EverWind Gets Approval For North America's First Green Hydrogen Facility (reuters.com) 62
EverWind Fuels has become the first green hydrogen producer in North America to secure the necessary permits for a commercial-scale facility on Tuesday. Reuters reports: Provincial authorities in Canada granted environmental approval for EverWind to begin converting a former oil storage facility and marine terminal at Point Tupper in Nova Scotia into a green hydrogen and ammonia production hub. [...] EverWind expects the project's first phase, producing and exporting 200,000 tonnes per annum, to be online in 2025, before ramping up to 1 million tonnes per annum the following year. The company has agreements with German energy firms E.ON and Uniper to acquire the production. "To get the permit is a big deal," said Vichie, who co-founded Stonepeak Infrastructure Partners and also worked at Blackstone. The green hydrogen produced by EverWind's facility will be combined with nitrogen and converted into ammonia before being shipped, in liquid form, in tankers to Germany, where it can be retained as ammonia or turned back into green hydrogen.
Production during the facility's first phase will be powered using wind and solar assets to be built nearby, Vichie said. The company in December leased 137,000 acres (55,440 hectares) which will eventually site turbines generating 2 gigawatts of wind energy, that will power production in its second, larger phase. "This provides an amazing green growth path for Atlantic Canada, where they have some of the world's best wind resources," Vichie said. The overall cost of the project is expected to be around $6 billion. Three banks are helping arrange debt funding, while Vichie's family office is providing equity capital, he said. In other hydrogen-related news, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) granted Universal Hydrogen approval to fly its 40+ passenger hydrogen electric plane.
Production during the facility's first phase will be powered using wind and solar assets to be built nearby, Vichie said. The company in December leased 137,000 acres (55,440 hectares) which will eventually site turbines generating 2 gigawatts of wind energy, that will power production in its second, larger phase. "This provides an amazing green growth path for Atlantic Canada, where they have some of the world's best wind resources," Vichie said. The overall cost of the project is expected to be around $6 billion. Three banks are helping arrange debt funding, while Vichie's family office is providing equity capital, he said. In other hydrogen-related news, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) granted Universal Hydrogen approval to fly its 40+ passenger hydrogen electric plane.
History Repeating (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Wait what, this facility is being built in the air?
Re:History Repeating (Score:4, Interesting)
The Hindenburg suffered from some amazing film and a well thought out voiceover.
Air travel in the 30s was dangerous. Engine failures mid air are common when your MBTF is one flight. I kid but only a bit. The lightweight high powered engines were at the bleeding edge of tech for the day and were notoriously unreliable and maintenance heavy. Zepps were safe by comparison. Most people survived the crash, which wasn't usually the case.
Re:History Repeating (Score:5, Informative)
The other thing to bare in mind is that what you see burning in the footage is *NOT* hydrogen, but the canvas cover that was basically coated in rocket fuel.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, it was doped canvas, but then again doped canvas was the standard aerospace engineering material of the day and most planes used it as well. Fabric covered wings were used throughout WWII, though the higher tech planes at the end generally eschewed them.
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno, early 20th century airship accident rates were pretty hair-raising too. The US airship ZR-2 broke apart during trials in response to hard rudder input. That's what happens when 1920s materials and engineering needs to make something as light as possible.
I don't think the Hindenburg is what killed the rigid airship though. I think what killed it were advances in airplanes. Even before the Hindenburg class launched in 1936, Douglas's DC-3 came on the market. In a sleeper configuration, a DC-3 can
This is the future (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
We need more than one solution, we need all the solutions. We can't build enough batteries for all our energy storage needs, and considering the environmental impact of mining the minerals for them, we probably don't really want to try. Hydrogen is here, and it doesn't require any futuristic technologies, just a bit of engineering around usability, and it is for sure part of the solution. I don't think necessarily in passenger cars, because that's actually where it makes the least sense. But for fixed insta
Re:This is the future (Score:5, Informative)
We can't build enough batteries for all our energy storage needs
Why not?
