your referring to is replacing the carbon from coking coal. They do have a method but it's pretty clunky. If interested it's easy to search. Cheers.
I hope gov't or someone continues to fund research.
I think you did not compleatly understand the process, that produces Iron.
No one said the hydrogen was green
Why would you use hydrogen? That is hugely inefficient. The metal manufacturing using organisms makes a lot more sense.
OR, just use renewable electricity in the first place!
because you need a reduction agent, to bind the oxigen.
Please boycott PC Swedish content!
Why are the people wearing yellow safety clothes instead of green? Don't you know yellow attracts bees?...bzzz
vattenfall hat mich als energieanbieter auf jeden fall enttäuscht so viel kann ich sagen.
The green hugging muppets shouldent have lobbied to close down the nuclear plants... hydrogen production need massive amounts of electricity... and yea, nuclear power... Thorium reactors is the way !
FYI, the Greens -- except for some diehards who'd do away with civilisation altogether -- have had a change of heart on nuclear energy.
We have not enough water to cool power plants, especially during the hot summer times. Damn. East Germany and Spain‘s groundwater is sinking. This is a huge problem.
@@peabase yes but at what cost... we lost to many years, preachoius years, that we could have used to move away from carbon fuels... but here we are... now we need to rebuild all that was lost... the "greens" need to think first, the blood is on their hands now... couse we cant transition without nuclear power, unless you want people to live in the dark and without electricty...
@@ThePianist51 Mhmm and why is that ?... this is a chicken and the egg argument... we have lost so many years that could been spend to transition from carbons, but here we are...the tech to use nuclear to make H2 existed since the sixties... but green muppets spendtheir time fighting nuclear, and its development, and now we pay the price, im all for wind, water sun, but it cant at this point substitute or anywere near be the only energy source... fairly sure sweden has plenty of water yet the greens been dismantling fully working reactors that could be used to make green H2...
Two questions. Where do they get the hydrogen? (In methane, hihi!) If hydrogen is extracted by electrolysis, wouldn't it be possible to find maybe better technology to extract the metal by electrolysis: instead of a two-step process, first reduce hydrogen, and then oxidize it back - to reduce the iron at once?
It's called "Clean coal".
Did you watch the video? It said they're electrolyzing water to split it into its elemental components.
@@Aethelos I believe that the electrolyzers shown in the video are as real as you are a Prince.
Hydrogen for green steel can only come from green hydrogen (electrolysis).
hydrogen electrolysis is way easier, than iron electrolysis.
it would in principle be possible to use electrolysis directly to reduce the iron oxide. and it is possible, that this would reduce the Energy requirements. But that procedure is way further away from becoming a technical reality than reducing the ironoxide with Hydrogen. On top of that, it does not fit as well into the rest of the production process.
Green Steel it will never happen properly
where we will get all that hydrogen from?? 🤡🌍
Your moms 🏠
Maybe from sea water, but then again it's ironic because for that you need metals like cobalt that is mainly obtained by mining and smelting other metals. Mining in poor African countries by slaves that don't get any of the profits.
hydrogen is future of fuel
hydrogen is NOT a fuel. more energy is required to make hydrogen then you get from using the hydrogen
In automobiles, batteries are more cost efficient. But in trucks, ships and plains hydrogen is the future.
@@user-kr1tf1ut6w Keep on dreaming. For long haul flights it needs to be liquid for a proper energy density, and you need to keep it below -253°C (−423°F) for that. You also need special polymer seals to prevent leaks. And if you have one, then good luck.
@@user-kr1tf1ut6w : Yeah, at the "scale" used for trucks, trains, shipping, hydrogen is a natural fit. However they are pushing for it's use at "scale" where it is not practical such as base load power.
@@DSAK55 It can be fuel. Newer discoveries of large pure hydrogen wells have been discovered and a lot of investment have started flowing into it. If you let Earth make it and we just extract it like natural gas, it'd be fuel at that point. Geologists are even expecting it to be a new "gold rush" as it's very likely large oil / gas companies with large experience with drilling and extraction will pivot to it once the "wildcatters" start getting their hydrogen sites.
Need to stop jets from flying in the stratosphere. Whoch is eatin the ozone when the exhaust is oxidized.
Wtf insane nonsense is this, oxygen is oxidised to ozone which is reduced to oxygen
Donald Trump does not approve!!!