Relying 100% on batteries might not be a good idea, but there is no reason we "can't build enough."
considering the environmental impact of mining the minerals for them
For static applications like grid storage, where weight is not an issue, we can use sodium instead of lithium.
There is no "environmental impact" to "mining" sodium.
Sodium-ion battery [wikipedia.org]
Hydrogen is here, and it doesn't require any futuristic technologies,
But it requires lots of taxpayer subsidies to make up for the terrible inefficiencies, and those inefficiencies are not improving.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only Sodium batteries, but also additional sources of Lithium poised to come online within a decade, as the demand ramps up to currently-unsustainable levels. And of course the rise of the LFP battery, which may have less capacity than NMC but which uses no cobalt, and little nickel if any. e.g. 50% of Teslas are already made with them in the US, and it's the NMC-pack models that are bursting into flames spontaneously.
I still think Hydrogen has a place, though, and it's for exactly what this wind farm i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The usual
http://web.worldbank.org/archi... [worldbank.org]
https://www.theguardian.com/su... [theguardian.com]
https://news.mongabay.com/2022... [mongabay.com]
Re: (Score:1)
We can't build enough batteries for all our energy storage needs
Why not?
Relying 100% on batteries might not be a good idea, but there is no reason we "can't build enough."
considering the environmental impact of mining the minerals for them
For static applications like grid storage, where weight is not an issue, we can use sodium instead of lithium.
There is no "environmental impact" to "mining" sodium.
Sodium-ion battery [wikipedia.org]
Hydrogen is here, and it doesn't require any futuristic technologies,
But it requires lots of taxpayer subsidies to make up for the terrible inefficiencies, and those inefficiencies are not improving.
Inefficiencies, like what? Oh, right, I forgot greenie assholes in their propaganda always compare some futuristic not-yet-existing-but-not-conclusively-proven-impossible battery technology with electrolyzers powered by potato battery stolen from some kid's science fair stand. Because that's pretty much the only way to arrive at the "30% efficiency" number those assholes keep repeating.
Re: (Score:2)
and considering the environmental impact of mining the minerals for them,
especially as opposed to the completely environmentally benign fossil fuels extraction, refinement, and transport industries
Re:This is the future (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Its a nice idea but according to the experts outside the fossil industry, hydrogen will only ever a niche solution, not chance for mass transport like cars - maybe heavy transport where a company can have a hydrogen station at their depot but they cost $1-$2 million. Its has too many downsides like being able to make enough cleanly, transporting it, etc. A better use is for solutions like replacing coal/coke furnaces to make green steel
*If* we ever do fully switch over to PV/windmills for energy production, then we will have to have a huge overcapacity making energy pretty much free in-season, and definite shortage out of season. Please tell me how do you plan to seasonally shift energy using batteries. Hydrogen is a perfect match for this, because with it the cost is in generation infrastructure (electrolyzer/power plants), while storage capacity is pretty much free (huge tanks don't cost that much). It's a perfect compliment for batteri
Re: (Score:3)
The only thing dumber than thinking we can just throw a battery in everything is thinking we can just throw hydrogen at everything.
No precisely zero people except for the deluded people at Toyota are considering hydrogen for cars due to some very real shortcomings (not the least of which is storage facilities for refuelling in population centres, and the low energy density requiring more frequent fillups).
Hydrogen green or blue will be used for industrial applications. It will be used for commercial transpo
Re:This is the future (Score:5, Interesting)
No precisely zero people except for the deluded people at Toyota are considering hydrogen for cars
The people at Toyota are not deluded. They are receiving more than 300 billion yen ($3B USD) in subsidies from Japanese taxpayers to build the hydrogen vehicles.
No capitalist is dumb enough to do that with their own money.
Also, Toyota isn't relying on "green hydrogen" but filthy "brown hydrogen" made from lignite in Australia and imported in tankers burning high-sulfur bunker fuel.
This is what you get when your political process is corrupted by fossil fuel industry lobbyists.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, we have to get the idea of cars out of our heads. The only sustainable path forward is to have denser cities with very good public transit networks. Public transit infrastructure can much more easily be powered by electricity or other non-fossil-fuel sources. Getting cars off the roads also improves air quality, reduces traffic congestion, and makes cities much more pleasant to live in.
Some places in Europe and Asia are well-positioned with good transit networks. Unfortunately, in other plac
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, we have to get the idea of cars out of our heads. The only sustainable path forward is to have denser cities with very good public transit networks. Public transit infrastructure can much more easily be powered by electricity or other non-fossil-fuel sources. Getting cars off the roads also improves air quality, reduces traffic congestion, and makes cities much more pleasant to live in.
Some places in Europe and Asia are well-positioned with good transit networks. Unfortunately, in other places like North America and South America, car culture is so ingrained that I am pessimistic we'll meet the challenge.
Many people like the independence of car ownership. Go anywhere, any time, on your own schedule, in your own private space. No waiting, no being confined to designated routes, no shared space with sick people, 24/7/365. Yesterday there was a discussion here about how older EVs may be worth more for their batteries to supplement the grid than as cheap used transportation for the masses which we have now. I have no doubt taking away people's cars is part of the agenda of some groups, but I am hopeful that
Re: (Score:2)
Many people like the independence of car ownership.
No. Many people are forced to a situation where car ownership is mandatory for independence, sponsored by GM and co having a hand in town planning for decades ensuring that if you want to get around, the car will be your only option.
People want independence period. And true independence is living in a place where owning a car is entirely optional. I am independent. I walk or cycle to the shops. I cycle or take the metro or tram into the city centre. If it's late at night I'll take a night bus. If I need to
Re: (Score:2)
No. Many people are forced to a situation where car ownership is mandatory for independence, sponsored by GM and co having a hand in town planning for decades ensuring that if you want to get around, the car will be your only option.
Right. It is a car manufacturer conspiracy going back to Henry Ford, and not just a big country filled with people who want to leave their neighborhood regularly not occasionally. I agree our society is built for cars. I don't see that as a negative. People without cars can still take the bus around town. Even poor people around here have cars though. Not sure how that will work when cheap but serviceable wheels are priced out by EVs, but it won't be an improvement.
And true independence is living in a place where owning a car is entirely optional.
It is not hard to do that at all if
Re: (Score:2)
No precisely zero people except for the deluded people at Toyota are considering hydrogen for cars due to some very real shortcomings (not the least of which is storage facilities for refuelling in population centres, and the low energy density requiring more frequent fillups).
Hydrogen green or blue will be used for industrial applications. It will be used for commercial transport.
Many large transport truck manufacturers and commercial users are testing hydrogen powered trucks right now. If they become popular, then it will be much easier for passenger cars to piggyback on the fueling infrastructure that will be built over time. Yes, they won't be like current gas stations on every second block like now, but you also won't need a place to plug in ever as with an electric car. Also, the Toyota Mirai has a 400 mile range, so frequent fill ups maybe not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes they are and they are supported for a good reason. Large trucks are capable of refuelling outside of population centres and carry large tank capacity. It's an ideal case for hydrogen since you can quickly refill without having to concern yourselves with the risk of hydrogen transport and storage on site.
Your piggyback view won't happen. It's the worst of all worlds. Imagine a world where your range is that of an EV (which people complain about), you still need to refuel because you can't charge at home
Re: (Score:2)
It's an ideal case for hydrogen since you can quickly refill without having to concern yourselves with the risk of hydrogen transport and storage on site.
Hydrogen storage and transport is pretty much a non issue, no more hazardous than gasoline storage and transport. Spare us the fear mongering, it is beneath you. H2 is also likely to be the replacement for stationary diesel generators (like hospitals and data centers), so there will be plenty of tankers moving it around in town regardless.
Imagine a world where your range is that of an EV (which people complain about), you still need to refuel because you can't charge at home (the best part of EV ownership), and on top of it all the ability to refuel is limited to city outskirt major hazard facilities requiring you many km to drive to. That's the situation H2 passenger vehicles will find themselves in.
If I could not charge at home, I'd still rather filling was fast with H2 than slow with charging. Won't be pulling into the local Shell station to sit and charge that i
Re: (Score:1)
the energy comes for free
Really? Where can I get free solar panels?
Re: (Score:1)
the energy comes for free
Really? Where can I get free solar panels?
If that was supposed to be a joke, don't give up your day job for a career in comedy. However, just in case you are one of the knuckle dragging morons who gets his technology know-how at Trump rallies and actually believes that shit; Solar panels are an energy harvesting technology, they are normally not obtainable for free. The energy that solar panels use is free, last time I checked the price of sunlight was $0.00 a unit. Solar and wind are also some of the cheapest energy generation methods available on
Re: (Score:2)
If solar energy is "$0.00 a unit", but natural gas may be cheaper, who pays you to harvest natural gas?
Re: (Score:1)
the energy comes for free
Really? Where can I get free solar panels?
If that was supposed to be a joke, don't give up your day job for a career in comedy. However, just in case you are one of the knuckle dragging morons who gets his technology know-how at Trump rallies and actually believes that shit; Solar panels are an energy harvesting technology, they are normally not obtainable for free. The energy that solar panels use is free, last time I checked the price of sunlight was $0.00 a unit.
Okay, that's how I know you are a moron. Let me guess, a Democrat? The price of sunlight, in any appreciable quantities needed for energy generation, is generally non-zero, but equal to the price of land you must be allowed to permanently put in shadow, i.e. usually land you must own or at least rent long-term. This is very non-trivial for anyone living in a city for example.
Solar and wind are also some of the cheapest energy generation methods available on the market other than maybe nat-gas.
Sure, but only if you count the taxpayer-funded subsidies, and the punitive taxes on anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
To keep polluting with fossil fuels is dumb, however hydrogen doesn't appear to make much sense except for existing fossil fuel companies which want to make hydrogen from fossil fuels.
There are a number of reasons for this. Below are a few.
It's an inefficient way to transport electrons. It's expensive, difficult to transport, it's dangerous and current production techniques don't play nice with intermittent energy supplies as electrolysers don't throttle well so you need PEM electrolysers which are more exp
Re: (Score:2)
It's a pretty good way to transport electrons across the Atlantic. And since we currently ship large amounts of ammonia all over the world, transport is maybe not nearly as difficult as you think.
What does electricity cost in Canada? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
this project must be living on subsidies
Yes, of course.
that normal Canadians will pay dearly for.
Somewhat, but many of the subsidies come from German taxpayers, not only Canadians.
Re: (Score:1)
Across the border, USA electricity can be had for 4 cents KWh or less. Making stuff, is just a function of the electricity price, just like an Aluminum smelter. So what are Canadian Households paying for green electricity? If the answer is over 8cents CAD then this project must be living on subsidies, cheap interest and tax breaks - that normal Canadians will pay dearly for.
Sure, and so are coal, nat-gas and oil because the fossil fuel industry and anybody burning fossil fuels gets to offload the damage caused by the pollution they generate on the tax payer. On top of that the fossil fuel industry also gets more subsidies in the form of tax breaks and direct payments. So, if anything, paying direct subsidies to this project is just being honest about it whereas hiding subsidies given to the fossil fuel industry in the form of tax breaks and offloading of externalities and then
Re: (Score:3)
Retail rates in Nova Scotia are going up to around CA$0.19. Big industries don’t pay that though, especially if they agree to let Nova Scotia Power throttle their demand when necessary for load balancing (and I could see this working well for a hydrolysis plant).
However, their goal here is to run it on wind in the mid-term. I guess the Germans will pay extra for “green” hydrogen. They have approval to build a 2 gigawatt wind farm. I suspect that kind of approval is easier to get in Guysbor
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea where you got 4/kWh... those are certainly not what residential customers in the United States are paying. According to this [bls.gov], residential electricity costs range from 12.7c/kWh to 45c/kWh.
Here in Ontario, I pay 8.7c (Canadian... about 6.54c US) per kWh for the first 1000 kWh per month, and 10.3c (Canadian) per kWh thereafter... much, much cheaper than anywhere in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Across the border, USA electricity can be had for 4 cents KWh or less. Making stuff, is just a function of the electricity price, just like an Aluminum smelter. So what are Canadian Households paying for green electricity? If the answer is over 8cents CAD then this project must be living on subsidies, cheap interest and tax breaks - that normal Canadians will pay dearly for.
So what are Canadian Households paying for green electricity? If the answer is over 8cents CAD then this project must be living on subsidies, cheap interest and tax breaks - that normal Canadians will pay dearly for.
Here in Manitoba our abundant hydroelectric power is $0.09CDN per kWh. It is cheaper for commercial users though. (And Google says the US average is $0.16USD but not necessarily green and probably varies highly by state as it does here by province)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Quebec sells electricity to New York for about 4.5 cents Canadian / KWh. Looks like New York sells it to regular people for an average of about 20 cents US. The American average is about 13 cents US.
If you've got a 4 cent source maybe you should go into business selling electricity to New York. If it's a long way to transport, you could make hydrogen or ammonia and ship it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If that's your point, you've got a weird way of making it. "normal Canadians will pay dearly for." Yeah right.
The cheapest electricity in Canada is from the provinces that built up big hydro projects and export power. Nobody is going to export electricity, with all the losses, when they can sell it locally for retail rates, so that market gets served first. The Atlantic provinces (except NB, which imports cheap power from Quebec) have high rates because they don't have much in the way of hydro, don't have m
Green hydrogen? (Score:1)
Damn. I've been buying stuff that runs on pink hydrogen.
Re: (Score:2)
I see some nuclear assholes have moderator points and their tiny personalities cannot take that somebody does not like them. How pathetic.
EverWind (Score:2, Funny)
So... (Score:2)
They're going to produce green hydrogen in the U.S.A. and then ship all that via DIESEL-POWERED TANKERS to Germany.
Yeah, that's really green. /Sarcasm
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
We can switch those cargo ships to something greener by using nuclear fission.
https://maritime-executive.com... [maritime-executive.com]
It appears work is under way to make this happen in the USA.
https://maritime-executive.com... [maritime-executive.com]
The UK is considering it also, and Russia has already done it.
https://maritime-executive.com... [maritime-executive.com]
To be clear the Russian nuclear powered ships are mostly icebreakers and floating power plants, only one of their nuclear powered civilian ships is a true cargo hauler, and it's built to carry military equipment.
W
I think this builds on research done earlier (Score:2)
New technique seamlessly converts ammonia to green hydrogen - Northwestern Now
Northwestern University researchers have developed a highly effective, environmentally friendly method for converting ammonia into hydrogen. Outlined in a recent publication in the journal Joule, the new technique is a major step forward for enabling a zero-pollution, hydrogen-fueled economy.
The idea of using ammonia as a carrier for hydrogen delivery has gained traction in recent years because ammonia is much easier to liquify th
Re: (Score:2)
> New technique seamlessly converts ammonia to green hydrogen
And where does that ammonia come from, exactly? Not exactly a resource you find laying around in large quantities.
Ammonia is produced using hydrogen, nitrogen, and a fuckload of energy. You need the hydrogen to make the ammonia, not the other way around.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the OP summary says
"Provincial authorities in Canada granted environmental approval for EverWind to begin converting a former oil storage facility and marine terminal at Point Tupper in Nova Scotia into a green hydrogen and ammonia production hub. [...] EverWind expects the project's first phase, producing and exporting 200,000 tonnes per annum, to be online in 2025, before ramping up to 1 million tonnes per annum the following year. The company has agreements with German energy firms E.ON and Uniper
just FYI (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Having to physically transport it is a benefit to the people who really want it — the oil companies. They don't want to change their business methods any more than they have to.
Modern automobile gas tanks are typically plastic, the whole situation is sketchy. LFP EVs now pls